Tories “getting rid of the green crap” – to quote David Cameron, remember him? – Owl

Fiona Harvey www.theguardian.com 

The government is planning to launch its revamped net zero strategy from the UK’s oil and gas capital, Aberdeen, in a clear signal of its intention to boost the fossil fuel industry while cutting key green measures, the Guardian has learned.

Next week’s launch was originally called “green day” in Whitehall, but has been rebranded as “energy security day” and will focus on infrastructure. Campaigners have called the move a travesty.

Plans to extend offshore drilling for oil and gas will be cited as necessary to keep the lights on, and justified by investment in nascent carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, which is as yet untested at scale.

The revamped net zero plans, including a green growth strategy, will contain major sops to the UK’s fossil fuel industries and will miss out on key green measures. The Guardian has learned that the plans, still under wraps before Thursday’s launch, will include the following:

• Ministers will refuse to force oil and gas companies to stop flaring by 2025, as recommended in the review of net zero by Chris Skidmore earlier this year.
• Ofgem will not gain important powers to include the net zero target in its regulation of the energy sector, effectively defanging the regulator.
• No overarching new office for net zero, as recommended in the Skidmore review.
• No compulsion on housebuilders to fit rooftop solar to new housing.
• No comprehensive nationwide programme for insulation of the UK’s draughty housing stock, as green groups have been calling for. Instead, the strongest insulation measure is likely to be a consultation on the private rented sector.
• The Treasury, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, and the Department for Business and Trade are at war over whether to introduce carbon border taxes.
• Major roles for carbon capture and storage technology and hydrogen, which could boost the oil and gas industry with questionable gains for the environment.
• The potential licensing of a massive new oilfield, Rosebank, under cover of investing in carbon capture and storage technology, which campaigners warn is “greenwash”.

Green experts and campaigners were “astounded” at the rebranding of what had been widely trailed as “green day”, and by the plans to unveil it in Aberdeen, the centre of the UK’s oil and gas industry.

Tom Burke, a co-founder of the E3G thinktank, said: “This is Fawlty Towers politics – don’t mention the environment! It’s a sop to the right wing. It’s clear this is not a strategy, just an assembly of lobby interests.”

He said the UK economy would suffer. “The real problem for the UK is that the US, with the Inflation Reduction Act, and the EU have started the race for a green economy. That race has gone off and we are not in the race. Green day was supposed to be an opportunity to get back in the green race, but this is just supporting [fossil fuel] lobbies.”

A last-minute change of venue is still possible, though Aberdeen is the favoured option, and rows are ongoing over whether the prime minister, Rishi Sunak, will lead the launch.

The launch next week will include several key elements and involve at least four government departments. Ministers are compelled to publish a revamped net zero strategy by the end of this month, after Friends of the Earth and other campaigners won a court case last year that found the previous strategy inadequate.

Green measures in the strategy are likely to include an expansion of renewable energy, includingoffshore and onshore wind – the latter currently in effect banned in England – and it will also include plans to produce green hydrogen. Electric vehicle manufacturing will be a focus, with the potential for a mandate requiring companies to sell more of them, as will heat pumps.

Ministers will also respond to each of the 130 recommendations of the net zero review, conducted by the Tory MP Chris Skidmore, and will publish a 70-page green growth strategy, and a green finance strategy from the Treasury. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will also make fresh commitments on the UK’s carbon footprint.

While the government sets out its energy security strategy, a decision on a licence for the massive new Rosebank oilfield has reached the desk of Grant Shapps, the energy secretary, the Guardian has learned. If it goes ahead, new estimates by the campaign group Uplift show that Rosebank, expected to cost £4.1bn to develop, could receive an effective taxpayer subsidy worth £3.75bn through tax breaks and the loophole in the government’s windfall tax that spares oil and gas investment.

This would mean that Equinor, the Norwegian state-owned company behind the potential field, would pay only £350m to develop Rosebank, which is three times the size of the Cambo oilfield. Equinor made £62bn last year, and about 80% of the oil from Rosebank is likely to be exported, rather than bolstering the UK’s energy security.

A spokesperson for Equinor said the company did not recognise the Uplift estimate, and cited a separate industry report that found the Rosebank project could bring £26.8bn to the UK through tax payments and investments into the UK economy. The spokesperson said: “Rosebank has the potential to strengthen energy security with oil and gas that is produced with a much lower carbon footprint than current UK production.”

Tessa Khan, the executive director of Uplift, said: “Approving Rosebank would be an unbelievably bad deal for Britain. UK taxpayers would effectively cover almost all the costs of developing Rosebank by giving Equinor billions in tax breaks. The oil would most likely be exported, and Norway would take the profit.”

Ed Miliband, the shadow climate change and net zero secretary, said: “The Conservatives’ latest energy relaunch is daylight robbery, a colossal waste of taxpayers money, and climate vandalism on an epic scale. Funnelling billions from the British people to foreign-owned oil and gas companies already making record profits is one of the worst deals in British history and an insult to millions facing the cost of living crisis.”

The potential Rosebank decision and the energy security launch proposals come after climate scientists issued their “final warning” this week that the world would breach the crucial threshold of 1.5C of global heating without urgent action. The UN secretary general, António Guterres, called for an end to new oil and gas development in response.

Relying on CCS technology to bring down emissions was “greenwash” and would benefit the oil and gas industry, said Greenpeace. “Carbon capture is not zero carbon; is unlikely to see dramatic cost reductions or be scalable; and is often used for greenwashing by oil and gas companies so they can carry on polluting. It doesn’t do what it says on the tin and certainly should not be prioritised as part of a green industrial strategy.”

