What better way to start your Easter weekend than with a light spot of trolling? Nigel Farage has been caught hook, line, and sinker by the latest ‘Led By Donkeys’ prank, which duped the controversial politician into endorsing their campaign.

ALSO READ: Mhairi Black shreds Dominic Raab after Led By Donkeys sting

Tom Head www.thelondoneconomic.com

Who are Led By Donkeys?

Led By Donkeys are a group that routinely holds the government and far-right figures to account, through their viral stitch-ups. Last week, a group of Tory MPs were caught out by one of their stings, in which they offered second jobs to the likes of Matt Hancock and Kwasi Kwarteng.

The pair of former ministers were the highest-profile victims of the ruse, requesting fees of up to £1,500 an hour. Gavin Williamson, meanwhile, rejected the offer of a side-gig, politely declining a potentially lucrative (but totally falsified) offer.

Led By Donkeys add Nigel Farage to victim list

However, you don’t have to be in the Conservative Party to find yourself in the firing line. Led By Donkeys are staunchly anti-Brexit, which means the biggest Brexiteer of them all is considered fair game.

Nigel Farage runs his own Cameo account – a video service where you can record messages for people who request them. At around £70 per message, getting an earful from Mr. Farage doesn’t come cheap. But we’d argue this is money well spent.

Nigel Farage stitched-up by ‘Elbie Dee’

The former UKIP leader is tricked into calling LBD – cleverly disguised as ‘Elbie Dee’ on the request message – ‘very brave’. He then accidentally asks viewers to support their latest fundraiser, saying that change ‘needs to happen’.

For once, Nigel, we agree with you…

“Now, LBD is very brave. She isn’t going to get funding for her new film from the Hollywood wokerati. They’re all mad, looney, crazy liberals. Can all of you pony up for LBD’s fundraiser? We need to make change happen, and LBD needs your support.” | Nigel Farage

Watch on Twitter here

Nine new rapid electric vehicle chargers are now ready to use in a quartet of communities in East Devon.

eastdevonnews.co.uk 

They have been located in car parks in Sidmouth, Colyton, Axminster and Beer.

And more are set to follow in Cranbrook, Lympstone, Honiton, Budleigh Salterton and three locations in Exmouth.

The Rapid Charging Devon scheme is part of a roll-out of 30 chargers in a dozen locations across the district.

Brand-new chargers have been installed at Roxburgh Car Park in Sidmouth, Dolphin Street Car Park in Colyton, West Street Car Park in Axminster and Central Car Park in Beer.

They take around 40 minutes to charge an EV battery to 80 per cent full at a cost of 55 pence per kWh. Payment can be made through the Wenea app.

Councillor Marianne Rixson, East Devon District Council’s portfolio holder for climate action and emergencies, said: “I am delighted to see that EV chargers in these four locations have been installed and will be operational in time for the Easter holidays, which is very good news.”

Jose Contreras, from Wenea, added: “The East Devon rapid chargers are part of a wider charging network being rolled out across Devon, providing EV charging for local people as well as supporting the important tourism economy in the area.”

A site visit will be needed for councillors to decide whether to approve or reject plans for a huge solar farm at Whimple in East Devon.

District council planning chiefs deferred making a call on the fate of the bid at a meeting last week.

eastdevonnews.co.uk

The proposals had been recommended for approval by officers, writes Local Democracy Reporter Rob Kershaw.

Developer Aura Power Developments Ltd says the scheme will provide renewable energy to the equivalent of 21 per cent of homes in East Devon.

It has proposed constructing a solar farm of around 143 acres in size comprising of arrays, a sub-station, equipment housing, fencing, CCTV and other kit.

Data from the Campaign to Protect Rural England shows that there are more than 15 approved solar farms in East Devon – with more pending review by the district council.

And a meeting of the authority’s planning committee last week heard residents voice concern over the loss of good-quality farmland.

A representative for Aura explained that sunlight can still penetrate the panels and continue to help the grass grow.

The firm also plans to provide £20,000 a year to nearby residents to help with their energy bills.

Councillor Richard Lawrence, who represents Whimple, described this amount as ‘pitiful’.

He lamented the loss of ‘quality farmland’ ad added: “This plan does nothing to allay the very real fears of food insecurity.”

Members agreed to a site visit to gauge the impact of the development – proposed for land to the east of Rutton Farm and Rull Lane.

The fate of the planning application will be decided at a later date.

Local communities fighting to clean up their rivers by creating protected bathing areas have been refused access to the reasons their applications were rejected by the government.

Sandra Laville www.theguardian.com

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) turned down a series of freedom of information (FoI) requests submitted by campaigners in Kent, Yorkshire, Oxfordshire, Cornwall, Suffolk and Lancashire to obtain more information on why the applications were unsuccessful. The campaigners have lodged a complaint against the refusals.

Community groups have been working to achieve bathing-water status for areas of their rivers in order to help clean up the waterways, because the designation means the Environment Agency has to test water for faecal bacteria.

However, Defra has granted only two of 21 applications over the past year. The Wharfe in Yorkshire was the first river in the UK to be given bathing-water status, but applications for three other areas on the river were all turned down.

Also rejected were the River Tyne at Wylam, Northumberland; part of the River Deben in Woodbridge, Suffolk, in the constituency of the environment secretary, Thérèse Coffey; and the River Kent in Cumbria. At the time, the campaigner Sheila Adam of the Clean River Kent Campaign told the Guardian: “We don’t get any information at all. We don’t know why we were unsuccessful – it might be numbers, but they have not told us what the numbers required are.

“We wanted to get this status so the Environment Agency would be required to test the water for bacteria and force a clean-up of the river. The river is a site of special scientific interest and has European conservation status, and we think it should make it a priority for investment.”

