Add a little zest to your life with a slice of turnip.

Soon time to plant your seeds for an early summer crop.

This 3.19% increase can be compared to the 6% rise in the Police budget and 4.99% for County – Owl

The average East Devon household will have to fork out an extra £5 a year for the district council’s slice of their overall council tax bills.

East Devon Reporter eastdevonnews.co.uk 

The authority has agreed a 3.19 per cent increase it says will balance its budget, protect frontline services and ‘help with the inflationary pressures’.

Some of the cash will be used to provide extra support will also be given to the leisure sector.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) provides services including rubbish and recycling collection, maintaining parks and open spaces, and leisure centres.

EDDC takes seven pence in every pound from residents’ overall council tax bills.

The rest is made up of contributions to police and fire services and county, town and parish authorities.

Councillor Jack Rowland, EDDC portfolio holder for finance said: “Whilst any increase in the EDDC element of council tax is regrettable in the current inflationary period, the increase is 3.19 per cent and £5 per annum for the average Band D rate payer.

“That is less than a 10p per week increase and despite, in real terms, losing over £50million over the last decade in central government grants, this EDDC budget for 2023/24 is providing the required balanced budget required by law as well as preserving services.

“For 2023/24 the average Band D ratepayer will be paying £161.78 per annum to EDDC, which is equivalent to just over £3 per week for services such as the waste and recycling collections, the StreetScene service in maintaining many parks and open spaces, the contract with LED Community Leisure to operate the swimming pools, gymnasiums and other sport and leisure activities in the district as just a few examples of the services provided by EDDC.”

Breathtaking incompetence and failings by police allowed a gunman to kill five people during a mass shooting in Plymouth, victims’ families have said.

This was the headline from the BBC a couple of days ago.

Under the heading: Alison Hernandez and her thoughts on guns from 2017, Owl recalled how our Police and Crime Commissioner caused alarm by suggesting that members of the public who own guns could help defend rural areas against terror attacks. 

What sort of example was she setting?

With hindsight, it looks like this was the first example of the trivial and populist way in which she exercises her responsibilities, epitomised by her predilection for “selfies” at every trivial opportunity.

Yet she controls about 12% of your council tax, compared to 7% for the, arguably more visible, services provided by East Devon.

By far the biggest spender is County at around 72% under the beady eyes of our recent correspondent Cllr Phil Twiss, Cabinet Member for Finance, the rest covers Fire and parish services.

Here is what Tim wrote in his comment .yesterday:

I gather Ms Hernandez is calling for someone to be disciplined over the Keyham tragedy-but not her.

These 2017 comments gave us a great insight into what sort of Commissioner she might become. Sadly she was plainly ignorant in a number of areas that she should have mastered.

Her job is to support the police and fire service, to equip both with adequate staff and the resources needed to perform their duties.

Is it not common sense to have some knowledge of the police roles that one overseas, especially topical serious issues?

In relation to her giving consideration to Firearm Certificate Holders (FAC) perhaps having a role alongside the police response to terrorism, she demonstrated how dangerously little she knows about firearms law and police practices. Thankfully senior officers dismissed the notion-and far more gently than she deserved.

The Firearms Act ’68 is one of many Acts that lays down duties but does little or nothing to enable those duties to be supported with funding the appropriate resources. The Act, and to my mind this is one of its greatest failings, effectively requires a chief officer (or now a nominated deputy) to issue a FAC unless he/she can show it is inappropriate. It does not require the individual to prove he/she is an appropriate person . I think it’s time to reverse that onus from the police to the applicant.

When certificates are issued there are inevitably conditions attached as well as restrictions from other laws that may apply in certain circumstances. For example you cannot simply take a firearm anywhere to use it, its use will be limited to say a particular shooting club or specified farmland. Unless a FAC holder had an additional condition allowing him/her to use when assisting police (an absolute non-starter), to do what Ms Hernandez contemplates, and all other issues aside, it would in itself be a criminal offence resulting in a court hearing, likely conviction and seizure of the firearms held. That is a measure of how naïve she is on the subject.

Davison may not have been processed properly but we all know from history that people can change and quickly become dangerous. I was loosely connected with the Hungerford incident in 1987 when 16 innocents were killed by a man, Michael Ryan, who held firearms 100% lawfully under the law as applied at that time.

Managing the response was immensely challenging and I dread to think how much worse it would be if civvie armed FAC holders had also been present. And, like it or not, the police must consider the shooter and in GB terms, so very differently from that seen on US TV. The force sniper on that Hungerford occasion, now sadly no longer with us, had Ryan in his sights but didn’t shoot him. Asked why he gave a powerful reply revealing what an expert and remarkable man he was, ‘I am not an executioner. At the time he was in my sights but he was not a threat to anyone else”. Can you imagine any civvie FAC holder being so well-informed and so disciplined to properly assess and apply the law?

The Keyham case has made plain, again, the need for sufficient resources to apply the Act (as it stands today), and that such resources have not been available for many a year. Ms Hernandez must bear a good deal of responsibility for that.

The PCC says she has given more resources to the department but are we are not entitled to ask what additional resources she made available to the D&C FAC dept before Keyham?

Water companies often release illegal levels of a toxic pollutant into rivers in breaches that go undetected because of a flawed “self-monitoring” system, analysis for The Times suggests.

Rhys Blakely www.thetimes.co.uk 

The research indicates that the Environment Agency (EA) has told the companies to test the treated sewage they release into watercourses during the hours of the day when they are most likely to comply with their permits.

Outside the hours when testing happens, levels of ammonia in the treated sewage, which can wreck river ecosystems, often appear to exceed legal limits.

The findings raise serious doubts over how the EA has directed water companies to monitor their own performance. They also raise the possibility that households are being overcharged because Ofwat, the water regulator, is using flawed pollution data provided by the companies when it carries out price reviews that control consumer bills.

The Times has launched the Clean It Up campaign to press for more action on cleaner rivers, lakes and beaches. It calls for water companies to be stripped of self-monitoring powers and the job handed to a beefed-up EA.

Under what is known as operator self monitoring (OSM), companies are asked to test their own treated sewage. They typically take samples from treatment works either 12 or 24 times a year. They test for a variety of pollutants and report the results to the EA, which passes the information to Ofwat.

The analysis focuses on ammonia, which can fuel algal blooms that choke river wildlife. Official guidance from the EA says that most OSM samples should be taken between 9am and 3pm, Monday to Friday, with one in every 12 samples taken outside of these “office hours”. The readings generated by the OSM scheme suggest that more than 97 per cent of treatment works comply with their permits.

However, another set of testing data generated for internal company use — not reported to the EA and not usually made public — gives a much more detailed picture of how the plants are performing, by collecting information on ammonia levels in treated sewage every 15 minutes around the clock.