Chris Venables, of the Green Alliance thinktank, said: “There can be no energy security while the UK remains dangerously reliant on volatile global oil and gas markets. A real plan to bring down eye-watering energy bills by protecting the public from expensive fossil fuels must have renewable energy at its heart. Luckily, the government has a whole range of incredibly simple tools at its disposal to speed up the rollout of cheap, clean power. If those remain collecting dust on the shelf next week, it will be almost impossible for industry and business, never mind environmentalists and fuel poverty groups, to take this new plan seriously at all.”

The Guardian has approached the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero for comment.

Watch the video

The former chancellor, Kwasi Kwarteng, and former health secretary, Matt Hancock, agreed to work for £10,000 a day to further the interests of a fake South Korean firm after apparently being duped by the campaign group Led by Donkeys.

Kwarteng attended a preliminary meeting at his parliamentary office and agreed in principle to be paid the daily rate after saying he did not require a “king’s ransom”. When Hancock was asked his daily rate, he responded: “It’s 10,000 sterling.”

Sir Graham Brady, the chair of the 1922 Committee, also attended an online meeting for the fake foreign firm from his parliamentary office. When asked about the limits on arranging meetings, he made clear he could not advocate on behalf of the interest but said he may be able to advise the firm on who to approach in government. He said a rate of about £6,000 a day “feels about right” and any payments would be on a public register.

A fourth MP, former minister Stephen Hammond, who had been approached, said this weekend he considered he had been the victim of a “scam”. He said he thought he was engaged in a preliminary discussion with a company but “it turns out this company was fake, with a fake website”. Hancock’s spokesperson said he had acted “entirely properly” and criticised what he described as the “illegal publication of a private conversation”.

The senior politicians have complied with all relevant rules and referred to their obligation to their constituents during preliminary meetings. The Led by Donkeys project, conducted with investigative reporter Antony Barnett, comes at a time when people face a cost of living crisis. The campaign group released a report on its investigation on Twitter on Saturday , with recorded undercover footage.While they are not prohibited from such meetings and no arrangements were finalised, there is currently intense scrutiny of politicians’ outside earnings. Labour has said it will ban most second jobs for MPs if it wins power……

www.theguardian.com (Extract)

Richard Foord Liberal Democrat Spokesperson (Defence)  10:07 am, 22nd March 2023

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Sharma. SEND services in Devon have been in serious crisis for a long time, probably three or four years, with the situation deteriorating lately. Last year, Devon County Council apologised for failing to improve SEND services, and promised that things would improve and that it would redouble its efforts. We are continuing to see a problem around a lack of political leadership and of oversight at the council. My postbag is heavy with correspondence from constituents who are at their wits’ end trying to get the support and educational placements that children need.

The wait times for assessments are far beyond the statutory 20 weeks. The lack of educational psychologists is leaving families uncertain, having to juggle work commitments and looking after their child at the same time. It is definitely leading to people being outside of the workforce who would otherwise be fulfilling an important role in it. The looming threat in Devon of these services being placed in special measures, or removed from the council’s remit, shows that things must change. The promise of more money in the forthcoming council budget is welcome. The Government’s recent announcement of a new SEND school at Cranbrook is again welcome, but we need to ensure that taxpayers’ money is being spent effectively to deliver the SEND placements that our children deserve.

I have had constituents contact me to highlight situations where a child is allocated a placement that is wholly unsuitable for them, and the child cannot take it up but remains on the school roll, with the funding also remaining assigned to that school. We need to ensure that money follows the child and that appropriate frontline services are delivered regardless of where the child then moves. I have seen for myself in East Devon that SEND pupils are being taught in cupboards and storage rooms, and I know that that is not unique to my part of Devon, because I have also seen it reported on the BBC. We should not allow that to continue. I cannot help but admire the parents who are pushing Devon County Council and the Government on this. Devon SEND Parents and Carers for Change staged a protest at county hall in Exeter last month, and they are trying to shine a spotlight on some of these failings.

It is not all gloom; there are some examples of best practice. My constituent, Danielle Punter, has written books and a blog—autability.co.uk—with tips on education and support in understanding neurodivergence. Danielle pointed out last month that when partial school closures happen as a result of lockdown or strikes, it is often special needs school pupils who are most affected, because those schools need to be fully staffed in order for children with a high level of SEND requirements to get the best possible care, otherwise they need to stay at home. In short, we need to get to grips with some of these repeated failures, particularly in Devon, and that will require political leadership and political oversight.

Owl can always dream!

(Councillors also agreed that evidence of alleged “misconduct, wrongdoing and failures” by previous senior leaders that led to its £1.6bn of “toxic” debt would be handed to the Met Police for investigation.)

A crisis-hit London town hall is preparing to take “unprecedented” legal action in a bid to claw back some of the £437k payoff its former chief executive received before the council was forced to declare bankruptcy.

Rachael Burford www.standard.co.uk

Jo Negrini got the substantial payout when she was laid off as chief executive of Croydon Council in August 2020, just months before the local authority admitted it could not set a balanced budget and would need a Government bailout.

Since then it has issued three bankruptcy notices. Earlier this month the council signed-off a record 15 per cent council tax rise.

During a meeting on Thursday night–in what is thought to be a first for a British council–members backed instructing lawyers to recover as much of Ms Negrini’s payout “as is legally possible”.

Councillors also agreed that evidence of alleged “misconduct, wrongdoing and failures” by previous senior leaders that led to its £1.6bn of “toxic” debt would be handed to the Met Police for investigation.

This includes details of former cabinet members and their involvement in a botched refurbishment of Fairfield Halls, which was delayed and £37.5 million over budget.

Croydon’s Conservative Executive Mayor Jason Perry said he will write to Levelling Up Secretary Michael Gove asking him to “urgently review councils’ powers to hold individuals to account for catastrophic failures in governance”.

The Committee on Standards in Public Life, the House of Commons Select Committee on Local Government and the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) are also being asked to scrutinse the proposals.

Mr Perry, who became leader of the council last May, said: “Like so many residents I feel angry about what has happened to my hometown.