Defra has also refused FoI requests for details to inform local people as they decide on whether to continue the fight for bathing water status. According to the responses to FoI requests seen by the Guardian, Defra has refused to provide details of the number of “bathers” required to meet the threshold for the status; what local consultation is required to meet the criteria; the score for each river area against the criteria; and what public facilities might be required in order to be given bathing water status.

The complaint launched by some of the campaigners comes as Coffey faces criticism for the lack of ambition in her plan for water, which was published on Tuesday.

The plan has been criticised for including measures such as a ban on plastic in wet wipes that was announced several years ago, and for failing to provide a comprehensive strategy to tackle the crisis of pollution, over-abstraction of water, and drought in English rivers.

Every river in England has failed tests for chemical and biological pollution, and a Conservative government target for three-quarters of rivers to be in good chemical and biological status by 2027 is unlikely to be met despite the promises under the plan.

In response to the series of FoI requests, Defra said the criterion for the number of bathers was “a large number of people”. It added that “all applications for bathing water designation are assessed against this criterion” and “only sites where the application provides evidence of a large number of people bathing have been taken forward for consideration for bathing water status”. However, Defra refused to say how many bathers amounted to a “large” number.

Becky Malby, of Ilkley Clean River, who worked on the successful application for bathing water status for the River Wharfe, is coordinating the FoI requests. She said the fact that so many river applications were rejected, based on the numbers of people using the river, despite huge local public support and consultation, demonstrated that the criteria were not clear and transparent. A complaint about the refusal to answer the questions has been lodged with the head of information rights at Defra.

“The applications are coming from public groups who are not party to, and excluded from the decision-making. Without knowing the assessment criteria and decision-making process, the public will continue to waste days of volunteer time putting together bathing applications over months that then fail,” said Malby.

“The application process requires the public applying to count people using the water over a three-month period, to identify facilities and to conduct consultation. This is a massive amount of work for local people and should only take place against publicly clear and transparent criteria.”

A Defra spokesperson said: “We would not comment on individual applications that are not being taken forward to consultation, but all applicants have been informed of the outcome of their application. When selecting new sites for potential bathing water designation, we consider how many people bathe there, if the site has suitable infrastructure and facilities, such as toilets, and if measures are being taken to promote bathing at those waters.

“All applications are assessed against these factors and applications that do not meet the essential criteria will not proceed to national consultation.”

“A key player in local regeneration and growth programmes” as well as creating jobs and attracting visitors.

Travelodge has announced plans to open 300 new cheap hotels in the UK in what represents a £3billion investment – and that includes 120 new destinations for the brand.

Coming soon to:

Exmouth/Sidmouth

Seaton/Lyme Regis

Julie Delahaye www.mirror.co.uk (Extract, open Mirror article to find full list)

Travelodge has revealed plans to open 300 new hotels across the UK, in what would represent a £3billion project for the brand and its third party investors.

The budget hotel chain announced today that it has reached out to 220 Local Authorities across Britain as it starts its search for the new hotel sites.

In a letter to the organisations, the company has said that its hotels have already boosted different regions and been “a key player in their local regeneration and growth programmes” as well as creating jobs and attracting visitors.

The chain is also targeting over 120 towns which do not currently have a Travelodge hotel, such as Ripon, Lichfield and Cromer.

With the new 300 hotels being proposed, it estimates that around 9,000 jobs would be created as part of the project.

Travelodge remains a firm favourite with Brits looking for cheap stays. The company already has over 500 hotels around the UK, and often hosts sales with rooms going from £35 or less.

Tory MP Scott Benton offered to table parliamentary questions, leak a confidential policy document and lobby ministers on behalf of gambling industry investors who proposed paying him thousands of pounds a month, an undercover investigation for The Times has found.

He is chairman of the all-party parliamentary group for betting and gaming and has been a vocal supporter of the industry’s interests in parliament. He is a former local councillor who won the red wall seat of Blackpool South for the Tories in 2019.

He has been stripped of the Tory whip.

This government will have integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level. – Rishi Sunak on the steps of No 10.

A huge fire which burned at The Knowle last week is being treated as arson, say police. The blaze burned for hours on Thursday, March 30, severely damaging the former headquarters of East Devon District Council in Sidmouth.

Shannon Brown www.devonlive.com

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service were called to Knowle House at around 4.10am, though the fire is believed to have started around 2.30am. At its height, eight fire engines were tacking the blaze at once, and a total of 29 Devon and Somerset fire engines were sent to the scene.

Around one third of the building was severely damaged in the fire and fire crews did not completely leave the scene until 8.30am on Friday, March 31 – approximately 30 hours after the fire is believed to have started. Devon and Cornwall Police believe the incident may be linked to a smaller fire a few days earlier in the same location.

On Sunday, March 26, a small fire was extinguished by the fire service in the same location, with little damage caused. One witness reported seeing a man at the scene of this smaller fire. He is described as a white male in his early 20s, of medium build with dark hair and wearing camouflage trousers.

Officers are investigating both incidents, which they believe may be linked and are appealing for anyone who saw or heard anything suspicious in the area to contact them. If you witnessed the incident or have any information or dashcam footage that could help with enquiries, please contact police via our website here or by calling 101 quoting 50230073429.

Alternatively, independent charity Crimestoppers can be contacted anonymously online at Crimestoppers-uk.org or by calling freephone 0800 555111.

The list of nominations for election was published last night see here.

It is heartening to see that there is no shortage of candidates with 129 nominees chasing 60 seats.

The big battles look like being fought in the following three-seat wards each with eight candidates:

Axminster

Budleigh & Raleigh (readers might be surprised at this but Budleigh has form for kicking the Tories out eg 2003)

Cranbrook

Exmouth Brixington

Ottery St Mary

In contrast, there are straight fights in these single seat wards:

Exe Valley  (between Lib Dem and Consevatives)

Feniton (between Conservatives and Greens)

Newton Poppleford (between Independent and Conservatives – don’t Tories ever learn?)