These “continuous’ readings were obtained for more than 500 treatment works, operated by six companies, by the campaign group Windrush Against Sewage Pollution (Wasp) using freedom of information laws.

The more detailed data shows that ammonia levels often dip to their lowest concentrations between about 8am and 2pm — which coincides with when the vast majority of OSM samples are taken. Outside of this testing window, ammonia concentrations are often far higher.

The OSM data suggests that less than 3 per cent of treatment works break their permits for ammonia. By contrast, the continuous data suggests that 105 out of the 531 sewage works included in the analysis — about 20 per cent of them — are in breach.

For example, in 2020 OSM samples were taken from the Chelmsford sewage works, which is run by Anglian Water, only between about 10am and 2pm. The more detailed continuous monitoring data suggests that ammonia levels often breached the permitted levels outside of this window.

The analysis is the latest to be produced by Professor Peter Hammond, of Wasp. He has previously used water company data to detect thousands of spills of untreated sewage, including many that were illegal and not picked up by the EA.

Hammond said: “If rivers are to return to at least good chemical status and customers are to pay fair charges, then Defra must stop operator self-monitoring in the water industry and replace it with well-funded, technically savvy and independent regulation.”

Penny Gane, the head of practice at Fish Legal, an advocacy group, said: “The reality is that a water company employee taking a final effluent sample once a month during a small window does not give a full picture of what’s going on at a treatment works.

“While the water companies may technically be compliant with OSM conditions in their permits, they miss peak usage times in the morning and evening when everyone is flushing their toilets, washing their clothes and showering. Breaches can go undetected by the regulator with the current approach.”

Data was supplied by Wessex Water, Thames Water, Southern Water, Yorkshire Water, Anglian Water and Welsh Water. The companies stressed that they carry out their OSM testing in line with government instructions. They strongly denied deliberately timing samples to meet their permits.

A spokesman for Water UK, which represents water companies, said: “Testing regimes are approved by the Environment Agency. Crucially, this includes the timing and frequency of samples and the rules about how they should be taken.

“In addition, water company sampling teams do not have access to the sampling programmes so they physically cannot advise operational teams of when samples are going to be taken.”

An Environment Agency spokesman said: “The Operator Self-Monitoring approach is independently accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service – and practically it is only water companies that can do this level of monitoring. Under the ‘polluter pays’ principle they should also be the ones paying for it. Many other industries use similar self-monitoring, including oil and gas and the chemicals industry.

“This is not the only way we check that water companies are complying with their permits — we also do our own monitoring and on-site inspections, both announced and unannounced.”

Wessex Water took issue with Hammond’s analysis, saying that it was not possible to make “a meaningful comparison” between the data from continuous monitoring and the OSM data. In response, Hammond pointed out that OSM readings for ammonia levels at Wessex treatment plants looked at in his analysis closely match those from continuous monitoring.

Sir Dieter Helm, professor of economic policy at the University of Oxford, said: “Peter Hammond’s work is excellent. The fact that it takes a retired mathematics academic to reveal what’s going on is itself a damning indictment of what the EA and the water companies have been up to. Worse still is the fact that companies like Severn Trent refused to release the data to Peter that others at least provided. No one seems to want to take responsibility. No heads have rolled.

“Public trust is now so low that only a transparent publicly available data monitoring system will do. Defra and the EA and the water companies should finally make the shift from the analogue self-reporting farce to a 21st-century digital real-time monitoring of the sad state of our rivers.”

Severn Trent Water, South West Water and United Utilities declined the freedom of information request and withheld data.

The Times is demanding faster action to improve the country’s waterways. Find out more about the Clean It Up campaign.

What’s the water like in your area?

Is there a story that we need to cover? Tell us about the lakes, rivers and beaches near you.

At the full council meeting on Wednesday the recommendation from cabinet was passed in what looked to Owl to be a unanimous decision but may more accurately be described as “nem con”. [Agenda item 10]

Cllr Eleanor Rylance declared an interest and withdrew from the chamber before the agenda item. The Tories had pointedly abstained from the vote on the budget under then previous agenda item.

Is that so they can campaign that Tories didn’t vote for tax increases? Like Simon Jupp’s claim: “I didn’t vote to pollute our water”

Re: Council Tax Charges for Second Homes & Empty Properties

The recommendation agreed was to implement the following upon the legislative provisions coming into force:

 a) The application of a premium of 100% for all dwellings which are unoccupied and substantially unfurnished (empty dwellings) after a period of one year rather than the current 2 with effect from 1st April 2024;

 b) The application of a premium of 100% for all dwellings which are unoccupied but substantially furnished (second homes) with effect from 1st April 2024; and 

c) That the Service Lead for Revenues, Benefits, Corporate Customer Access is given delegated powers to implement the policy in line with the Council’s requirements and having regard to any guidance given by the Secretary of State. 

d) That a letter is written to our local MPs to ensure their support for the bill so it receives royal assent prior to April 2023. To communicate to all other councils in Devon to encourage a unified Devon policy on the increase in rates for empty or second homes.

People have been asked to consider wearing face masks once again following a sharp rise in Covid-19 rates. Following a national trend, Plymouth has also seen a nearly 25 percent increase of people who have reported testing positive with the virus.

Shannon Brown www.plymouthherald.co.uk

This is the fourth week in a row hospital admission rates have increased for the virus, rising to an average of 9.4 admissions per 100,000 people in the week ending February 19, up from 7.9 per 100,000 in the previous week, according to NHS data. A total of 8,015 people were in hospital in England on February 22 who had tested positive for Covid-19, up 11% on the previous week and the highest since January 10.

Plymouth has seen an increase of 24.2 percent in the week ending February 18, according to the government’s coronavirus tracker. Over the seven days last week, 195 people in the city reported testing positive for the virus- an increase 38 on the previous week – with a case rate per 100,000 people in the city is 74.2.

Recent national rates of Covid hospitalisation over Christmas 2022 peaked at 11.8 per 100,000. 9,535 people were in hospital will the virus on December 29. Experts at the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) have asked people to reconsider wearing face masks to protect against airborne infection.

Across Devon, there are currently around 479 total Covid cases as of the week ending February 18. This is an increase of 16, or 3.5 percent. Per 100,000 residents in the county, there is an average of 59.1 new cases every week – Plymouth average rate is significantly higher.

Christmas Covid cases was one of the factors adding extra pressure on the NHS this winter, along with a sharp increase in cases of flu, a bed shortage, and staff sickness. Flu levels have fallen since early January, with an average of 638 flu patients in hospital beds each day last week, down from 738 over the previous week, and significantly reduced from the 5,441 people in hospital at the start of the year.

However, this is still well above the average of 29 patients at the same point last year. Dr Mary Ramsay, head of immunisation at the UK Health Security Agency, said: “Covid-19 and flu are still in circulation. Hospital admission rates for Covid-19 are continuing to increase, particularly among those aged 65 and over.