“The scale and severity of the financial collapse is unprecedented and that is why we are recommending unprecedented steps.

“The council has £1.6bn toxic debt in total and has had to seek permission to borrow £369m from government.

“It is completely unacceptable that individuals who held positions of trust should escape the consequences of their misconduct. Nor should they be rewarded for their failures while our residents, businesses and partners continue to pay the price.

“I will also be making the case to government that councils must have greater powers to hold former officers and members to account for misconduct – without risking further costs to the taxpayer.

“This is something that I will be asking government to look at as a matter of urgency.”

During the meeting, current chief executive Katherine Kerswell added: “What has occurred at Croydon has clearly been very damaging to our finances and ability to perform our key public service functions and most importantly undermined public trust in this council.

“As such, the council’s current leadership are duty bound to ensure that those responsible for the situation are fairly and properly held to account.”

The Conservative’s won control of the council from Labour last year.

Several internal investigations have been published into its financial collapse since then.

The Penn report, published last month, found that the council was a “highly dysfunctional organisation” under the previous Labour administration with a small number of cabinet members making decisions without appropriate scrutiny.

Workers interviewed for the probe described Ms Negrini as having a “bullying style”, the report said.

“The decision to take this unprecedented action was fully supported by Croydon’s Labour councillors. We understand entirely the public’s desire to see former senior leaders at the council properly held to account,”  Croydon Labour Group said in a statement.

A source from the previous administration told the Standard that Ms Negrini had always appeared to be “engaged” in council business and “competent” .

This doctrinaire Government has flogged off the Vaccines and Manufacturing and Innovation Centre once fast tracked at the beginning of Covid to fill a strategic hole in our response capability.

Just think how successful water privatisation has been in serving public needs.

Next time we will be well and truly stuffed- Owl 

Britain is less prepared for a pandemic now than it was three years ago, thanks to the sale of a key vaccine manufacturing plant, leading scientists have warned.

Tom Whipple www.thetimes.co.uk 

Professor Adrian Hill, director of the Jenner Institute, which was responsible for the Oxford Covid vaccine, said that the recent loss of the Vaccines Manufacturing and Innovation Centre (VMIC) in Oxfordshire, which had been created to respond to outbreaks, showed that the UK had been going backwards since the coronavirus pandemic.

“It’s less that we haven’t learnt the lessons — we’re aware of the lessons,” he said. “We just haven’t taken the action that’s required from those lessons. And we’re looking at our toes again, rather than doing something about it.”

• Have we learnt any lessons from the dystopia of Covid lockdown?

The £200 million tax-payer-funded facility was set up as a not-for-profit company, partly in response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak. It was intended to help vaccines from a diverse set of technologies into manufacturing and quickly increase production during pandemics.

When coronavirus struck, the facility was repurposed with a view to mass manufacture, but now that the vaccines are being made by pharmaceutical companies, it has been sold to Catalent, a US company. This means that the UK is once again without a flexible manufacturing facility that can respond to outbreaks. A government spokesman said: “VMIC Limited has always been a private company and the government had no role in the sale of its manufacturing centre. Catalent is a highly-regarded global company and its expansion in the UK will further strengthen our biotherapeutics industry.”

Hill said the loss of control was baffling. “The man in the street thinks the UK is really good at this, thanks to all the publicity about what we did during the pandemic, and probably feels we’re in a relatively good place. Well, we’re actually in a worse place than we were three years ago.”

Professor Robin Shattock, from Imperial College, a former chair of VMIC’s board of directors, said he thought the decision to sell had been made on cost grounds. “Suddenly they were worried that they’d built this big white elephant, and they’d be on the hook for the next umpteen years with it ticking over. It probably would have cost £5 million a year — pretty small in defence terms, if you think of it as defence against infectious diseases rather than military defence. But I think that ship has sailed.”

The government recently announced a ten-year partnership with Moderna, the mRNA vaccines manufacturer, to include vaccine manufacturing.

Inside the lab preparing for the next pandemic

Professor Sandy Douglas, from the Jenner Institute, said that in the early stages of an outbreak, when it is not clear that it will spread, it is not enough to rely on pharmaceutical companies. In particular, he said, a system would be needed that took action when “there’s a 10 per cent chance it’s going to be a problem for the UK, rather than waiting until it’s a 99 per cent chance”.

He also said that to combat unknown future threats the UK needed to rely on more than mRNA. “In 2020, everyone was saying never again,” he said. “But entirely predictably, we’re back in the position where a pandemic is something which is probably not going to happen in this parliament and so it’s off the priority list.

“It’s not really clear to me whether the UK has any system for thinking about emergency commissioning. Is there someone in government who would say, ‘Hello, Oxford, we’d like you to make a vaccine against this quickly?’ I’ve no idea.”

Kate Bingham, former head of the Vaccines Task Force, said she still hoped that the government would seek an alternative mechanism. “The sale of VMIC was a definite loss. But I’m still hoping the government listens to these serious concerns and doubles down on advanced biomanufacturing,” she said. “The chancellor said that the UK life sciences sector could shape and define this century. To do this, we need to reinstate our commitment to working with innovators to scale-up and test new vaccines and biotherapeutics which needs leadership and funds.”

In a letter sent to households in the past few days, signed by Conservative Group Leader Cllr Philip Skinner, he criticises EDDC’s current leadership for being “wasteful” with taxpayer money, and also for “increasing council tax significantly whilst doubling car parking charges and looking to close public toilets.”

Let us not forget our former Tory administration was prepared to make speculative developments on purchasing property “assets” at the same time as over-running costs of Knowle relocation and the sale of Knowle itself…

The independent-led council scuppered the risky investments (though it could do nothing about past risks) and, as a result, is the only council in Devon that has balanced its books without dipping deep into reserves. It also raised council tax by less than the permitted 5% and well below inflation. 