Sidmouth Rural  (between Independent and Conservative)

Tale Valley (between Lib Dem  and Conservative)

Trinity Ward (between Lib Dem and Conservative)

Whimple & Rockbeare  (between Lib Dem and Conservative)

In total, the data – which was analysed by the party – shows 141,777 sewage-dumping events occurred across 137 constituencies on the coasts of England and Wales in 2022.

This analysis found sewage was dumped once every three minutes and 45 seconds in 2022, adding up to a combined total of 980,999 hours of discharges last year.

Not a good start for the Tory local council election campaign – will they need to reprint their handouts? – Owl

Donna Ferguson www.theguardian.com 

Ministers have treated coastal communities as if they are “open sewers”, Labour has said, after a damaging analysis of Environment Agency (EA) data revealed sewage was dumped for almost a million hours last year.

In total, the data – which was analysed by the party – shows 141,777 sewage-dumping events occurred across 137 constituencies on the coasts of England and Wales in 2022.

This analysis found sewage was dumped once every three minutes and 45 seconds in 2022, adding up to a combined total of 980,999 hours of discharges last year.

The shadow environment secretary, Jim McMahon, said people who live by the coast “should be able to just enjoy the place where they live without having to worry about encountering filthy raw sewage”.

He added: “That the Tories have allowed villages, towns and cities across the country to be treated as open sewers shows that they have no respect for places where people live, work and holiday.”

The coastal constituency of Torridge and West Devon was found to have had the highest total hours of sewage discharge, at 57,494 hours.

The EA revealed at the end of last month that there were more than 300,000 raw discharges into rivers and coastal areas in 2022, lasting for more than 1.75m hours. Keir Starmer accused the government of “turning Britain’s waterways into an open sewer”.

On 21 April, MPs will debate a private member’s bill, put forward by McMahon, which Labour says would curb sewage discharges by 2030. It includes proposals to automatically fine companies for sewage dumping and implement legally binding reduction targets.

The party has previously said it would introduce a legally binding target to end 90% of sewage discharges by 2030 and stronger sanctions and fines for water bosses and companies who fail to do so.

“The next Labour government will build a better Britain, ending the Tory sewage scandal by delivering mandatory monitoring on all sewage outlets, introducing automatic fines for discharges, setting ambitious targets for stopping systematic sewage dumping and ensuring that water bosses are held to account for negligence,” said McMahon.

A senior Conservative party source said the Tories had brought in widespread monitoring of the issue, and said sewage was dumped more frequently under Labour in Wales.

EA figures released last month show that last year across England, sewage discharges fell by 19%, down to a total of 301,091 spills. However, the drop was largely due to dry weather and not action taken by water companies, the agency said.

A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spokesperson said: “We have introduced compulsory monitoring, set the strictest targets ever on water companies to reduce discharges and required them to deliver the largest infrastructure programme in their history.

“The environment secretary has demanded an action plan on every storm overflow from every company in England, prioritising those near bathing waters.

“We are also consulting to give regulators more powers to impose much larger penalties for polluters without needing to go to court.”

The Times Leading Article www.thetimes.co.uk

It is barely 18 months since 265 Conservative MPs provoked a national outcry when they voted down a Lords amendment to the Environment Bill that would have required water companies to demonstrate progressive reductions in discharges of untreated sewage into Britain’s waterways. Life comes at you fast. The government has since launched no less than three water sector action plans, of which the latest was announced yesterday by Thérèse Coffey, the environment secretary. This came in response to growing public anger at the dire state of the country’s rivers and coastal areas, as highlighted by The Times’s Clean it Up campaign, and ahead of local elections in which government inaction is an issue on doorsteps.

Yet there was little in yesterday’s [Monday’s] announcement to suggest that the government has a grip on the problem. The plan consisted merely of reheated existing policies, vague aspirations and promises of new consultations. The £1.6 billion Ms Coffey said would be spent on reducing discharges from storm overflows is money already earmarked for investment pending a rise in customer bills in 2025. Ms Coffey expects this investment to reduce spills by 10,000 by 2030. That compares to 300,000 spills in England and Wales last year, according to the Environment Agency.

It was a mark of the government’s shortage of ideas that it felt the need yesterday to reannounce a ban on wet wipes, as it has been doing with tedious regularity since 2018. Yet predictably, even this is subject to a consultation. Ironically, Ms Coffey chose to launch her new plan at the London Wetland Centre in Barnes, just metres from a notorious spot on the banks of the Thames where piles of wet wipes accumulate whenever Thames Water discharges raw sewage into the river, which is seemingly every time it rains.

What is missing from Ms Coffey’s plan is radical action to get a grip on the decades of underinvestment by an industry that for far too long has been able to siphon off customer money to fund vast dividends for its shareholders and lavish salaries and bonuses for its executives. Ms Coffey talked of giving the Environment Agency the power to impose unlimited fines on water companies. Of course, the current limit of £250,000 is inadequate, but it is only weeks since she insisted that raising the cap to £250 million was excessive. Similarly, a proposal to give Ofwat, the regulator, new powers to link dividend payouts to environmental performance sounds promising, but it is unclear how it would work in practice.

A radical plan would recognise that the current system for managing the country’s water resources is broken. As Sir Dieter Helm, professor of economic policy at Oxford University, wrote in The Times last week, responsibility is spread across dozens of regulators, agencies, government departments, water companies and farmers, all operating in their own silos. Ms Coffey’s plan rightly recognises that a new approach is needed based on catchment areas, which can take an integrated approach to water supply and tackling pollution. But these catchment plans need integrated budgets and someone in charge of delivery, along with much more demanding targets to stop the spills.