“Although flu case rates remain relatively low, we have also seen a rise in hospital admission rates among the over-85s, who are at greater risk of severe illness. Simple actions can make a big difference in reducing the spread of these viruses.

“You can help by regularly washing your hands or staying at home and avoiding vulnerable people if you are unwell. If you do have to leave the house, please consider wearing a face covering, which can help prevent you passing respiratory viruses on.”

Owl thinks many Tories will see the writing on the wall and claim to be “Independent” to try to save their skins in May, 

Cllr Mike Howe says he still gives his full backing to East Devon MP Simon Jupp. 

Remember: A blue rose by any other name would smell as stinky! (Ben Ingham led a so called “Independent” EDDC administration when, in reality, he was just a puppet on a string to the Tories, hoodwinking a number of quite reasonable independent minded councillors along the way.)

Or maybe Mike Howe has just had his fill of turnip rations from Tory group leader Cllr Philip Skinner. – Owl

Rob Kershaw www.devonlive.com

An East Devon councillor has quit the Conservative group to sit as an independent after growing tired with the party’s stance on some issues. Cllr Mike Howe (Independent, Clyst Valley) said he has been considering the move for a while, but a full council meeting on Wednesday [22 February] was the final straw.has had his fil

Cllr Howe sat on the opposite side of the room to his now former Tory colleagues. He vocally disagreed with them on a number of points.

“I’ve just had enough. I’m just worn out and last night’s full council just pushed me over the edge,” he said. “I thought I need to be a bit more distant and a bit more independent and do what I can for my ward and the district as a whole. And I feel the best place to do that is not in the Conservative Party locally. I think the party was wrong from start to finish last night, and it just gets to the point where you can’t defend the indefensible.”

While no longer a Conservative on council level, Cllr Howe still gives his full backing to East Devon MP Simon Jupp. Conservative leader Cllr Philip Skinner (Tale Vale) said he respected Cllr Howe’s decision to part ways with the group.

“Councillors obviously have their views on certain issues,” he said. “And they’ve got to make the decisions they take on their own merit. It’s just one of those things I guess, where people are in their lives, the views they have on different issues.

“We’ve just got to respect other peoples’ viewpoints of people and decisions they make in life, and the consequences to the actions and the decisions that they make are their own.”

Cllr Howe’s decision comes less than three months before the next election in May.

His decision leaves the composition of the council with 21 Conservatives, 16 Independents, 12 from the East Devon Alliance, 7 Liberal Democrats, 2 Greens and 1 Labour councillor. There is also one seat vacant as former Labour councillor Paul Millar, who represented the Exmouth Halsdon ward, is no longer listed as being a member of the council.

Boris Johnson’s legal defence fees for the upcoming Partygate, covered by the taxpayer, are expected to soar again as the government prepares to extend the contract.

Adam Forrest www.independent.co.uk

The taxpayer is already set to contribute more than £222,000 in legal fees for the former PM as he faces a grilling over whether he lied to parliament on Covid parties.

But the government contract with legal firm is to be renewed again before expiring 28 February, upping the bill by another five-figure sum, according to The Guardian.

It comes as it emerged investigating MPs on the privilege committee made a “site visit” to No 10 to see where rule-breaking parties were held during the pandemic.

The committee led by senior Labour MP Harriet Harman wanted to get a sense of the layout in the building to better understand how the gatherings happened, ITV reported.

MPs have not yet set a date for the public hearings for the Partygate, which is trying to establish whether Mr Johnson misled the Commons about what he knew of illicit gatherings.

But the televised sessions are expected to begin sometime in March. Mr Johnson denies misleading MPs – recently telling his staunch ally Nadine Dorries that anyone who suspects he deliberately covered up lockdown parties was “out of their mind”.

The decision to give so much taxpayers’ money to cover Mr Johnson’s legal fees for the is being looked into by officials at the National Audit Office (NAO).

The NAO has not yet decided to launch a formal investigation, but a letter last month revealed one of the spending watchdog’s top officials will speak to the Cabinet Office about the matter.

Solicitors firm Peters and Peters was awarded a contract worth £129,700 in August to provide Mr Johnson with advice during the investigation. An extension of the contract, costing another £90,000, was approved in December.

Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner said voters “will be justly outraged at the prospect of having to foot the bill yet again for Boris Johnson’s Partygate defence fund”, adding: “Rishi Sunak is showing once again that he’s too weak to put a stop to it.”

Mr Johnson has been accused of “treachery” after intervening on the Northern Ireland Protocol row and other issues, with ex-Tory Chancellor George Osborne claiming the ex-PM wants to “bring down” Mr Sunak and return to No 10.

The former Tory leader will “100 per cent” condemn any agreement reached in the coming days if he feels it means closer alignment with the EU, allies have said. Mr Johnson has made known that dropping the unilateral protocol bill would be a “great mistake”.

He is one of 57 Tory MPs who has signed a letter urging Mr Sunak to boost nuclear energy capacity. He and the group want to see two more large-scale projects before the next general election.

Up to 30 new homes will be built on the outskirts of Topsham, despite concerns about road safety. Heritage Developments’ outline application for a green field site along Newcourt Road was approved by Exeter City Council’s planning committee on Monday, which will see the Topsham Gap get even smaller.

Ollie Heptinstall www.devonlive.com 

35 per cent of the properties will be classed as ‘affordable,’ while the meeting was told the homes will be ‘net zero.’ This includes triple glazing throughout, air source heat pumps, solar panels and electric car charging points.

Located between the M5 and the Avocet railway line, Newcourt Road is currently the location of a number of new developments and recently-granted planning applications, leading local resident Ben Fitzpatrick to raise concerns about safety.

“Newcourt Road is a narrow, single track, country-style lane, with extremely restricted blind corners,” he said. “Worse than this – [there are] no footways along the majority of it, including at the worst end.”

Mr Fitzpatrick said the road was “dangerous” and “clogged at peak times.” He criticised the use of 2018 traffic data – before the recent housing developments were built – to help to assess road safety.

Councillors were told another survey had been carried out by an objector, showing significantly higher levels of traffic along the road, less than a week before the meeting. It came with a request to defer the application.

However, an officer for Devon County Council, which concluded it was “satisfied that safe and suitable access can be achieved to the site,” said the 2018 traffic survey was “perfectly applicable” given it had “taken into account future developments.”

Applicant David Lovell, from Heritage Developments, questioned the veracity of the objector’s survey, adding: “After allowing for this development and all other existing planning permissions, traffic movements on Newcourt Road will still be less than half the maximum threshold set out in national guidance.”

But he committed to adding pavements around the front of the site “to futureproof Newcourt Road for any future further developments.”