Here are a couple of posts from the run up to the 2019 election:

Oh-nooooo, 20m investment fund to be set up so East Devon can buy property and raise cash to balance books (Feb 2019)

More than £86.6 million in outstanding loans is owed by EDDC (April 2019)

The local council in deep trouble is Conservative run Devon County which raised council tax by the full whack.

A local councillor has condemned the East Devon Conservatives for sending out letters encouraging people to apply for postal votes with an application and free return envelope addressed to their own party.

sidmouth.nub.news 

The Conservatives said in the letter that they would “make sure” they forwarded the postal vote application to the electoral office. 

Cllr John Loudoun (Independent East Devon Alliance, Sidmouth Rural), who is also a district council cabinet member, said he viewed the pack as “cynical electioneering” and “blatant data harvesting”.

The East Devon Conservatives were approached for comment but did not respond by the time of publication.

The letter, signed by Conservative Group Leader for East Devon Cllr Philip Skinner (Conservative, Tale Vale), criticises the district council’s current leadership for being “wasteful” with taxpayer money, and also for “increasing council tax significantly whilst doubling car parking charges and looking to close public toilets.”

With regard to postal votes, it reads: “We’ve included a postal vote application with this letter.

“It takes just a moment to fill it in. You can then return it to the local council… or you can send it back to us free of charge using the envelope provided.

“We’ll make sure it’s sent on to the electoral office within two working days.”

District and town council elections will be held in East Devon on 4 May. You can apply for a postal vote here.

We now have an additional piece of the jigsaw puzzle and it’s this:

“The Commissioning Group received further information on Tuesday afternoon which, if accurate, it believes has the potential to materially affect some elements of the Verita Report that was due to be considered by EDDC Councillors on Thursday evening.

“Once this new material has been validated, assessed and properly considered a meeting will be reconvened to consider the Verita Report at the earliest opportunity.”

[The Commissioning Group is led by Simon Davey, Chief Finance Officer, and comprises Cllr Ian Thomas (Council Chair), Cllr Sarah Jackson (portfolio holder for transparency and democracy) and Cllr Jess Bailey.]

By Ewan Murrie BBC South West

A report into how a council handled child sex abuse allegations against a councillor has been withdrawn after new information came to light.

John Humphreys was convicted of sexually assaulting two boys in 2021, and jailed for 21 years.

He was first questioned in 2005 and arrested in 2016, but remained an East Devon District Councillor until 2019.

The report was due to be discussed on Thursday but was withdrawn while the new information is investigated.

The BBC has asked the council what the new information is, but no comment has been provided.

An East Devon District Council (EDDC) spokesperson said: “The Commissioning Group received further information on Tuesday afternoon which, if accurate, it believes has the potential to materially affect some elements of the Verita Report that was due to be considered by EDDC Councillors on Thursday evening.

“Once this new material has been validated, assessed and properly considered a meeting will be reconvened to consider the Verita Report at the earliest opportunity.”

The report was published earlier this week but has now been removed, and the investigation has been reopened.

Council Leader Paul Arnott said he did not know what the new information was.

He said: “It’s very disappointing that a conviction having been achieved in the summer of 2021, that we still aren’t getting to the bottom of this matter.

“We have tried really hard as a council, to make sure that in the interests of the victim, and in the interest of safeguarding for young people and others of east Devon, that we have a proper investigation.

“And yet here we are, at the 11th hour the meeting is cancelled.”

The report found a member of staff was told about the police investigation, but was bound by stringent confidentiality rules and could not tell anyone.

As a result, no safeguarding risk assessment was done and Humphreys was able to carry on coming into contact with children from his arrest in 2016 until standing down from the council in 2019.

In that same year the former mayor of Exmouth was also given an honorary title of alderman.

Also:

Rishi Sunak saved £300,000 in tax thanks to cut he voted for in 2016

[For comparison Sir Keir Starmer’s effective tax rate is 32%]

Rishi Sunak has saved more than £300,000 in tax thanks to a cut he voted for in 2016, according to an analysis of his tax records.

Kiran Stacey www.theguardian.com 

The prime minister has paid just over £1m in tax over the past three years, most of which was accrued on the gains he has made on his US-based investment portfolio. But that figure would have been £308,167 higher had the top rate of capital gains tax (CGT) not been cut by the Conservative government in 2016.

The figures highlight the disparities between Britain’s income tax rates and its relatively low rates of CGT. The prime minister’s overall tax rate for the last three years was 22%, roughly equivalent to what a nurse would pay in income tax.

Dan Neidle, the founder of Tax Policy Associates, said: “This is about whether it is fair for people holding investments to pay about half the rate of people getting income through their salary. It is hard to see how it can be.”

Britain’s CGT rates were aligned with income tax rates until 1998, when Gordon Brown slashed them as chancellor. His successor Alistair Darling put them back up 10 years later, however, introducing a top rate of 28%.

In 2016, the Tory government cut that top rate back down to 20%, arguing it would encourage business investment. Sunak, then the new MP for Richmond, argued several times in the debate that followed that the cut was an important pro-business step – without saying whether he might benefit from it.

Sunak said in parliament in 2016: “I am confident that reducing capital gains tax rates – together with a brand new 10% rate for long-term investments in private businesses – will unlock millions in much-needed funding. From speaking with investors this past week, it is clear that those policies have cut through and generated a fresh wave of enthusiasm for investing in British companies.”

A No 10 source said: “The tax return shows that a considerable amount of capital gains tax is being paid.”

Sunak’s tax affairs came to prominence last summer, when it emerged his wife, Akshata Murty, had saved millions on her UK tax bill by claiming non-dom status while her husband was chancellor. Murty gave up her non-dom status last year.

The prime minister had promised for months to release his tax returns, eventually deciding to release a three-page summary of them on Wednesday, in the middle of the testimony by the former PM Boris Johnson to a parliamentary committee investigating Partygate.