Instead, it is customers who are expected to continue to pay the price of industry failure in the form of bills that are no longer simply a charge for the provision and maintenance of infrastructure but a regressive means of rationing supply. Thanks to decades of underinvestment, including no new reservoir for 30 years and the loss of 20 per cent of annual supply due to leaks, a country famous for its rainfall is forecast to be four billion litres a day short of what will be needed for public water supply by 2050. The government’s response is to push for increased use of water meters, while Ms Coffey calls for new standards for dual flush toilets. That is no solution if it still ends up in the river.

Remember: Devon one of UK’s most at risk areas for flooding and John Hart’s famous quote, “self-help is going to be the order of the day”? Well nothing for us in this announcement. You’re on your own. – Owl

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs www.gov.uk

Floods Minister Rebecca Pow has today (Wednesday 5 April) announced the first communities in England to receive better flood protection as part of the government’s £100 million Frequently Flooded Allowance to protect areas which have been affected by repeated flooding.

The first 53 projects announced today will be allocated more than £26 million in total, better protecting more than 2,300 households and businesses across the country.

Communities that will be better protected include those in Worcestershire, which faced severe flooding with Storm Christoph in 2021, and Cumbria, whose residents suffered major flooding from Storm Desmond in 2015 and Storm Ciara in 2020.

It will also better protect properties in the Calder Valley, which was devastated by flooding when it was hit by both Storm Ciara and Storm Eva in 2015.

The allowance targets communities where 10 or more properties have flooded twice or more in the last 10 years. These communities are often smaller and can face barriers to access funding due to the relative complexity and cost of building flood defences compared to the size of the community.

Environment Minister Rebecca Pow said:

We know only too well the devastating impact that flooding can have on communities and businesses, as we face more extreme weather brought about by climate change.

I am determined that we do whatever we can to prevent flooding that affects so many towns and villages across the country.

This much-needed funding will go a long way to support those whose homes and livelihoods are repeatedly threatened by flooding and forms a key part of our record £5.2 billion investment by 2027 to protect communities in England better.

Caroline Douglass, Executive Director for Flood and Coastal Risk Management at the Environment Agency, said:

Increased flooding is just one of the impacts of climate change we are seeing in the UK and around the world. Protecting people and communities is our top priority as we look to tackle this challenge.

The funding announced today will help better protect homes and businesses at risk from repeated flood incidents across the country.

The Environment Agency’s strong track record in delivering flood defence schemes means we have better protected 374,000 homes since 2015.

Projects will improve resilience through a mixture of hard engineering flood defences and natural flood management measures. The allowance also supports the installation of property flood resilience (PFR) measures such as flood doors and barriers, meaning more homes will be better protected in communities where traditional defence schemes are not always viable.

The ring-fenced funding is part of a record £5.2 billion investment in flood defences to protect communities across England better.

Since the start of the current £5.2 billion investment programme (2021-2027), we have already better protected more than 35,000 properties. This follows our successful delivery of the previous £2.6 billion investment programme between 2015 and 2021, which better protected more than 314,000 homes across England.

See below for a full list of projects to receive funding:

• Alconbury Flood Alleviation Scheme Stage 2
• Brighton & Hove City Council Surface Water Management Feasibility Study
• Bingley and Shipley Property Flood Resilience Study
• Bledington Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Brighouse Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Burrow Beck Conveyance Improvements
• Carlisle Appraisal Package Appleby Town Centre
• Chard Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Cocker Beck, Lowdham, Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Dufton Close Feasibility Study
• Earby Flood Alleviation Scheme Phase 3, Earby Beck
• Eardisland Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Erringden Hillside
• Falmouth Integrated Urban Drainage Management
• First Avenue Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Flood Risk Reduction Schemes 2 – Copley Village Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Flood Risk Reduction Schemes 2 – Cottonstones near Lumb, Calderdale
• Flood Risk Reduction Schemes 2 – Railes Close between Luddenden and Midgley
• Greyfriars Community Flood Risk Management Scheme
• Hebden Bridge Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Ilminster Flood Alleviation Study
• Intake, Flood Risk Management Scheme
• Irwell Vale to Chatterton
• Langstone (Havant) Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Scheme
• Larkspur Close Integrated Urban Drainage Scheme
• Lavendon Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Leintwardine and Walford Property Flood Resilience
• Lindale Road Grange over Sands
• Lipson Vale Phase 1, Trefusis Park (South West Water Integrated Urban Drainage Modelling)
• Little Bollington River Bollin Property Flood Resilience
• Market Weighton Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Natural Flood Management Upstream of Cirencester
• Northumbria Integrated Drainage Partnership – Redcar (Yearby, Kirkleatham & Low Farm Drive, and West Dyke Road) Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Northumbria Integrated Drainage Partnership – Saltburn (Princes Road & Marske Road) Flood Alleviation Scheme
• North Road, Holme Village Flood Alleviation
• Pallion Flood Alleviation Scheme
• River Teme, Tenbury Wells Community Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Rolleston Brook Flood Alleviation Scheme, Staffordshire
• Ruislip Park Wood and Pinn Meadows
• Severn Stoke Flood Alleviation Scheme, River Severn
• Skipton Road
• Small Communities Property Flood Resilience Scoping
• South Cave Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Stony Stratford Flood Alleviation Study
• Stubbing Holme Road
• Tenbury Wells Integrated Flood Solution
• Toronto Close Flood Alleviation Scheme
• Undefended Properties in the Ironbridge Gorge – Individual Property Protection
• Upper River Piddle Catchment Flood Risk Management Scheme
• Walsden Flood Alleviation Scheme
• West End Road, St Helens
• Whitley Brook Flood Reduction Scheme
• Williton Flood Alleviation Study

Feargal Sharkey on Thérèse Coffey’s water pollution plan

Desperate revival of failed policies doesn’t add up

Feargal Sharkey www.thetimes.co.uk 

What we need is a government with the vision and leadership to stand up to the water industry and hold them properly to account. What we have, as we have seen today, is a government trying to scrabble together something that looks like a policy, ahead of the local elections.