Mr Lovell also reminded councillors that the properties will be net zero homes and said he had no problem with including a play park in the development’s open space.

Council leader Phil Bialyk (Labour, Exwick) suggested the principle of housing at the location was broadly accepted, but called on the county council to “step up” and put in a “proper traffic management plan” as a condition for outline planning approval. However, he was told this was outside of the committee’s powers.

Councillor Rob Hannaford (Labour, St Thomas) said he would raise the issue of road safety at a future meeting of the Exeter highways and traffic orders committee (HATOC), on which he also sits.

Backing the scheme, Cllr Hannaford concluded: “We have a housing shortage. We need more housing across the board. These are family homes and there’s good provision of affordable and social housing.”

The application was approved by 11 votes to three. A final stage ‘reserved matters’ application containing the finer details will be brought back to the committee at a later date.

Therese Coffey Roasted For Saying ‘Cherish’ Turnips, Forget Tomatoes

Graeme Demianyk www.huffingtonpost.co.uk

Twitter has been digging for jokes after the environment secretary suggested eating turnips could help avoid the UK’s fruit and vegetable shortages.

Supermarkets have been rationing fresh produce after bad weather in north Africa and southern Europe has disrupted the UK’s supply chain (some, however, are insisting Brexit is to blame too).

Speaking to MPs in the commons, Therese Coffey, the minister in charge of food supplies, insisted that ongoing shortages will be a temporary issue that should be resolved in two to four weeks.

The Tory MP added the UK should “cherish the specialisms” it has and a “lot of people would be eating turnips right now” under a seasonal food model – rather than thinking about lettuce, tomatoes and similar fresh food.

It quickly prompted a pile-on …(see www.huffingtonpost.co.uk)

Mirror

Daily Star

.

….after rejecting a new business plan for their controversial development company.

“Conservative councillors seem hell bent on investing more taxpayers’ money on this vanity project.” LibDem spokesperson

Mid Devon is another council facing problems from controversial property development.

[Mid Devon District Council – No overall control since 1999, Conservative led for a decade until 2019, subsequent “Indy” Leader Bob Deed until ousted this week].

The council appears simultaneously to have reject two sources of revenue: raising car parking charges and a new business plan for their controversial development company –  3 Rivers Development Ltd (3RDL). Council members have also ousted their Leader, Bob Deed.  

3RDL is another of those controversial investment schemes see: “A cautionary tale from Mid Devon – Council dabbles in investment”. Here are some selected quotes from this 2020 post.

Following an explanation from Deputy Chief Executive, Andrew Jarratt on the origins and aims of the 3Rivers project, Leader of the Council, Bob Deed was reported as saying:

“It was time to “lift the veil” on the “considerable mystery around the performance of 3RDL and the oversight of the company by the responsible officers at the Council.”

He said: “You have heard in Mr Jarrett’s response that 3RDL has already returned significant sums to the Council over the past two years and delivered its only completed scheme to date on time at its level of profit.

“This is opaque speak in that, not one penny has been returned to the Council by 3RDL over the past two years, every penny of interest due from 3RDL to the Council has had to be lent by the Council to 3RDL and remains outstanding within its total loan figure due to the Council.”

LibDems said in February:

“Conservative councillors seem hell bent on investing more taxpayers’ money on this vanity project. The Liberal Democrats believe external expertise needs to be brought in to review the company and to find a solution that does not leave the local council taxpayers ‘picking up the tab’.

 Mid Devon budget chaos as parking charge hike refused and 3Rivers plan rejected

Ollie Heptinstall www.devonlive.com

Mid Devon urgently needs to find more than half a million pounds for its new budget after councillors rejected two sources of income.

At a lengthy and eventful full district council meeting on Wednesday [22 February], a new business plan for the authority’s controversial housing development company, 3Rivers, was rejected.

The expected interest generated from loans to the company – whose future is now in serious doubt – is therefore missing from the budget, meaning the council is £500,000 short, according to deputy chief executive Andrew Jarrett.

It is also short of an additional £120,000 of revenue after members paused planned hikes to car parking charges, following a public outcry. Some charges, including annual allocated permits, were planned to more than double.

As a result of the decisions and the financial implications, councillors decided not to vote on the proposed 2023/24 budget. Some also didn’t want to because the budget papers had been submitted without five working days’ notice.

An emergency meeting will now be scheduled, in which savings or cuts totalling around £620,000 will need to be agreed. Councils must legally set balanced budgets by Saturday 11 March.

However, councillors did vote to put up council tax by 2.99 per cent – something that has to be agreed by the end of this month so that bills can go to residents in time. The rise is equivalent to an extra £6.56 per year for a band D property, taking their annual contributions to Mid Devon up to £225.40.

Together with other increases to Devon County Council, fire, police, and town and parish councils, band D households will be paying out £2,295.32 next year – an increase of £109.73. Councillors now quickly need to finalise what taxpayers will be paying for in Mid Devon over the year ahead.

Difficult to sort the “good-uns” from the “bad-uns” in this complicated story of an “Indy”/Tory administration falling apart, with serious consequences explained in a companion post as they grapple with legacy problems.

Reminds Owl of the infamous Ingham (LINO) regime in East Devon [Leader in name only].

See, for example, this 2020 extract from the LibDems Mid Devon Council Leader ‘acting like the Sun King!’

Liberal Democrat Councillor Alex White commented, “As Liberal Democrats we are very proud to have forged a consensus with Independent and Green Councillors that in the last two years has made the Council more responsive to the needs of the local community. We unwisely thought Bob Deed, who had quit the Tory Group, shared our principles, but it looks like he has reverted to type.”

Deed, who has been heavily involved in promoting the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan, replaced the four Liberal Democrat Councillors with his former Conservative colleagues in a move seen to be aimed at reversing the Council Cabinet decision to oppose GESP.

Mid Devon District Council has a new leader

Ollie Heptinstall www.devonlive.com

Mid Devon District Council has a new council leader. It follows the resignation of the previous leader following a tumultuous meeting on Wednesday night.

Ahead of the meeting, Cllr Bob Deed, the Independent leader of the council, had been facing calls to resign. A motion had been put forward by Tory group leader – and Cllr Deed’s former deputy – Cllr Clive Eginton – calling for his resignation.

Mid Devon’s political leadership has been in turmoil after the Conservative members of Cllr Deed’s Independent-Tory cabinet left in a dispute over the authority’s controversial 3Rivers property development company. Cllr Deed said he was going to appoint the necessary replacement cabinet members ahead of the meeting, but soon after it began news broke that he had resigned.

The Conservatives tried to get Cllr Eginton appointed as the new council leader, but this failed to receive a majority of votes. A subsequent vote to appoint Independent councillor Barry Warren, who represents the Lower Culm ward, and who is a prominent voice on the council’s scrutiny and planning committees, was then passed successfully.