The timing of the release triggered accusations that the prime minister was shying away from scrutiny. The fact that the vast majority of his earnings came in the form of capital gains has refocused attention on CGT policy.

The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, said on Thursday: “I do think there’s a wider point about choices here. The choices they’ve made on tax and the tax system are obvious. They always go after working people; just look at the last 12 months.”

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Starmer also announced he would give up the unique tax perk he received as director of public prosecutions if Labour won the next election.

Starmer was given a bespoke pension that would have meant he did not have to pay tax on contributions above the lifetime tax-free limit, under an arrangement that had also been made for DPPs before him. Labour has promised to restore the lifetime limit after it was scrapped at last week’s budget, but the Labour leader was accused of hypocrisy after his own pension arrangements were revealed.

On Thursday, Starmer confirmed he would give up the carve-out if he became prime minister. He said: “When we reverse that change the government put in place last week I will be included within that, whatever changes are needed within legislation or anything else.

“I’m very happy to be – and will be – in the same position as everybody else in this country.”

Tom McPhail, a pensions expert at financial consultancy the Lang Cat, estimated Starmer’s decision could end up costing him tens of thousands of pounds more in tax payments until his retirement.

Boris Johnson has been urged to correct his Partygate inquiry testimony after he was found to have claimed a No 10 party marked the exit of the top civil servant who did not resign until a month later.

Adam Forrest www.independent.co.uk (Extract)

The former Tory prime minister claimed the notorious “bring your own booze” garden party on 20 May 2020 had been aimed at motivating staff because cabinet secretary Mark Sedwill had quit.

But Mr Sedwill did not resign until 29 June 2020 – more than a month later – revealing he would step down from his top Downing Street role in September.

Claiming the drinks gathering was purely a work event, an angry Mr Johnson told MPs: “People who say we were partying in lockdown simply do not know what they are talking about.

“People who say that that event was a purely social gathering are quite wrong,” the ex-PM said of the garden event – at which Mr Johnson and were seen with staff drinking bottles of wine.

The former PM added: “My purpose there was to thank staff, was to motivate them in what had been a very difficult time – and what was also a very difficult day in which the cabinet secretary had just resigned.”

But Mr Johnson’s former top adviser Dominic Cummings said the “bring your own booze” garden party “had nothing to do with assuring staff after cabinet secretary resignation”.

Mr Cummings said MPs on the cross-party privileges committee would have to write to Mr Johnson “confirming that a resignation in June could not possibly have been his justification for holding an event in May”……

At the eleventh hour!

Despite this, BBC Spotlight featured the story, giving for once, a good summary of the case, pointing out that Humphreys continued as a councillor with access to children, after his arrest in 2016,  until 2019 . He was  then given the honorary title and status of Alderman. A title that is given to councillors who have given “great service”. Although one member of staff knew of the arrest, confidentiality meant that the EDDC safeguarding officer and others were kept in the dark.

The reason given for postponement is that “new evidence” has come to light at the last minute. 

An individual has come forward with  information that, if accurate, could materially affect the conclusions of the report.

The investigation has had to be reopened.

Paul Arnott was interviewed. He expressed disappointment that despite a conviction having been achieved in 2021, we still haven’t got to the bottom of the matter. He explained, the council has tried very hard in the interests of the victims and safeguarding young people and others in East Devon to get a proper  investigation. Yet here we are, he said, at the eleventh hour and the meeting is cancelled.

Paul Arnott waits to find out what this information is.

In the light of this week’s devastating report into the Met Police and the interrogation of a past Prime Minister at the Parliamentary Privilege committee for misleading parliament, candour in public service ought to be the order of the day.

To avoid speculation EDDC needs to explain urgently what is going on. – Owl

Never had an emperor worn fewer clothes

For just a moment, you could almost feel sorry for him. Boris Johnson sat in front of the Commons Privileges Committee for hour after gruelling hour this afternoon. And bit by bit, question by question, he simply fell apart.

Ian Dunt inews.co.uk

There were sporadic outbursts of rage and entitlement. “This is just complete nonsense,” he barked at the MPs at one point. “Complete nonsense.” There were looks of startled outrage as the carefully constructed defences he had created were slowly and methodically demolished. But most of all there was just this strange, angry little man-child left utterly exposed.

Behind him, there was an array of silk the likes of which we rarely get to see. Somewhere around £222,000 worth of taxpayer-funded barrister sat with him, including Lord Pannick, whose usual rate is £5,000 an hour. His expressions were a masterclass in legal aloofness. For whole sections he sat with a smile on his lips, as if he’d just been introduced to a charming new jazz album.

But towards the end, even Pannick started to give way. By the time the session ended, he was balanced on the very edge of his chair, the smile gone. In front of him, his client was flailing around, all at sea, his every utterance more preposterous and improbable than the last.

Throughout the week, Johnson’s allies in the press have been stressing that he was preparing to unleash stunning new evidence that would show up the Committee inquiry for the farce which it really was. “Boris Johnson’s ‘bombshell’ that will ‘exonerate him from Partygate’,” The Telegraph said. “Bullish Boris up for the fight,” the Mail shouted.

Over the course of the afternoon, it slowly became clear what this bombshell was: nothing at all.

Johnson’s account of the parties in Downing Street during the Covid restrictions was tenuous and absurd. He insisted that all the events were essential for work purposes because he had to maintain staff morale. He claimed they were not parties, even though they involved no work, lots of socialising, plentiful alcohol and sometimes ended early in the morning. He mangled himself into impossibly contorted positions stressing the exceptions on guidance on social distancing.

It was gaslighting on a national scale. Everyone could remember what the rules were. They could remember how strenuously those rules were explained to them, because it was Johnson who did it, night after night from his Covid press conference lectern. And they could see, quite clearly, that none of these events met those requirements.

The inquiry is about whether Johnson misled the Commons, either purposefully or recklessly. It’s about whether he said things which were wrong, how quickly he corrected them, and what he did to ascertain whether they were true. And that was where he came completely unstuck.