This plan consists of rehashing, republishing, repolishing and re-presenting years-old failed policies. It reeks of desperation.

Take, for instance, wet wipes. It would be great to ban plastic wet wipes.

Presumably that’s why this is the third time in the past five years that the government has said it will ban them. Will it happen? On past experience, no.

Then they say that they are bringing forward £1.6 billion in investment to stop 10,000 sewage dumps a year. It’s a big number, until you realise how many sewage dumps there are a year: 300,000. So this is 3 per cent. That’s not a plan. That’s desperation.

Or what about the unlimited fines for water companies? Before Christmas, they announced they would increase fines to £250 million. In January, the chairman of the Environment Agency said that was “crazy”. A month later Thérèse Coffey, the environment secretary, said it was disproportionate.

We are meant to believe that in a matter of weeks they have had this miraculous vision on the road to the sewage treatment works, and are converted to the idea that we should have not merely £250 million, but unlimited, fines. It doesn’t add up. Ofwat already has the power to impose a fine that is 10 per cent of a company’s annual turnover. How many times has it done so in the past 30 years? Once.

What in God’s name is the point of creating a power when there is clearly no will to use it?

The maddening thing is, if it had the will and the wherewithal, there is already nothing to prevent the government bringing these companies to heel.

Coffey could say, “Here’s what is going to happen for the next ten or 15 years until we fix this. This is what you’re going to pay your shareholders. This is what you’re going to pay your executives. This is what you’re going to invest in your network and this is what you’re going to use to pay down that debt you’re walking around with.”

We would all end up with a nice new shiny sewage system and secure water supply. They’d end up with a company that’s debt-free, profitable and looking forward to a prosperous future. She could start that process this afternoon. But she won’t.

What is required is a properly managed, costed and deliverable ten or 15-year plan — along with people who can be held accountable for delivering it.

None of that exists and, until it does, none of this is going to stop.

A correspondent writes an open letter to Simon Jupp

Dear Simon,

I am very pleased that sewage pollution is being tackled in the immediate future in Sidmouth and Tipton St. John, but Simon, what criteria were used to choose these two locations?

I would have thought that the hours of sewage outfall would be the criteria.

Exmouth has over 2,000 hours of outfall into Lyme Bay and the Exe. Sidmouth just over 1,000 hours. I, therefore, would have thought that Exmouth should be prioritised.

(The Lib. Dems list of the 5 worst beaches in the country which lists Sidmouth ahead of Exmouth Revealed: Worst beaches for dumped sewage – is your nearest beach on the list? YES two! | East Devon Watch did worry me. Exmouth beach having less pollution than Sidmouth beach didn’t seem right. However, if the surrounding outfalls from the town are included Exmouth has twice the sewage outfall than Sidmouth)

And why choose Tipton St. John with 22 spills lasting 48 hours of pollution in 2021 into the small River Otter when upstream Honiton’s 2 main sewer storm overflow sites spilled 222 times for a total of 4759 hours, discharging into the River Otter?

South West Water seem to have a curious set of priorities.

“Only the little people pay taxes” – Owl

Up to a quarter of taxpayers could be paying a higher effective tax rate than Rishi Sunak, research suggests.

Henry Zeffman www.thetimes.co.uk

Nurses, teachers and paramedics are among millions of Britons whose salaries are taxed at a higher rate than the prime minister’s investment income.

Sunak became the first prime minister since David Cameron to publish a tax return last month. It showed his income from shares dwarfed his ministerial salary. The £1.6 million in capital gains Sunak reported for last year was taxed at 20 per cent, whereas the overall tax rate on his other income was 37 per cent.

The return showed that Sunak paid tax at an effective rate of 22 per cent on his total earnings and gains. According to research by the Economic Change Unit, a campaign group, this is approximately the same effective tax rate as those on salaries of about £40,000 a year, about a quarter of taxpayers.

Like Sunak, some of those with incomes above £40,000 will be taxed at a lower rate because a portion of their income comes from capital gains or dividends, although this is likely to be a small percentage. Government statistics suggest that few outside the top percentage of earners derive a significant income from investments.

The research also found that more than half of those who live in the same constituency as 10 Downing Street — the Conservative-held Cities of London & Westminster — are likely to be paying a higher effective tax rate than Sunak.

The residents of the constituency have a median income of £46,000, the highest of any UK constituency, according to data for the 2020-21 tax year. Those earning £46,000 pay an effective tax rate of 33 per cent.

Sunak and his wife, Akshata Murty, are estimated to have combined wealth of £730 million.

The research is in support of Stop the Squeeze, a campaign calling on the government to increase wealth taxes.

Gemma McGough, an entrepreneur and member of the Patriotic Millionaires group that is supporting the campaign, said: “The fact those with high levels of wealth can pay lower tax rates than millions of people who work hard and have little economic security is a sign of a tax system that is broken.”

Mike Clancy, the general secretary of the trade union Prospect, said: “Prospect members doing the right thing, paying their tax and working exceptionally hard to keep government functioning are having to strike because their pay has fallen so far behind inflation. It will be galling for them that the prime minister pays a significantly lower effective tax rate than they do.”

When Sunak released his tax return, Downing Street said it was “entirely routine for savers to choose to invest in funds that focus on long-term growth rather than short-term dividend income. The tax return clearly shows that a considerable amount of capital gains tax is being paid.”

At the time, Dan Neidle, founder of Tax Policy Associates, said: “In paying capital gains tax at 20 per cent, Sunak is doing nothing remotely wrong or improper, but it’s hard to justify this disparity and it’s in Sunak’s gift to end it.”