The former police officer is only likely to serve as leader until May’s council elections, telling colleagues after his appointment: “I am purely here as a caretaker until the next election.”

But it is likely to be a busy two-and-a-half months. Mid Devon still needs to agree a balanced budget for 2023/24 in the coming days and Cllr Warren will need to quickly appoint a new cabinet.

“There will just be some urgent matters to deal with,” he said. “But if somebody is expecting myself or my cabinet to come up with some earth-shattering new initiative or something, there won’t be. It’ll be very much trying to keep going what’s already going and tweaking what needs doing. Until I’ve talked to various officers, I haven’t got a clue where we start.”

Simon Jupp straining to get answers.

But the answers to his questions are “unilluminating”, in fact one might call them rather bog standard. – Owl

www.theyworkforyou.com

Simon Jupp Conservative, East Devon

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps her Department is taking to ensure that the reporting of storm overflows in real time will be (a) consistent, (b) transparent, (c) accessible and (d) readily understood by the public.

Rebecca Pow The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

The Environment Act places new monitoring duties on the water industry to significantly improve transparency. It requires companies to make discharge data available in near real time to the public and to monitor water quality upstream and downstream of their assets.

More weasel words – Owl

The water regulator for England and Wales has weakened its language around how utility companies spill sewage pollution in future, prompting claims it is toothless.

Adam Vaughan, Environment Editor www.thetimes.co.uk

Ofwat has begun drafting standards for water companies governing how they protect the environment and how they perform between 2025 and 2030.

These “performance commitments” include definitions on storm overflows, which act as emergency valves for the sewage network during heavy rainfall and spill untreated sewage into rivers and seas. Companies are permitted to dump sewage this way to prevent it backing up into homes, but there has been public outrage at the number of spills. There were 372,000 spills in 2021.

In Ofwat’s definition of storm overflows, the original version said that reducing spills from them “helps to ensure that storm overflows are used by exception, rather than as a norm”. However, in an amended version published in December, the reference has been removed.

Such language is important because the use of storm overflows to spill sewage is the norm today by design, but has become seen as increasingly unacceptable. The government has set companies targets to curb them that will cost an estimated £56 billion.

The original Ofwat text also included a statement that “fewer and less frequent discharges” would help public health and the environment. This language is cut in the amended version.

The total number of storm overflow spills grew from about 13,000 in 2016 to about 404,000 in 2020, mirroring an increase in monitoring. It fell about 8 per cent in 2021, but whether that decrease continued last year will not be known until late next month when new figures are released.

In the meantime campaigners have identified 143 occasions between October 2021 and September last year when “dry spills” occurred. Companies are permitted to discharge untreated sewage during heavy rainfall, but not when conditions are dry.

Although highly visible, storm overflow spills are not the biggest source of pollution from water companies: a greater contribution comes from their sewage treatment works. Another Ofwat document, on river water quality related to phosphorus pollution from sewage treatment works and farms, dropped a passage on the benefits of curbing the pollutant.

The original text spoke of “encouraging water companies to limit adverse impacts on the water environment and demonstrate how they are contributing to tangible progress towards good ecological status of water bodies as part of their statutory functions”. The sentence was struck out in the version published in December.

Meanwhile, a document on flooding on private properties and land outside water companies’ networks, caused by sewers run by the companies, cut the suggestion that reducing the floods also curbed “negative social impacts”.

Ofwat said it expected the language of the definitions to be updated in April, reflecting feedback from stakeholders. The regulator added that it did not expect the December changes to affect any targets it set for water companies from 2025 to 2030.

Labour claimed that the edits showed Ofwat was toothless. “Our lakes, rivers and sea have been turned into an open sewer and the water regulator has been caught red-handed rewriting the rules given to water companies,” Jim McMahon, the shadow environment secretary, said. “The Conservatives have given the green light to further sewage dumping, and tried to minimise its impact on communities and local businesses dependent on tourism and leisure.”

The Times recently launched Clean It Up, a campaign calling for more robust regulation of the water sector and faster investment tackling storm overflow spills.

In an apparent nod to the campaign, the outgoing head of the other main regulator for the water sector in England, the Environment Agency, this week said that water pollution had garnered “huge media attention, particularly at the moment”.

Sir James Bevan, in a speech at the World Water-Tech Innovation Summit, conceded that progress on improving the water quality of rivers had slowed in recent years and even stopped in some cases.

However, he insisted progress was being made and argued some discussion of the issue had not been grounded in reality. “All I would say is let’s have this debate on the basis of the facts not assertions — and there are some wild assertions, myths and outright untruths flying around,” he said.

Plans to create hundreds of new jobs in two East Devon towns have been announced by the district council regardless of its failed bid to secure £11million government funding.

How many times has the government turned its back on Axminster?

Neil Parish always seemed preoccupied with “other interests”.

Remember this at the next election. – Owl

East Devon Reporter eastdevonnews.co.uk

East Devon District Council (EDDC) has revealed its ‘disappointment’ at a failed funding bid for Levelling Up cash for the Axe Valley, but vowed to forge ahead with some of its smaller plans to build new employment sites in Seaton and Axminster.

Later this year the council will report on the ‘viability’ of three new work sites in Colyford Road and Harepath Road, in Seaton, and Cloakham Lawns, Axminster, with the aim of developing around 3,000 square metres of employment space, creating up to 140 jobs for the local community and district.

In the summer EDDC will decide if the council will sell the sites, or if the authority will control running the workspaces.

EDDC said the Levelling Up funding hit has prompted the council to review its phase one plans of the £7million Seaton Seafront Enhancement project, in a bid to reduce costs.

It said it could not commit to working on the project in the next financial year.

An EDDC spokesperson said: “The first phase of the Seaton Seafront Enhancement project was set to cost nearly £7million.

“This included plans to create a bigger, better and more attractive outdoor space, including cafes, which can be enjoyed by locals and tourists alike near the roundabout close to Fisherman’s Gap.

“The council hopes to review phase one, and how the cost can be reduced although cannot commit to working on this in the next financial year.”

They added: “Following cabinet approval, EDDC is also now in the process of selecting a marketing agent for the Seaton Moridunum site, the Esplanade.

“This is the former toilet block with ramps either side and viewing platform above.

“There is an opportunity for the site to be transformed into a café or other leisure related facility.”

EDDC said it was waiting to receive feedback from the Government Department of Levelling Up Homes and Communities on its failed bid, to help with future applications.

Councillor Paul Hayward, EDDC portfolio holder for economy and assets, said: “Despite the disappointing outcome of the Levelling Up Fund, which was announced in January, we are still keen to make progress with some of the projects included.

He added: “While the council will progress with the marketing of the Seaton Moridunum site on the seafront, unfortunately, without the assistance of Government funding, the council is limited in what it can do at this time with the Seaton Seafront Enhancement project as a whole and a further review of this project is necessary.”

