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

Here in East Devon, many of us are fortunate to live in or near happy valleys. The Axe, Otter, Sid, Exe et al have dominated our topography since the Ice Age. Last Sunday, the BBC’s own Yorkshire-set Happy Valley series came to a universally acclaimed end.

For those still to catch up, I will steer well away from any spoilers and will only make two comments about side issues which interested me. Sarah Lancashire was of course brilliant, but it was James Norton whose career was revived. Three years back he was a shoo-in as the next Bond. Then he was directed to deliver a plank of wood performance in McMafia and serious doubts arose. Happy Valley proved beyond doubt that he can act, and that he has that glint of savagery 007 always needs.

My second comment is about the Knežević brothers, a brilliantly played family of criminals who weaved in and out of the plot. Because series 3 revealed that having become wealthy in drugs and money laundering they were now planning to have a go as local councillors.

At last, I thought, to the groans of my wife and one daughter back for a few days, a drama with local councillors at the centre of it. Author Sally Wainwright clearly shared their perspective, though, because she took this plotline no further. As someone who works on and off in television, I see the problem. Imagine pitching a new drama series. “Ok, so it’s about two people having an illicit affair.” One can imagine a drama commissioner’s ears pricking up as you start the pitch. “And they’re both local councillors!” I suspect the meeting would be over within five minutes.

However, as you’d expect, I believe that local councillors play a key role in the pyramid of democracy, but sadly I have to report a challenge put in democracy’s way deliberately by the government. On the basis of no evidence at all, condemned across the board, they are insisting on introducing Voter Identification at the District and Town/Parish elections in May.

It’s more populist nonsense from the people who brought you three prime ministers in about five months, the first two now blaming everyone but themselves for their downfalls. Liz Truss named ‘the financial markets’ only this weekend, as if their existence came as a surprise to her, with Boris Johnson giving his latest iffy spin to the adoring Nadine Dorries on the fourth-rate TV station, GB News.

Therefore, on 4th May in East Devon we have the first local council elections ever held demanding that voters bring with them a form of photographic identity such as a passport or a driving licence. Needless to say, many millions possess neither.

This right-wing brainwave claims to wish to make elections safer, yet every expert organisation, such as the Electoral Reform Society, has confirmed that the phenomenon of someone impersonating someone else to cast a vote in person is more or less non-existent.

In reality, fraud through the postal vote system has always been much more of a threat. That’s where resources are needed, not making the lovely people who work at polling stations from 7am till 10pm on election days have to perform the role of amateur passport controllers. The government doesn’t care, because those who have neither a driving licence or a passport are much more likely not to vote Tory.

If you are one such person who does not have photo ID, and there will be hundreds, perhaps thousands in East Devon, you can either apply for a postal vote or, to vote in person, register for a Voter Authority Certificate through East Devon District Council. We have created a special link on our website which is http://www.eastdevon.gov.uk/voter-id. Please spread the word. Thank you.

Simon Jupp was scheduled to have been leading a Westminster Hall debate on the performance of South West Water yesterday at 0930. But he got cancelled, a victim of force majeure as President Zelenskyy paid a surprise visit to the Houses of Parliament.

PS. We need Simon PPS to get this debate rescheduled urgently.

Background

commonslibrary.parliament.uk /research-briefings/cdp-2023-0029/

Performance of South West Water – House of Commons Library

Regulatory and policy framework

There are three main regulatory bodies that monitor the performance of water companies in England:

• Ofwat, the economic regulator;
• The Environment Agency, the environmental regulator; and
• The Drinking Water Inspectorate, the drinking water quality regulator.

As part of its role as economic regulator Ofwat limits the prices that water companies can charge customers. Prices are reviewed every five years and, during the review process, water companies commit to delivering certain service levels. Performance commitments cover various areas, including customer service and environmental protection.

The Government provides policy direction to Ofwat through strategic policy statements, which set long-term priorities for the water industry. Ofwat must act in accordance with the statements when carrying out its duties, including when agreeing performance commitments with water companies.

Water companies must also comply with a range of environmental legislation and targets. For example, the Storm Overflows Discharge Reduction Plan requires water companies to eliminate the adverse environmental impact of sewage discharges by 2050.

Assessments of South West Water’s performance

Ofwat and the Environment Agency publish annual reports measuring water companies’ performance against their performance level commitments and environmental obligations.