“The Conservatives are responsible for this sewage crisis after allowing water companies to dump sewage in our rivers for years. They need to take responsibility for fixing it. The public shouldn’t be forced to pay the price with our rivers and coasts ruined for generations to come.” – Tim Farron

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com 

Thérèse Coffey has admitted she cannot end the sewage scandal, in what critics are calling a “complete abdication of duty”.

Launching her department’s cleaner water plan at the London Wetland Centre in Barnes in the south of the capital, the environment secretary said upgrading the sewage network to stop spills could add hundreds of pounds each to people’s bills.

She said: “While London and the Thames may have space for its new supersewer, wider upgrades of the sewer network lead to destructive works on our streets and put hundreds of pounds on people’s bills. There’s no way we can stop pollution overnight. If there were, I would do it without hesitation.”

Coffey took a veiled swipe at the Labour party, which has vowed to “end the Tory sewage scandal”, by saying that those who say they could end the problem are “either detached from reality or being definitively dishonest with the public”.

She also claimed “reaching the gold standard for ecological status would mean taking us back to the natural state of our rivers from the year 1840”, which was “not practical or desirable”. As an illustration of the difficulties, she pointed out that “no one is contemplating ripping up half of Sheffield to let the River Don run free, but without that it would never be scored as gold standard”.

Her plan has been criticised for including measures such as a ban on plastic in wet wipes that were announced years ago. Meanwhile, critics say they cannot see the tough new actions needed to tackle the crisis. The environment secretary recently faced calls by campaigners and political parties to resign for “not caring” about the sewage scandal, and the Conservative party is concerned that anger over local pollution issues may cost seats in the upcoming local elections. Coffey was recently named the least popular cabinet minister – by some margin – among Tory voters in a Conservative Home poll.

This week it was revealed that even England’s most celebrated beaches are being marred by sewage, with Blue Flag areas in Sussex and Devon having experienced 8,500 hours of dumping last year.

The strategy also focuses on getting people to use less water, encouraging the rollout of smart meters and a campaign for a change in lifestyle choices.

When asked by journalists how she personally reduced her own water usage, Coffey said she had a meter that once detected a leak. The water minister, Rebecca Pow, said she had just installed her third water butt.

The Liberal Democrats’ environment spokesperson, Tim Farron, said: “It’s disgraceful that Thérèse Coffey is throwing in the towel in the fight to protect our rivers from filthy sewage dumping. This is a complete abdication of duty.

“The Conservatives are responsible for this sewage crisis after allowing water companies to dump sewage in our rivers for years. They need to take responsibility for fixing it. The public shouldn’t be forced to pay the price with our rivers and coasts ruined for generations to come.”

Campaigners said her plans did not go far enough to protect rivers and wildlife.

Matt Browne, the head of policy and advocacy at Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “What we are still waiting to see is a comprehensive plan built around delivering on a long-term target for the health of our waters and an ambitious UK chemicals strategy to weave these individual threads into a world-leading tapestry of action to restore our rivers and seas. With so much of our wildlife and waters struggling under the weight of pollution, development and overuse, only a well-focused, well-resourced and far-reaching plan will turn the tide for nature.”

Spaceport Cornwall has been funded with public money including an initial £20 million package which included £12m from Cornwall Council, £7.85m from the UK Space Agency and £2.5m from Virgin Orbit.

Isn’t a spaceport without a launcher a bit like a pub with no beer? – Owl

Richard Whitehouse www.cornwalllive.com 

Virgin Orbit, the only company which has a contract to launch from Spaceport Cornwall, has filed for bankruptcy protection in the US. The firm, which carried out its first launch from the Newquay base in January, which ended in failure, had laid off most of its staff last week.

Today (April 4) it was announced that Sir Richard Branson’s company had filed for bankruptcy protection after last-minute bids to secure new funding failed. Last week the company announced it was making 85% of staff redundant.

In a statement Virgin Orbit chief executive Dan Hart said: “While we have taken great efforts to address our financial position and secure additional financing, we ultimately must do what is best for the business. We believe the cutting-edge launch technology this team has created will have wide appeal to buyers as we continue in the process to sell the company. At this stage, we believe the Chapter 11 process represents the best path forward to identify and finalise an efficient and value-maximising sale.”

The announcement comes a few months after Virgin Orbit undertook its first launch from Spaceport Cornwall which ended in failure following an anomaly with the LauncherOne rocket which was set to launch small satellites into space. The modified 747 plane Cosmic Girl successfully took off from Cornwall Airport Newquay but the rocket it carried – containing nine satellites from seven customers meant to go into orbit – didn’t reach space.

Virgin Orbit was the only operator with horizontal launch capacity to have a deal with Spaceport Cornwall. The system works by using a modified 747 aeroplane – Cosmic Girl – with the rocket launcher attached under a wing which can launch in the air.

Since the news first broke that Virgin Orbit was in financial difficulty Spaceport Cornwall and Cornwall Council has insisted that it is “business as usual”. Melissa Quinn, head of Spaceport Cornwall, said last week: “We are saddened to hear the news from Virgin Orbit. We wish the very best for all of the team who have been affected.

“Spaceport Cornwall continues to operate with no direct impact to the team or project. As the UK’s only licensed spaceport we continue to grow the space cluster in Cornwall through developing future launch operations, opening a new facility to support global space and satellite businesses and inspire local school children into STEAM (science, technology, engineering, maths) through our outreach programme.”

Spaceport Cornwall has been funded with public money including an initial £20million package which included £12m from Cornwall Council, £7.85m from the UK Space Agency and £2.5m from Virgin Orbit.

The development of Spaceport Cornwall was hailed as a way of generating more high value, high skilled jobs for Cornwall and securing a part of the global space industry. It was predicted that hundreds of new jobs could be created and that firms could relocate to Cornwall.

There are already a number of companies in Cornwall which have links to the space industry including Goonhilly Earth Station. As well as being able to launch to space Spaceport Cornwall aimed to have facilities which could be used in research and development in the space sector.