The Westminster Hall debate, chaired by Simon Jupp, rescheduled form Zelenskyy’s visit will now take place at 2.30 tuesday 28 February.

It will be recorded in Hansard and there may be a live video feed.

“I’m from Devon, I live near the sea in Sidmouth, and I love where we live…..I voted for a crackdown on sewage spills.” – Simon Jupp

In October 2021 Johnson’s Conservative government, with the votes of Simon Jupp and Neil Parish, succeeded in voting down a Lords amendment designed to stop private water companies from dumping raw sewage into the UK’s waterways. The amendment would have placed a legal duty on companies “to make improvements to their sewerage systems and demonstrate progressive reductions in the harm caused by discharges of untreated sewage.“

In November 2021 what Simon voted for was a watered down version which changed a legal duty into a nebulous progressive aim of a “reduction of adverse impact of storm overflows’ and make it enforceable under a different Act.

In December 2022 the Government announced abandoning the principle of a legal target for river health, and postponing a deadline for agricultural run-off reduction by three years (from 2037 to 2040).

The government has also promised a new “plan for water” this year, and that 160 sewage treatment works will be upgraded by 2028 to cut phosphorus pollution being dumped in to rivers. Campaigners said, however, that the promises fall far short of a blueprint to clean up the country’s waterways.

Ashley Smith of Windrush Against Sewage Pollution, an Oxfordshire-based group, noted that there are more than 5,200 sewage treatment works in England.

“We estimate at least 2,000 combined sewer overflows are dumping too often,” he said. “This plan does nothing to stop pollution from being profitable.”  www.thetimes.co.uk 

Even our AONBs, SSSIs and National Parks are inadequately protected and in poor condition. – Owl

Prominent environmental scientists, peers and experts have signed a letter to the Prime Minister, calling on the government to give Protected Landscapes new powers and duties to help meet international commitments on nature recovery.

“The past decade has seen deterioration in the condition of our Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). Our National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) still lack the purposes, powers and resources needed to fulfil their potential to protect and restore nature within their boundaries. If not urgently addressed, this lack of progress in delivering bigger, better and joined up spaces for nature will mean the end of any chance of meeting nature recovery targets in England by 2030, undermining UK promises made at COP15.“

www.cnp.org.uk 

Organised by a coalition including Campaign for National Parks, Wildlife and Countryside Link, and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, the letter has been covered in The Times.

The letter also urges the government to set a new target under the Environment Act for improving the condition of special sites of scientific interest (SSSIs) across the UK. Our recent analysis, again covered in The Times, shows that only a quarter of SSSIs in National Parks in England are in ‘favourable condition’, compared to a national average of 38%. This is a worrying trend over the longer-term, and that’s why we need to take urgent action.

Is Government giving up on nature in protected landscapes?

The letter has been accompanied by an article from Campaign for National Parks, Wildlife Trust, and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, warning that the Government has one last chance in this Parliament to act to recover nature in Protected Landscapes. They need to step up and grab this opportunity.

We’re calling on Peers in the House of Lords to back our campaign

The letter coincides with the next stage of the levelling-up and regeneration bill in the House of Lords. Thanks to the efforts of Campaign for National Parks and the coalition, Lord Randall has tabled an ammendment to the bill with cross-party support taking forward key recommendations from the Glover Review of Protected Landscapes, which would see National Parks and other Protected Landscapes being given vital new power and duties so they can do more for nature recovery and people’s access. Signatories on the letter include the author of the review, Julian Glover, as well as members of the review panel.

As the letter makes clear below, although the government have accepted proposals from the review, they have so far failed the seize the opportunity to legislate these commitments. With the amendment now tabled in the House of Lords there is a perfect opportunity to turn words into action. 

We’re delighted with the broad alliance of supporters that have come together on this campaign and we’re now calling on Government and Parliament to take forward this legislation so Protected Landscapes can do more for nature, climate and people.

The next few weeks and months will be crucial as we look to win over even more support and everyone’s voice counts – including yours. You can pledge your support, and sign up for receiving more information about joining our campaign for legislative action.

Full letter to the Prime Minister – Delivering on COP15 promises by making space for nature

Dear Prime Minister,

The UN Biodiversity Conference (COP15) in December concluded with agreement, signed by 195 countries, to protect 30% of our land and ocean by 2030. Your Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs rightly hailed the agreement as ‘‘a historic milestone in protecting our natural environment for future generations’’.

We are writing, as scientists and experts working to protect the natural environment, to urge you to uphold these welcome global commitments by implementing them at home.

The blueprint for restoring natural systems in England is now over a decade old. In September 2010, a group of scientists, including some of the authors of this letter, submitted a Government-commissioned review of England’s ecological network, Making Space for Nature.

The review found that England’s wildlife sites were largely inadequately protected and in poor condition, even in our most special habitats. Overall, the review concluded that the existing network of places for nature was not sufficient to either halt the loss of biodiversity or to meet our natural capital needs. In response to this conclusion, the review’s core recommendation was that England needed more, bigger, better and joined up spaces for nature.

Sadly, this vision has still not been delivered in full. The past decade has seen deterioration in the condition of our Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). Our National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) still lack the purposes, powers and resources needed to fulfil their potential to protect and restore nature within their boundaries. If not urgently addressed, this lack of progress in delivering bigger, better and joined up spaces for nature will mean the end of any chance of meeting nature recovery targets in England by 2030, undermining UK promises made at COP15.

Every year counts, and to uphold COP15 commitments at home, 2023 needs to see early, ambitious action to deliver better spaces for nature. There are two steps that can be taken straight away by your Government to implement key Making Space for Nature recommendations:

• Amending the Levelling Up & Regeneration Bill to deliver legislative reforms to purposes, duties and management for Protected Landscapes.

The Glover Review of Protected Landscapes, building on Making Space for Nature conclusions, highlighted how National Parks and AONB were held back from delivering for nature and put forward a package of recommendations to address this. A number of these recommendations were accepted by the Government in their response to the review, including recognition of need for legislative reform. Ahead of the Levelling Up & Regeneration Bill’s report stage in December, Sir Gary Streeter MP tabled amendments to the Bill which would have put these key recommendations and related reforms into law for National Parks. It was very disappointing that at Report Stage on 13.12.22 the Bill Minister failed to take this opportunity to legislate to deliver agreed commitments, merely stating that the Government was ‘‘continuing to consider how best to implement’’ the Glover review. Now that the Bill is in the Lords a further amendment to deliver Glover recommendations, both for National Parks and AONBs, has been tabled by Lord Randall, with cross-party support. This amendment must be accepted. There have been years of consideration of recommendations to improve protected landscapes for nature. It is now high time for delivery.