In their most recent reports, covering performance in 2021, both regulators gave South West Water (SWW) their lowest performance rating. They highlighted the number of pollution incidents as a particular area of concern. SWW was also criticised for a lack of capital investment.

As a result of Ofwat’s assessment the company will be required to pay a fine of £13.3 million in the form of lower bills for consumers.

This pack contains information on Government policy on water companies’ performance, performance measures and ratings, special performance measures, and water bills, as well as recent Parliamentary material and news items. 

Documents to download

• Commons Library debate pack – Performance of South West Water (408 KB , PDF)
• Download full report
• Download ‘Commons Library debate pack – Performance of South West Water’ report (408 KB , PDF)

Lucy Frazer, moving to “Culture”  becomes the 14th housing minister to leave the post since the Conservatives came back to power in 2010, and the fifth in the past 12 months. Good job there’s no housing crisis. Sports and TV are much more fun, to be fair.

Her replacement has yet to be named.

(From Politico)

“Ministers already waste billions each year hiring consultants to tell them how to do their jobs, so who knows what that bill will look like when these controls are removed. To make this change at any time would be inexplicable, but during the worst cost of living crisis for decades, it is downright indefensible.” The shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, Pat McFadden.

Evidence of an out of touch government that has lost its way and run out of ideas – Owl

Jessica Elgot www.theguardian.com 

Ministers have quietly dropped restrictions on spending controls, allowing Whitehall departments to potentially spend millions more on external consultants.

The limits were introduced under David Cameron in 2011, requiring central authorisation if contracts with firms such as Deloitte or KPMG lasted more than nine months or exceeded £20,000. The value of the contracts has been rising – with the limit earlier this year set at £600,000.

But now those spending limits have been cancelled altogether, paving the way for department to spend millions more of taxpayers’ money on external advice.

Labour said the change was “simply staggering” and it was indefensible it had been made during a cost of living crisis when government purse strings were being tightened in other areas of public spending.

The Cabinet Office minister Jeremy Quin and the chief secretary to the Treasury, John Glen, wrote to departments this month ending restrictions on consultancy “effective 31 January 2023 in line with the agreed lifting of burdens [and] realignment of focus and impact of Cabinet Office spend controls”.

The update concluded that “following workshops during January on an operational level, the removal of the controls is welcomed”.

The move was not announced, but changed on the guidance page of the Cabinet Office website, which said the spending controls on “consultancy and professional services” had ceased as a requirement. All government contracts worth more than £20m still require authorisation centrally.

The Cabinet Office says management consultant advice will be “time limited” and likely to be “related to business change or transformation”, and that the individuals employed on a consultancy basis “will operate outside of the client organisation’s structure and staffing establishment”.

Spending on outside consultants has soared in recent years, although some additional spending was connected to Covid. The UK public sector awarded £2.8bn of consulting contracts in 2022, according to data from the contract analysts Tussell Ltd in the FT last week. That figure was up 75% on 2019.

Deloitte was awarded contracts worth £278m in 2022, more than any other consultancy, though spending was down on levels during the UK height of the pandemic.

Others in the “big four” accountancy firms were also awarded millions in contracts, including £152m for PwC and £101m for EY. KPMG had withdrawn from bidding for work because of a series of scandals reported last year, but was still awarded contracts worth £12m.

The shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, Pat McFadden, said: “It is simply staggering that a government which has crashed the economy, crippled the finances of millions of households, and brought our NHS to breaking point, has decided now is the time to loosen the Whitehall purse strings when it comes to hiring outside consultants.

“Ministers already waste billions each year hiring consultants to tell them how to do their jobs, so who knows what that bill will look like when these controls are removed. To make this change at any time would be inexplicable, but during the worst cost of living crisis for decades, it is downright indefensible.”

The Financial Times reported last month that the government’s in-house consultancy hub was being scrapped by the end of January because government departments continued to prefer hiring support from major outside consultancy firms.

A Cabinet Office spokesperson said: “We are committed to improving efficiency and reducing consultancy spend across government.

“The recent changes removed a number of administrative processes and the Cabinet Office will continue to assess data on departments’ consultancy spend.”

So obviously pressing on with a business park in Sidford is exactly what we need! – Owl

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com 

Exeter Science Park has appointed global property consultancy JLL as marketing agents to try and find tenants for its empty units. They will also be asked to see if there are any companies who would move in, if a purpose built unit was provided.