On 1 December 2021, he told the Commons: “All guidance was followed completely in No 10.” A few days later, he said: “I have been repeatedly assured since these allegations emerged that there was no party and that all guidance was followed completely.”

One of the key priorities of the Committee was to find out the basis upon which he said that. Of all the MPs questioning him, it was Alberto Costa, an innocuous, mild-mannered Conservative with no great record in rebellions or Parliamentary speeches, who did the most damage. He was like a quiet sorrowful assassin, seemingly deeply saddened by what he was doing, but proceeding regardless, each question more dangerous and forensic than the last. And under that questioning, the former prime minister wilted.

Did Johnson seek assurances about the legality of the gatherings from any of the Government lawyers available to him, or from the Attorney General, or from anyone in government legal services? No, he answered. Did he seek assurances from anyone in the senior civil service, the permanent secretaries or heads of department who might have some understanding of the rules and guidance? Also no.

So who did he seek guidance from? And that was where Johnson’s supposed bombshell came in. It was from his two directors of communication: James Slack and Jack Doyle. It wasn’t really guidance at all, in any meaningful sense. It was just the lines-to-take, the statements put out by the press team to handle media responses.

Not only that, but even these figures didn’t seem convinced by the idea that the guidance had been followed. “I’m struggling to come up with a way this one is in the rules,” Doyle said in a conversation with a No 10 official on 25 January last year.

“Some might see your reliance on the repeated assurances you received as a deflection mechanism to prevent having to answer questions about your knowledge of these gatherings,” Costa said, the knife now firmly embedded in Johnson’s chest. “Would that not be a fair assessment?” Johnson sputtered and raged.

Harriet Harman, chair of the committee, then zeroed in on the former prime minister. “I was in the House when these assurances were given,” she said. “We took them to be serious assurances. Would you not expect us to be a bit dismayed to hear it was not from senior civil servants, it was from political appointees? That they themselves had doubts about it? That it only covered one gathering and it didn’t cover the other three? And also you were there at the time, so it’s a bit hard to understand what the nature of an assurance is when you were there and saw it with your own eyes?”

Johnson tried desperately to intervene. His lawyers perched ever further on the edge of their seats, furrowing their brows. But it was clear that the fight was over. Never had an emperor worn fewer clothes than those upon him this afternoon.

Beach hut owners fury over rental charges plan

Furious beach hut owners in East Devon no longer have the option of monthly rental charges spread out across the year due to ‘unannounced’ changes being imposed by East Devon District Council. It is claimed that without any prior warning, the council has sent out invoices last week stating the yearly costs of beach hut rentals must be paid in four consecutive months starting from next month.

Anita Merritt www.devonlive.com

For one beach hut owner, it has left her unsure if she will continue to rent the hut that has been in her family for many years in Beer. Claire Branfield is now faced with four monthly payments of nearly £300 a month from April to July, instead of paying under £100 a month, with just a couple of weeks notice.

It is a double blow for beach huts owners who have also seen their rents increase by three per cent. EDDC says it has been brought on to create the same payment rules for both new and current beach hut owners and to stop tenants cancelling tenancies part way through the season without having paid the full amount.

Claire, who was born in Beer and lives in Budleigh Salterton, said: “Last year I paid £97 in 12 monthly instalments which is a lot but now it has trebled to £295 for four months. When I complained to the council the person I spoke to was very apologetic and said letters should have gone out to warn us.

“I am aware that EDDC is intent on making the maximum return from their assets, but it is the slipshod and careless way they go about it which has infuriated me. I received just an invoice, no covering letter, and the lack of prior notice shows supreme disregard for ratepayers’ finances which are already under great pressure. As it happens, I can afford to find the money by July, but many people can’t.

“This could be the final straw for me. My beach hut is up all year round but I am beginning to think seriously for the first time of giving it up.”

Beach hut owners have also condemned EDDC for wasting taxpayers money in postage costs and the environmental impact by each year sending out business rate notifications which are said to always issue an invoice for 0.00p.

A spokesperson for East Devon District Council said: “EDDC have introduced a revised payment structure for beach huts to standardise payments for all tenants. We now offer two options: payment in full for the season ahead, or for those wanting to spread the cost, four affordable direct debit payments.

“This change has generally been well received, as many who started tenancies within the last two to three years had been required to pay upfront and have welcomed the opportunity to pay in instalments. Although tenants have been put onto four monthly instalments as default, a number have opted to pay in full.

“Previously, tenants were able to pay by various instalments which made administration inefficient and inconsistent. EDDC was exposed to tenants cancelling tenancies part way through the season without having paid the full amount.

“EDDC has over 3,000 people on our waiting lists. It’s important we avoid cancelled direct debit arrangements and a loss of income, and protect those who commit to a full season.

“£0.00p bills were sent to tenants with explanatory notes to advise them that small business rate relief has been applied, so there is nothing to pay. If they pay business rates on another property they need to let us know.”

Is this an example of “taking back control”?

Is the writing on the wall for Tories in Plymouth? – Owl

Plymouth’s Tory MPs have called on Labour to take over the city council amid chaos following Richard Bingley’s resignation. Johnny Mercer and Sir Gary Streeter said Labour supremo Tudor Evans should now form an administration until the local elections in May.

William Telford www.plymouthherald.co.uk

In a joint statement the Tory stalwarts said: “We have long wished for local politics to be a little more stable for the people of Plymouth. Labour is now the largest party. We call on Tudor Evans to accept the responsibility that comes with that democratic mandate and form an interim council until the May elections to ensure that stability and continuity is preserved.”

Cllr Bingley resigned almost a year to the day he took charge, following criticism after he signalled the start of a £12.7m Armada Way upgrade which involved wholesale tree felling. A public outcry ensued and a legal challenge from the action group Straw (Save the Trees of Armada Way) prevented further lumberjacking with court battles imminent.