• Adding a terrestrial protected sites condition target to the Environment Act targets.

There is no target for the condition of designated nature sites in the package of Environment Act targets, despite the fact that the UK’s SSSI network (the last fragments of habitat that are most important for nature) are languishing in sub-standard condition, with just 38% in favourable status. This should be addressed by a direct target for at least 75% of SSSIs to be in favourable condition by 2042, with the remaining 25% showing evidence, based on monitoring, that SSSI features are making progress towards ecological recovery. Although the interim SSSI condition targets in the new Environmental Improvement Plan are a step forward, they are not legally binding and are no substitute for a headline target set under the Environment Act. The Environment Act gives Ministers the power to set new environmental targets at any time; a new terrestrial protected sites condition target should be set as soon as is practicable. The new Environmental Land Management (ELM) system of farming support, if properly structured and adequately funded (at least £2.4 billion per annum for the next five years), has the potential to help improve the condition of SSSIs in farmed landscapes. Improvements to SSSI condition assessments will also help to drive progress.

Your Government has made welcome COP15 commitments to net zero, to halt and reverse the decline in the abundance of species and to protect 30% of our land and sea by 2030. It must now complement these global promises with meaningful domestic delivery – starting with implementation of the above recommendations.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir John Lawton CBE FRS, Chair of Making Space for Nature

Julian Glover OBE, Chair of the Review of Protected Landscapes

Lord Cameron of Dillington, member of the Review of Protected Landscapes panel

Jim Dixon, CEO Peak District National Park 2003-2014, member of the Review of Protected Landscapes panel

Jake Fiennes, Director of Conservation at the Holkham Estate, member of the Review of Protected Landscapes panel

Professor Lord Krebs FRS, Department of Biology, University of Oxford Professor Julia Aglionby PhD, Professor in Practice, University of Cumbria

Dr Gail Austen, Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent

Maxwell A. Ayamba BEM, Founder & Managing Director, Sheffield Environmental Movement (SEM) and academic at University of Nottingham

Dr Cristina Banks-Leite, Reader in Conservation Ecology, Imperial College

Dr Joseph J. Bailey, Lecturer in Ecology, Conservation and Sustainability, Anglia Ruskin University Professor Tim Benton, Professor of Ecology, University of Leeds

Dr Stuart Connop, Associate Professor in Sustainability, Sustainability Research Institute, University of East London

Dr Charles Cunningham, Department of Biology, University of York

Prof Zoe Davies, Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent

Prof Alastair Driver FCIEEM, Honorary Professor of Applied Environmental Management, University of Exeter

Dr Charlie Gardner, Associate Senior Lecturer, Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent

Professor Kevin J. Gaston, Professor of Biodiversity & Conservation, Environment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter

Dr Pippa Gillingham, Deputy Head of Department, Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, Bournemouth University

Dr Mark Goddard, Assistant Professor, Department of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Northumbria University

Professor Dave Goulson, School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex

Professor Richard D. Gregory, Head of Monitoring Conservation Science, RSPB Centre for Conservation Science

Professor Rosie Hails MBE FRSB FRES, Science & Nature Director, National Trust

Professor Karen Jones, Professor of Environmental and Cultural History, School of History / Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent

Richard Lindsay, Head of Environmental and Conservation Research, Sustainability Research Institute University of East London

Dr Caroline Nash, Senior Research Fellow, Sustainability Research Institute, University of East London Dr Lisa Norton, Senior Scientist UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology

Professor Lois Mansfield, Director for the Centre for National Parks & Protected Areas, University of Cumbria

Professor David Macdonald CBE, WildCRU, Biology, University of Oxford

Dr Chloë Metcalfe, Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, University College London Professor Jesse O’Hanley, Professor of Environmental Systems Management, University of Kent Professor Nathalie Pettorelli, Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London

Dr James Robinson, Director of Conservation, Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT)

Professor Christopher Short, Associate Professor in Environmental Governance, Countryside and Community Research Institute, University of Gloucestershire

Professor Bob Smith, Director of the Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent 

David Stroud MBE, Former Chair of Ramsar Convention Science Panel and AEWA Technical Committee 

Professor Philip Warren, Emeritus Professor of Ecology, School of Biosciences, University of Sheffield 

Professor Michael Winter OBE, Glanely Professor of Agricultural Change, University of Exeter

Reminders of Philip Hammond warning of Cuba and Venezuela-style food shortages under a Jeremy Corbyn government have been circulating today as UK supermarkets impose purchase limits on fruit and veg.

Jack Peat www.thelondoneconomic.com 

The former chancellor used the Conservative Party’s 2017 conference to raise the spectre of failed socialist states around the world as he branded Labour’s economic plans a “political version of Jurassic Park”.

Speaking in Manchester, he claimed “Corbyn’s Marxist policies will inevitably lead us back to where Britain was in the late 1970s”.

And he also made an “appeal to geography”, pointing to the desperate plight of countries that rejected market economics in favour of socialism.

“Like Cuba, which I visited last year as Foreign Secretary, where curiously, I found cows in the fields but no milk in the shops.

“Or Zimbabwe – once, one of the most productive and prosperous countries on the continent but after decades of socialism, not so much a breadbasket, as a basket case.

“And Venezuela, a country rich beyond imagination in natural resources but where the economic policies of Hugo Chavez, publicly supported by Jeremy Corbyn, have so tragically impoverished the country that it can longer feed its people and inflation is over 1,000 per cent and growth this year will fall for the fourth year in a row.”

The Chancellor claimed Labour’s “failed ideas, dredged up from a bygone era” threatened “not only our economic progress but our freedom as well”.

“A party taken hostage by a clique of hard-left extremist infiltrators people who despise our values and talk down our country,” he said.

The comments have been posted as national food shortages, rampant inflation and threats of 1970s-style blackouts hit Britain under the Conservative government.

A comment from Councillor Phil Twiss, Cabinet Member for Finance DCC has prompted Owl to add more clarification on the plight of Woking Borough Council highlighted in this morning’s post: “Another one bites the dust” 

Phil pointed out that Woking is a LibDem council. Indeed this is now a LibDem run council, Owl pointed this out quite clearly in the post, but the problem it is grappling with is one that it inherited from an earlier Conservative administration. 

“We inherited enormous Conservative debts. We knew that decades of dependency on new future debt was hard-wired into supposedly long-term projects. These two factors – debt and a dependence on debt – already presented a financial survival project.

“Yet we are now uncovering a third and potentially more worrying financial inheritance: the mis-statement of debt. Uncovering more of that reality is essential, even if it makes unpleasant reading.” LibDem leader, Woking Borough

New discovery adds to Woking Council’s debt woe

George Rae www.wokingnewsandmail.co.uk

THE Liberal Democrats in charge at the Civic Offices claim to have uncovered another devastating threat to Woking Borough Council’s (WBC) already parlous financial position – the mis-statement of debt.