The Science Park is one of the South West’s leading centres for businesses involved in science, technology, engineering, maths and medicine (STEMM). All current occupiers are involved in research, affiliated with higher education, or are tech related companies.

But there are several units that are current empty. As a result, JLL have been asked to help to try and let the available floor space and also identify occupiers who require build-to-suit options on its development land

Tim Western, Lead Director in the Exeter office of JLL said: ‘We are delighted to have been formally appointed by Exeter Science Park to help deliver further growth. The Park is a vital part of the region’s infrastructure and already consists of high quality, modern space in a well-connected and highly secure environment.’

As well as offices, laboratory space and amenity facilities, the Science Park offers innovation support and access to a network of like-minded individuals and leading institutions. If you are a growing STEMM business and interested in leasing space in the innovative Exeter Science Park, you can contact Tim Western tim.western@jll.com or Katie Fowler katie.fowler@jll.com at JLL or visit property.jll.co.uk.

Looks like speculating with council tax payers money to Owl

Richard Whitehouse www.cornwalllive.com

Cornwall Council has explained why it paid Virgin Orbit more than £1 million last month after the company used Spaceport Cornwall for its first European launch. While Cosmic Girl successfully took off from Newquay last month the mission ended in failure due to an anomaly in the LauncherOne rocket system which was carrying nine satellites to send into orbit.

Since the event there has been speculation about how it was paid for and how much public money was spent on the launch from Cornwall Airport Newquay. At a meeting of full council last week, Independent councillor Julian German asked Conservative Cabinet member Louis Gardner if Virgin Orbit had been paid by Cornwall Council for the launch.

Cllr Gardner, Cabinet member for the economy, was unequivocal in his response stating: “Virgin Orbit were not paid by this council to do the first launch.” The launch event saw hundreds gather to watch the modified 747 take off with the Launcher One rocket under its wing, which did launch from the plane over the Atlantic but failed to reach orbit.

However, on the council’s contract register there is a contract with Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Orbit worth £1,163,102. This contract, originally awarded in May 2021, actually started on January 18 – eight days after the launch – and finishes on March 31.

The contract listing explains this “relates to Virgin Orbit UK Limited, a named core team party within the UK Space Agency Grant Funding Agreement identified to provide specialist services related to horizontal launch system handling and operations. Virgin Orbit have specialist engineering and technical knowledge related to the design, implementation and operation of the spaceport, expertise that is critical to the successful delivery of the spaceport programme”.

Speaking after the meeting Cllr Gardner said: “Cllr German asked me if we paid Virgin for the launch. That answer was no and it remains no. We didn’t pay for the launch.

“We do have a commercial agreement with Virgin and we pay for some things and Virgin pays for things in return. What we have paid Virgin for is assistance in establishing the licence for the Spaceport. They helped us with the licencing and helped with some of the ground operations. Those things remain in place for perpetuity.”

Cllr Gardner admitted that it was a “complex” arrangement but was adamant that the council had not paid Sir Richard’s firm for the launch itself. He also added that while the contract is with Cornwall Council and paid for by the council “the vast majority of funding” came from the UK Space Agency and other Government departments.

He added: “Cornwall Council has focused its investment in the Spaceport around the operations linked with the airport and the new operations facilities which have been provided as a result.”

The government will allow three local authorities, which all have financial difficulties, to raise council tax above the referendum limit, by up to 15%. 

How close to the brink is DCC? – Owl

Kwame Boakye www.lgcplus.com

The final local government financial settlement 2023-24 was published this afternoon and it confirmed that Thurrock Council and Slough BC had been successful in their requests to raise council tax by an additional 5%. [i.e. 10%]

Croydon LBC will be able to raise council tax by an additional 10% with the government revealing that due to “exceptional circumstance” and “unprecedented scale of financial deficits in each council” ministers had agreed to their requests. [i.e 15%]

Today the government said: “Given the exceptional circumstance in these council and unprecedented scale of financial deficits in each council, government has agreed to the requests.”

Thurrock issued a section 114 notice last year and has a funding gap of £469m. Essex CC has been appointed as commissioner to oversee its finances.

Croydon also issued a Section 114 notice in November 2022, effectively declaring bankruptcy, due to a £130m black hole in the following year’s budget. This was the third time in which the council declared bankruptcy in the last two years.