Mr Mercer and Mr Streeter, MPs for Moor View and South West Devon respectively, thanked Cllr Bingley for his hard work and integrity. In their joint statement they said: “We would like to thank Richard for all of his tireless work to promote Plymouth over the last year. Being in politics locally is tough, and he has remained true to his commitments to Plymouth, and to the local community.”

Cllr Bingley is stepping down as leader of the authority and Conservative Group from Monday, March 27, the date of the next full council meeting. He had come under mounting criticism after signing an executive decision to press ahead with the Armada Way redevelopment, which resulted in 110 trees being chopped down at night. Cllr Bingley insisted this was the right thing to do and that it would result in a “wonderful tree-lined zone whereby businesses and cafes and people feel safe”.

Cllr Bingley took over from Cllr Nick Kelly, who then left the Conservative group, in March 2022. During his year in charge Cllr Bingley had to deal with the resignation of several other high-profile Tory councillors and ended up leading a minority administration.

He said that in his year in charge his team took 165 Executive Decisions which, he said, “emphasised our belief in economic development, job creation and being compassionate community councillors.” He said he was proud of several achievements including finishing the Forder Valley transport scheme and establishing the Plymouth and South Devon Freeport.

Plymouth City Council’s Labour Group leader Tudor Evans has called Cllr Bingley’s resignation “yet another chapter in the ongoing chaos, backstabbing and infighting” among the Conservative group and the Independent Alliance. He said Labour would publish an “exciting vision” for greening the city centre, which the party would “look forward to getting started on should we take control of the council in May.”

One of us? – Owl

Rishi Sunak has published his long-awaited personal tax returns – revealing his mammoth income from a US-based investment fund outside of his salary at Westminster.

Adam Forrest www.independent.co.uk

The prime minister has raked in more than £4.7m over the past three years, the summary of his tax returns published for 2019-2020 to 2021-22 have revealed.

He made more than £1.9m last year alone – including £1.6m in capital gains and more than £300,000 in earnings and investment income.

And the PM paid more than £1m in UK tax over the three-year period, including £432,000 last year.

Mr Sunak’s financial affairs have come under intense scrutiny ever since The Independent first revealed his wife Akshata Murty held “non-dom” tax status to avoid UK tax on foreign income.

She later renounced the non-dom status. But it subsequently emerged that Mr Sunak had held a US green card and filed tax returns in America while he was chancellor.

Details of the couple’s fortune, believed to total around £730m, are also politically sensitive following warnings last week that Britons face a lost decade in living standards.

A statement from Mr Sunak’s accountants on Wednesday showed that his huge investment income and capital gains relate to a single US-based investment fund.

This is the investment listed as a “blind management arrangement” on the list of ministers’ interests. Mr Sunak is subject to UK tax on the investment income and gains received from the American fund.

Tax expert Dan Neidle said Mr Sunak had done nothing wrong – but noted how little capital gains are taxed compared with income, saying Mr Sunak paid only 20 per cent tax on the £1.6m made from it last year.

Mr Neidle – who probed ex-chancellor Nadhim Zahawi’s tax affairs – said “there is one interesting point: most of the £400,000 tax bill comes from the blind fund which doesn’t pay cash to him. So how does he pay the tax bill, given it’s so much more than he earns?”

Fellow tax expert Richard Murphy tweeted: “What do Sunak’s tax returns tell us? It is that a wealthy person with income beyond their immediate needs can always re-categorise large parts of that income as capital gains to reduce their tax rate on that part to 20 per cent, which is an insult to all who have to work for a living.”

The tax returns coincided with the highly anticipated grilling of Mr Sunak’s predecessor Boris Johnson by MPs over whether he misled the Commons with his denials about Partygate.

It was also on the same day as the Commons voted on Mr Sunak’s new post-Brexit deal. Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner tweeted: “Wonder why he’s chosen today?”

The ministerial code requires all ministers, including the prime minister, to provide information about their tax affairs for review by the Cabinet Office and the independent adviser on ministerial interests.

However, they are not required to make this public. Mr Sunak had promised that he would become the first prime minister since 2016 to publish his tax returns in full this year.

David Cameron did publish his returns after coming under immense pressure, as did Boris Johnson while London mayor. George Osborne did the same as chancellor.

Theresa May did publish four years’ worth of returns during her campaign for the Tory leadership.

Mr Sunak initially made the pledge last summer during his unsuccessful Conservative leadership campaign against Liz Truss.

He repeatedly promised to do so in recent months, and faced continued pressure to release the documents when it emerged Mr Zahawi settled an estimated £4.7m bill with HMRC while he was chancellor.

The Independent first revealed in July that HMRC officials were examining the tax affairs of the senior Tory figure after an inquiry was launched by the National Crime Agency in 2020.

For Owl’s comment see this post.

Spring has sprung and, as happens every four years in East Devon, the month after Easter will see innocent citizens subjected to campaigning from hopeful candidates in parish, town and district elections.

Paul Arnott, leader of East Devon District Council www.midweekherald.co.uk 

Next week we enter the ‘pre-election period’. This means that any readers who rush to read this column, or to tear it out to line a litter tray, will be disappointed. In the interests of balance, I must sign out until after the elections.

Indeed, it is always possible that I am neither re-elected a councillor here in Coly Valley, nor that anyone will want me to be Leader after May. This may be less au revoir and more Goodnight Vienna. However, after about 130 articles in recent years, or 85,000 words – all unpaid I should add, the length of a novel – this is the end of Book One.

Some have moaned about the articles, but I have done my best to share East Devon matters without too much of a po face. Which leaves me about 400 words to put the argument for voting for my group of councillors in May.