Spaceport Cornwall was the first spaceport in the UK to receive a licence to operate. Other spaceports are planned in other parts of the UK, including Scotland which will be home to the first vertical launch site in the country.

Devon, one of England’s best loved regions for staycations, has four of its beaches in the top (or should that be bottom) five shamed by the new analysis.

Two are in East Devon: Sidmouth at 4 and Exmouth at 5.

Simon Jupp, who voted down in October 2021 an opposition amendment to the Environment Bill seeking to place a legal duty on companies to stop spills,  takes the opportunity for a photo op at the mouth of the Sid but not Exmouth. Cheeky! – Owl

Shocking new data has revealed that some of England’s so-called cleanest beaches might not actually be that clean at all.

Jenny Medlicott www.lbc.co.uk

Analysis by the Lib Dems has revealed that a number of the England’s ‘Blue Flag’ beaches, an accreditation given only to ‘well managed beaches with excellent water quality’, are in fact blighted by sewage.

The figures show that during 2022, sewage was dumped onto various beaches a total of 1,504 times, totalling 8,497 hours of sewage dumped on beaches marked as safe and environmentally friendly.

Devon, one of England’s best loved regions for staycations, has four of its beaches shamed by the new analysis.

The top five beaches with the most waste are as follows:

1. Blackpool Sands Beach, Stoke Fleming, Devon – 63 spills, totalling 1,014 hours
2. Meadfoot Beach, Torquay, Devon – 79 spills, 946 hours
3. Beachlands Beach, Hayling Island, Hampshire – 102 spills, 793 hours
4. Sidmouth Town Beach, Sidmouth, Devon – 59 spills, 631 hours
5. Exmouth Beach, Exmouth, Devon – 39 spills, 470 hours

Brighton beach in Sussex was also amongst some of the worst hit beaches, which had 45 spills last year.

Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats, said: “Britain’s beaches are being ruined by profiteering water companies getting away with dumping sewage as the government has failed to act for years.

“What is the point of an environment secretary who doesn’t care about the environment?”

South West Water was singled out among firms who regularly use ‘storm overflows’ to pump sewage into bodies of water.

The company’s operating officer, John Halsall said: “We are reducing the use of storm overflows and our plan is working but there is more to do.

“We want everyone to feel confident about the water quality at their favourite beaches and to know that we are serious about reducing the use of storm overflows.”

The environment secretary Thérèse Coffey was expected to announce government plans to clean up Britain’s waterways today but instead has sparked outrage with her statement, which has been described as a ‘complete abdication of duty’.

Liberal Democrat’s environment spokesman, Tim Farron MP, said: “It’s disgraceful that Thérèse Coffey is throwing in the towel in the fight to protect our rivers from filthy sewage dumping. This is a complete abdication of duty.”

Ministers are attempting to wrest control of the narrative on Britain’s sewage-strewn rivers and beaches by threatening water companies with unlimited fines.

Environment Secretary Thérèse Coffey launched the government’s euphemistically titled “plan for cleaner and more plentiful water” in a speech yesterday morning.

Locally, Simon spins on the Sid: Simon “I would never vote to pollute our water” Jupp tries to take full credit for the “well timed” announcement from SSW of future investment plans to upgrade sewer overflows in Sidmouth and Tipton St John, alongside work to support nutrient neutrality in Axminster. [Sorry Exmouth, he seems to have deserted you! – Owl]

 “I have repeatedly called on South West Water to invest in East Devon. [Only after massive public protest – Owl]

“I’m really pleased they’ve listened to the case I have put forward on the floor of Parliament and in cross-party meetings with local councils.”

Time elapsed since the last Defra plan to tackle sewage: 221 days (or just over seven months). On August 26, the department (under George Eustice) announced its “toughest” targets yet on polluting water companies … guess they weren’t tough enough.

Yuck: If last year’s figures are anything to go by, you can expect raw sewage to pour into English rivers and seas 825 times during the course of today. Playbook recalls that angry constituent emails poured into Tory MPs’ inboxes in October 2021 (!) after they voted down an opposition amendment to the Environment Bill seeking to place a legal duty on companies to stop spills. Tory MPs were deeply unhappy about the backlash and it was enough to trigger a defensive social media campaign. [eg see above from Simon] This plan represents an attempt by the Tories to get on the front foot — but will it be enough?

Also worth noting: There are three national newspaper campaigns on this — the Telegraph’s Clean Rivers campaign, the Times’ Clean It Up campaign, and i and New Scientist’s joint Save Britain’s Rivers effort. It means there’s lots of press interest in (currently negative) stories about the problem … but also interest in touting any effective steps and signs of progress that will help these papers eventually claim victory (the Tel’s campaign has been running for over a year now). Coffey sets out today’s plans in a Telegraph op-ed.

Labour and the Lib Dems have long been trying to pooh-pooh the government’s record. Shadow Environment Secretary Jim McMahon said today’s announcement is “nothing more than a shuffling of the deck chairs” and “a reheating of old failed measures.” The Lib Dems point out ministers have been talking about banning wet wipes containing plastic — one of today’s main announcements — for the past five years (the Mirror’s John Stevens writes it up). And the BBC notes the government decided against doing so after the last consultation. Defra aides insist the opposition’s demands for a speedy solution are impossible given the scale of the problem.  

From Politico London Playbook with local embellishments added

The vast majority (95%) of local authorities across the UK are dominated by men, while only just over a third of local councillors are women, according to figures that highlight the gender disparities of local government.

Tobi Thomas www.theguardian.com 

The analysis, conducted by the Fawcett Society and Democracy Club in the run-up to local elections in May, reveal only 18 of 382 councils have the minimum gender representation parity.