They say that new officially-audited accounts for Thames
Wey Limited, which is fully owned by the council and responsible for multiple energy and housing developments in the town, uncover a string of overstatements of income and assets.

The documents reveal that the company has negative net assets of £19.4 million, as of the end of 2021, rather than the claimed positive assets.

A “restatement” of previously published accounts shows concern by newly-appointed auditors Menzies that old accounts were not giving a true and fair view.

For example, say the Lib Dems, the new documents demonstrate that, in 2020, ThamesWey Group accounts overstated turnover.

Financial statements incorrectly included £30.3 million inter-company revenue, effectively an internal transfer, in the group turnover, meaning the real turnover for the year has had to be reduced from a previously-claimed £61 million to £31 million – an overstatement of almost double the actual revenue.

In 2021, there were group losses of a further £17 million. A single loss of £13.2 million had been classified as “work in progress” when it should have been written off.

Cllr Ann-Marie Barker, leader of the council, said: “We inherited enormous Conservative debts. We knew that decades of dependency on new future debt was hard-wired into supposedly long-term projects. These two factors – debt and a dependence on debt – already presented a financial survival project.

“Yet we are now uncovering a third and potentially more worrying financial inheritance: the mis-statement of debt. Uncovering more of that reality is essential, even if it makes unpleasant reading.”

It follows grim warnings that WBC could be facing bankruptcy unless a balanced budget can be agreed by February.

Although the scale of council debt has long been known and debated – it is forecast to reach £2.4billion by 2024-25 and has attracted the concern of central government – the recent appraisal by the Liberal Democrat administration was the bleakest assessment yet.

With the council, in their words, “close to running out of money”, the Lib Dems proposed launching Operation Recovery “to rescue Woking”.

While local authorities cannot officially go bankrupt, they are effectively in that position as they declare a Section 114 notice, under which all non-essential and statutory spending is stopped.

A sobering assessment of the financial situation was delivered by the council’s finance director Leigh Clarke. In a document considering the council’s medium term financial strategy and presented to the council Executive, the section headed Executive Summary noted the need for “additional assurance on the financial position for each of the years 2023-24 to 2025-26 to provide assurance the expenditure can be contained within resources.

“If this is not possible, the council will need to commence discussions with the government on financial support and the finance director will determine whether a Section 114 report is appropriate.”

Inflation is measured by increases in the retail and consumer price indices.

Recipients of public services, e.g. the NHS, do not pay a retail or consumer price for this service. The same applies for most other public services.

If nurses are given a pay rise to cover inflation, consumers are not charged any more, so there is no direct effect on inflation. 

Government tax receipts tend to rise with inflation. Those given pay rises in line with inflation, pay more tax; VAT also rises with inflation. 

So the Treasury line that paying more than currently offered would be “inflationary” is arguable.

The real crunch occurs when inflation drives prices up but economic stagnation pushes purchasing power down, producing what is called “Stagflation”. Squeezing public sector pay reduces economic activity.

The political reason to squeeze public sector pay, which can only ever be a short term tactic, is to create budget headroom. Useful at this point in the electoral cycle to fund pre-election tax giveaways.   [Owl’s thought for the day]

Richard Partington www.theguardian.com 

Jeremy Hunt is facing calls to offer a bigger pay rise to public sector workers to break months of strike deadlock, after official figures showed stronger than expected government finances.

The government ran a surprise £5.4bn surplus in January, fuelled by bumper self-assessment income tax receipts, handing the chancellor scope to increase spending or offer tax cuts at next month’s budget.

The surplus was £5bn higher than the government’s fiscal watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility, had expected, although it was £7.1bn smaller than in January 2022, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics. Analysts polled by Reuters were taken by surprise, having predicted that the government would have to borrow £7.8bn in January.

In the final snapshot of the government finances before Hunt’s budget, public borrowing for the year so far was about £30bn lower than forecast by the OBR in November.

“[This] could tempt the chancellor to offer a pay increase to public sector workers as part of his budget next month, hoping to prevent another wave of strikes,” said Michal Stelmach, a senior economist at the accountancy firm KPMG UK.

Paul Nowak, the general secretary of the TUC, said the figures showed the government was “running out of excuses” to break the deadlock on strikes.

“Jeremy Hunt must come out of hiding and help break the deadlock on public sector pay. After 13 years of pay cuts and pay freezes nurses, teachers and millions of other public servants are at breaking point,” he said.

“If ministers don’t provide a fair pay settlement the staffing shortages crippling our schools, hospitals and other frontline services will just get worse.”

Government coffers were increased by £21.9bn of self-assessed income tax receipts, the highest January figure since monthly records began in April 1999. They were offset partly by substantial spending on energy support schemes for households and businesses to cushion the blow of spiralling energy prices, and large one-off payments relating to historic customs duties owed to the EU, the ONS said.

However, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said the cost of energy support was less than expected: “While expensive, the energy support schemes introduced in the last year are actually likely to cost less than forecast in November due to a combination of lower wholesale energy prices and a milder winter.”

Ruth Gregory, an economist at the consultancy Capital Economics, said the figures suggested Hunt “will have some wriggle room in the budget to fund near-term tax cuts and/or spending rises”.

However, Hunt suggested he was in no mood for loosening the purse strings after an increase in the national debt. “We are rightly spending billions now to support households and businesses with the impacts of rising prices – but with debt at the highest level since the 1960s, it is vital we stick to our plan to reduce debt over the medium-term,” he said.

“Getting debt down will require some tough choices, but it is crucial to reduce the amount spent on debt interest so we can protect our public services.”

Downing Street also played down the prospect of tax cuts, despite pressure from backbench Conservative MPs calling on Rishi Sunak to do more to support economic growth. The prime minister’s official spokesman said borrowing remained close to a record high, while “significant uncertainty and volatility” remained.

Interest payments on government debt have risen sharply in recent months because of the effect of higher inflation on index-linked gilts. Debt interest payable rose to £6.7bn, the highest January figure since monthly records began in April 1997. However, despite a rise compared with a year earlier, economists said borrowing costs had not risen by as much as feared in November.

The figures come as the government stands to benefit from a fall in global energy prices over recent months, which is expected to reduce the overall cost of support schemes put in place for households and businesses.

Cara Pacitti, a senior economist at the Resolution Foundation, said Hunt was approaching the budget with “significantly healthier borrowing levels” than forecast in the autumn.

“However, with borrowing still much higher than last year, and with interest rates likely to remain elevated for some time to come, Jeremy Hunt can’t afford to be relaxed about the state of the public finances,” she said.

“The extra fiscal headroom should allow him take on some key issues however – namely corporate reform, boosting workforce participation and preventing a spike in energy bills this spring.”