To begin at the beginning, in 2019 only 19 of the 60 councillors elected were Tory. Somewhat weirdly, the new Leader in 2019 (then an ‘Independent’, now the deputy Tory Leader!) and the outgoing Leader (the Tory Leader before the election, then an ‘Independent’!) formed a business-as-usual Cabinet with the support of the 19 Tories. As tends to happen in these situations, that Cabinet collapsed less than a year later, and the rest of us who’d watched on quietly formed a new one.

So, for the last three years East Devon has been run by an incredibly friendly administration of Independents, LibDems and Greens. It’s been a down the centre, progressive council, of the type the whole country seems to want but the daft electoral system seems never to come up with. It was called the ‘Democratic Alliance’.

Straight out of the blocks we dealt with two Tory legacies – the officer-dominated Greater Exeter Strategic Plan with its huge democratic deficiencies – and the bonkers way in which a single officer was given a £20 million fighting fund to initiate questionable investments across the country to bolster EDDC finances. These schemes were notorious – and we stopped them instantly.

We then dealt with other Tory legacy issues such as their neglect of both public toilets and car parks policy. We reset the whole framework for discussions around seaside towns, work still in progress, including major sea defence projects. To drive the local economy forward we invented new Tourism and Culture strategies in which hundreds of businesses and organisations are now engaged. During and after Covid 19 we ran local funding strategies for thousands – from businesses to those in poverty – and hit sixes around the ground in Environmental policy too.

As for the bottom line, we are the ONLY district council in Devon to balance its books this year without a major dip into reserves, something no Devon Tory council has managed. That is a huge tribute to our careful and outstanding work with council officers. In 2023 we have the foundations to be the best run local democracy in the country.

The historic election of Richard Foord as MP last summer proves that Tory East Devon is sinking into the sunset. Having publicly supported Richard during that election, I must be consistent now and will stand as a Lib Dem this May too. I believe the district wants a non-Tory administration for many years to come and for me this is the best way I can help to secure that.

For Owl’s comment see this post.

The leader of East Devon District Coubcil and three other Cabinet members – all previously elected as members of the Independent East Devon Alliance – will stand as Liberal Democrat candidates in the elections on May 4.

seaton.nub.news 

Leader of the council Cllr Paul Arnott (Coly Valley); Cabinet member for Tourism, Sport, Leisure and Culture, Cllr Nick Hookway (Exmouth Littleham); Cabinet member for Coast, Country and the Environment, Cllr Geoff Jung (Woodbury & Lympstone); and Cabinet member for Climate Action, Councillor Marianne Rixson (Sidmouth Sidford), have announced they will all stand as Liberal Democrats in the upcoming idstirct council election.

They were previously elected as members of the Independent East Devon Alliance and later joined the council’s Democratic Alliance with other party members.

In a joint statement, they said they believed that a Democratic Alliance would provide a “sustainable future” and standing as Lib Dems was a way to help guarantee this.

They commented: “For the last three years, we have been proud to be part of the Democratic Alliance leading the council as Independent, Lib Dem and Green councillors.

“Under this administration, East Devon is the only district council in Devon to balance its books without major borrowing from reserves. 

“Together, we led the district through Covid-19, supporting thousands of individuals and businesses. We kept our leisure centres open. We made huge strides in environmental protection, from new projects to sea defences, and created new economic strategies around tourism and culture.

“We have invested sustainably in the economic powerhouse in the west end of the district, which will lead to more than a thousand new jobs. We dealt with toilet and car park legacy issues which were ignored by the Tories for more than a decade.

“We believe that this Democratic Alliance of the last three years is the sustainable future for East Devon. The historic election victory of Richard Foord MP last summer was a watershed moment.

“In order to grow a progressive, centrist East Devon – with Homes, the Environment and Economic Growth at its heart – we believe that by standing as Lib Dems we can help guarantee this for the future.”

Nub News will be offering all local candidates in the East Devon District Council the opportunity to make a statement before the election.

“We effectively have in East Devon an almost proportional representation situation with those who are prepared to work together doing so, and those who put politics first (Tories and pseudo-Independent Tories) refusing to do what is best for the district.”

The East Devon Alliance (EDA) emerged in 2013 from the widespread protests at the arrogant way the long standing Tory regime in EDDC were driving through a build, build, build agenda, with a disregard for accountability and scrutiny and  their lack of respect in listening to members of the public. 

Its purpose was to provide genuine Independents with a mutual support umbrella to seek election.

Under electoral law it was obliged to register as a political party in 2015 when it won 10 of the 59 seats in the 2015 and became a significant opposition political grouping.

In the 2019 election two thirds of councillors were non-Tories of various shades. Under “independent” Ben Ingham an administration was formed with the support of the remaining 19 Tories. Ingham specifically excluded the EDA. Unsurprisingly, his cabinet fell apart within a year as, one by one, independents who had given this form of “change” a go realised their error and removed their support.

At this point long standing LibDem Councillor Eileen Wragg suggested a formal arrangement between the two major groupings of the LibDems and EDA, forming the “Democratic Alliance”. This has resulted in a three year broad coalition in EDDC between an even wider grouping including other Independents, Greens and Labour. Their achievements in just these three years are listed in separate posts mentioned below.

We now learn (see separate posts) that a number of EDA councillors will join the LibDems to fight this year’s election, seeing this the best way to ensure the “Democratic Alliance” continues, others will continue as EDA candidates.

Owl’s hope is that ALL non-Tories will work together, as they have done so far, because we have to do better at a local level than those who are at a national level are currently doing – putting party before prinicples.  

We deserve better and we effectively currently have in East Devon an almost proportional representation situation with those who are prepared to work together doing so and those who put politics first (Tories and pseudo-Independent Tories) refusing to do  what is best for the district.

We have to do politics better – localism should trump tribalism.

Be under no illusion. Under the leadership of Phil Skinner, with his deputy Ben Ingham, the local Tories have not reflected on why they lost so heavily in 2019.

If the Tories are returned to power this May we will return to their rotten old ways of governance.