The data also shows that at a regional level, no council has gender parity – with London the highest, at 45% female, and Northern Ireland the lowest, at 26%. It also found that the proportion of women in councils in 2022 was only 2 percentage points higher than in a snapshot taken in 2018.

The highest proportion of local councillors who are women, broken down by party, is Labour (47%) followed by Green (43%) and Scottish National party (41%), while the lowest proportion is found in the Conservative party (29%), the SDLP (29%), DUP (21%) and Ulster Unionist party (20%).

The low levels of women in local government can be attributed partially to sexism and harassment having been shown to be widespread throughout local councils, according to previous Fawcett research. A lack of support for those with caring responsibilities has also been revealed by earlier research, with only a quarter of local councils offering formal parental leave policies.

A lack of women in local politics is a recurring issue: In 2021, concern was raised after data revealed that only one-third of candidates in the English council elections were women.

Jemima Olchawski, the chief executive of the Fawcett Society, said: “Women are significantly impacted by decisions made at the local level and are more likely to rely on the services our councils run from social care to social housing. Yet progress on women’s representation in local government is moving at a snail’s pace.

“That such a vast majority of local councils are male-dominated diminishes public life. Government, local authorities and political parties need to take action and record diversity data, set targets for women’s representation alongside other protected characteristics, and make being a local councillor more accessible to those with caring responsibilities.”

Frances Scott, the director of 50:50 Parliament, said the report demonstrated that democratic systems in the UK were “inaccessible or unattractive to most people”.

She added: “This matters because representation shapes policy and we want our elected bodies to draw upon the widest possible pool of talent and experience, including that of the 32 million women who live and work in the UK.

“50:50 Parliament is a charity taking action to build a better democracy. We work together with the Fawcett Society and all the political parties to help women progress in politics, to ensure women have rightful representation.”

Cllr Izzi Seccombe, the vice-chair of the Local Government Association, said it was important that local governments reflected the communities they serve and their experiences.

Seccombe added: “We work with councils towards being representative of the communities they serve, including campaigning for the continuation of virtual council meetings, challenging abuse of councillors through our Debate Not Hate campaign, encouraging the provision of parental and carers leave and running our Be a Councillor campaign.

“We know many prospective councillors are put off standing because of their already busy lives. We want to see more women, parents and carers stand for election and encourage them to step up to leadership roles in local government, while still being able to live their lives outside of the council chamber.”

Farmers and Tory MPs are joining ranks to clash with conservation authorities about the best way to look after Dartmoor national park.

[Sources at Natural England said that while the Conservative MPs talk of the “grazing traditions” of Dartmoor, sheep have only been grazed there in the winter in the last 60 years when hardy Scottish breeds which could tolerate the freezing, windswept moors were introduced. See also this short historical review of human exploitation and the shaping of Dartmoor.] 

So Conservatives have short memories. Whose interests are they really conserving? – Owl

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com 

Parts of the national park are worryingly overgrazed, particularly by sheep, say nature experts, which is destroying habitats and putting rare birds at risk of local extinction. Breeding populations of moorland birds such as golden plover, red grouse and ring ouzels have now gone or are on the verge of being lost.

Natural England, the government nature watchdog, has advised farmers who are in agri-environment schemes and receive government money for nature friendly farming that they will have to reduce their stocks. It said that in summer, at least 50% of their livestock units should be cattle or ponies rather than sheep, and that “except for pony herds, winter grazing will need to be justified through clear and specific environmental outcomes that require winter stocking”.

Sources at the quango said that of the three largest moorland sites of special scientific interest (SSSI) – north Dartmoor, south Dartmoor and east Dartmoor – none of the key open moorland habitats, such as bog and heath associated, are considered to be in favourable condition.

Critics argue that farmers should not be paid millions of pounds of taxpayer money for environmental stewardship without changing their practices when the habitats are being degraded.

But the suggestion has been met with concern by local MPs. Sir Geoffrey Cox, a former attorney general and local MP, published a statement with other local Conservative MPs last week saying: “It seems that valuable and constructive work has now been abandoned by Natural England which has issued apparently peremptory limits on grazing, which would have a significant adverse impact on farm businesses (especially tenants), rendering some, if not many, no longer viable. It would also destroy the ancient traditional hefted flocks, which instinctively know the boundaries of their own common and are themselves a prized part of the unique life and culture of Dartmoor.”

Cox, Sir Gary Streeter, the MP for South West Devon, and Anthony Mangnall, the MP for Totnes, have asked for the current grazing regime to be kept in place for an extra 12 months, the appointment of an independent facilitator, and then an agreed “road map” for the way forward.

Cox, the Conservative MP for Torridge and West Devon, has secured a parliamentary debate later in April, where MPs will discuss whether Natural England’s management of the moor is adequate. The farming minister, Mark Spencer, is expected to respond.

But sources at Natural England said that while the Conservative MPs talk of the “grazing traditions” of Dartmoor, sheep have only been grazed there in the winter in the last 60 years when hardy Scottish breeds which could tolerate the freezing, windswept moors were introduced.

Dave Slater, the south-west regional director for Natural England, said that the grazing changes need to be made to save rare birds on the moors.

“Dartmoor contains three of the largest moorland SSSIs in the south-west, but none of these are in a ‘favourable condition’, with rare moorland birds all but disappearing from the area and precious peatland habitats damaged. The right type of grazing is fundamental to restoring the health of these moors.”

Alice Groom, the RSPB’s head of sustainable land use policy said: “Natural England have a statutory duty to protect Dartmoor’s SSSIs which like many in our national parks are largely in unfavourable condition.

“In order to deliver on the UK government’s commitments, places like Dartmoor need to provide more nature. This means ensuring that agri-environment schemes are fit for purpose, and support the people best placed to deliver it.

“In some situations, this will however involve making difficult choices about sustainable management. But we are in a nature and climate emergency and must not fight shy of making these choices.”