Meanwhile, budget papers published last year showed that Slough BC needs almost £0.5bn support from the government to achieve financial sustainability following years of “recklessness” in the management of its affairs.

Good Law Project goodlawproject.org

A hedge fund where the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, was a founding partner, has seen its profits more than double in a year. Annual reports published on Companies House reveal that Theleme Partners made £109m in the year up to 31 March 2022 – a £65m increase from the previous year.

Theleme is heavily invested in Covid vaccine manufacturers Moderna – which last month signed a 10-year partnership with the UK Government for an undisclosed sum. 

The Prime Minister left the company in 2013 in order to pursue his political career. However, he has refused to deny that he will profit from a surge in the share price of vaccine manufacturer Moderna and subsequent profits from Theleme.

The mystery is further compounded by the failure of the PM to publish his tax returns, despite promising to do so. 

In 2020, Sunak hired John Sheridan, a partner at Theleme to advise the Treasury on Covid policies. The fund has invested 34% of its pot in Moderna – its single biggest investment – reported to be valued at $710m.

Theleme Partners LLP’s parent company is based offshore in the Cayman Islands and lists the notorious Ugland House as its address. The small office is the registered home to approximately 40,000 entities. In the past, former U.S. President Barack Obama was highly critical of this arrangement and labelled the building as “the biggest tax scam in the world”

In a recent press release, Theleme said: “Rishi Sunak worked at Theleme from 2010 to 2013. Once he left, he ceased to have any ongoing financial interest in the funds managed by Theleme. Neither Mr Sunak, nor any of his family members, have held a financial interest in any fund managed by Theleme, or in any Theleme management company entity, since 2013.”

When asked, Theleme denied that Mr Sunak has any interest “either indirect or direct” in its funds. However, when asked how it could possibly know whether Mr Sunak was a beneficiary under a trust that held Theleme funds it failed to respond.

According to the latest list of Ministerial Interests Mr Sunak’s wealth is managed by a blind trust.

Theleme also asked us to make clear that Jolyon Maugham KC, Director of Good Law Project, had represented its founder, and Mr Sunak’s then boss, Patrick Degorce in court. It’s a matter of public record that Mr Degorce embarked upon a tax avoidance scheme and that Mr Maugham acted for him in the tax tribunal.

The Cabinet Office were approached for comment, but they haven’t responded. 

Good Law Project only exists thanks to donations from people across the UK. If you’re in a position to support our work, you can do so here

Nicola Jennings on Rishi Sunak’s economic approach.

There is money for tax breaks for the rich, there is money for building freeports, there is money for vanity projects but Sunak tells us that there is no money. To attract (fossil fuel) investment we need to keep wages low and remove protection and workers’ rights.

Between 2011 and 2021 East Devon grew at twice the national rate: 13.8 percent compared to 6.6 percent. Much faster than the rest of Devon.

John Hart writes about providing funding and support for the growing proportion of “Oldies” in the county and appeals to the county’s army of (ageing) volunteers. 

Echos his response to flooding, remember John Hart in February 2020? – Owl

“Council Leader, John Hart’s solution, however, is to encourage a modern day dad’s army of individuals, villages and Parish Councils, where they care, to do more for themselves. Self-help, he said, is going to be the order of the day.” 

Providing funding and support for Devon’s older residents

John Hart, leader of Devon County Council www.sidmouthherald.co.uk

Our population in Devon is growing at a faster rate than nationally, according to the latest figures from the 2021 census. In the 10 years from the last census in 2011, the population of England grew by 6.6 per cent while in the South West the increase was 7.8 per cent.

Locally, East Devon had the second largest growth in population in the South West after Tewkesbury at 13.8 per cent. Torridge was 6.7 per cent while North Devon was 5.3 per cent.

The latest figures show there are nearly 815,000 people living in Devon of whom nearly 268,000 – almost a third – are over 60. And that includes me.

Now the great majority of us pensioners are hopefully living healthy and happy lives and still making a real contribution to our communities. But there’s no doubt that as we get older we need more support from our health and care services.

That’s why in this year’s Devon County Council budget we are proposing an 8.8 per cent increase in our spending on adult social care. We are obviously well aware that at a time of double-digit inflation that may not cover all the extra demands that are made on us. People are living longer and are coming to us with more complex disabilities and needing more care for longer.

But clearly there is a limit to how much extra we can ask council taxpayers to stump up. So it’s vital that we get the very best value for every pound we spend and that we also make savings in our budget where that is achievable. I assure you it will be our intention to target the funding we do have to the most vulnerable people to ensure that they are living well and ageing well. We want to embrace new technological advances so people have the equipment they need to continue living in their own homes. We want more extra care housing where people have the support they need to remain in their own communities instead of having to go into care.

One of the real challenges we face is recruiting enough staff to look after the people who come to us for help. Unfortunately people can earn more money in a supermarket in a job which is perhaps less demanding than caring for a frail older person with dementia. So it’s important that they are properly rewarded. However, the latest increase in the national living wage will cost the council about £9 million this year – roughly the equivalent of a two per cent increase in council tax.

That’s where this county’s army of volunteers can help. Devon has a thriving voluntary and community sector and, as a county council, we are keen to support individual groups where we can as well as making use of their services for our clients.

We try to provide seed funding and support so, as well as our paid carers, there is a sound infrastructure of voluntary and community support available. For example we’ve helped people set up dementia cafes in their local communities and supported them with training and in applying for grants from a range of funders so they can be self-sustaining. But it is important that we make the best possible use of the voluntary and community sector and only refer people to them who are suitable for the help they provide. That needs better communication and for us to ensure they feel part of the team that is doing its very best for our residents.

• Variation of condition no. 2 (approved plans) of planning permission 20/0346/FUL to enable the use of green technology to be added to the conversion. The amendments are for the addition of solar panels and an air source heat pump to the project, rather than using an oil fuelled heated system. Lower Marsh Farm Marsh Green Exeter EX5 2EXRef. No: 23/0184/VAR | Validated: Fri 27 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of condition no. 2 (approved drawing conversion of first floor storage holiday flat with amended ground floor access (22/0565/FUL, 22/0599/LBC) to be replaced with submitted plans. Strand House The Strand Lympstone Exmouth EX8 5EYRef. No: 23/0194/VAR | Validated: Fri 27 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Internal alterations to shop unit, maisonette refurbishment and demolition of dilapidated rear extension to form in-fill extension with flat roof over Crane And Kind Market Place Sidmouth EX10 8ARRef. No: 23/0192/FUL | Validated: Fri 27 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed front, rear and first floor extension, including garage to side and rear balcony and internal alterations. 43 Halsdon Avenue Exmouth EX8 3DWRef. No: 23/0179/FUL | Validated: Fri 27 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Copper beech – 2m crown reduction. Root extent – application of 8m3 of composted wood-chip mulch to surface; vertical mulch: 3cm deep x 4cm diameter back-filled , composted wood-chip mulch at 3cm intervals. Application of 50kg of slow-release organic fertiliser.. 7 Glebelands Uplyme Lyme Regis DT7 3TBRef. No: 23/0173/TRE | Validated: Fri 27 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing garage extension and construction of replacement extension and modifications to the bathroom extension. Pump Farm Whitford Axminster EX13 7NNRef. No: 23/0167/FUL | Validated: Thu 26 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing garage extension and construction of replacement extension and modifications to the bathroom extension. Pump Farm Whitford Axminster EX13 7NNRef. No: 23/0168/LBC | Validated: Thu 26 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement single storey rear extension. 40 Tyrrell Mead Sidmouth EX10 9TPRef. No: 23/0171/FUL | Validated: Fri 27 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Permanent agricultural workers dwelling Stable Roost Sheldon Honiton EX14 4QWRef. No: 23/0154/FUL | Validated: Fri 27 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use from C1 hotel to C3 for the purposes of rented self-catering holiday accommodation The Orchard Country Hotel Rousdon Lyme Regis Devon DT7 3XWRef. No: 23/0162/FUL | Validated: Wed 25 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed 2 storey side extension. 1 Littletown Road Honiton EX14 2DGRef. No: 23/0157/FUL | Validated: Wed 25 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of hip to gable extension, front and rear dormer windows and installation of side window 15 Prestor Axminster EX13 5BRRef. No: 23/0161/FUL | Validated: Wed 25 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of PVC extension to rear of property. Solid roof construction. PVC windows / door frames. Rendered external masonry. Rull Cottage Payhembury Honiton EX14 3JQRef. No: 23/0153/FUL | Validated: Fri 27 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of proposed lawfulness for development of an outbuilding incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse at Southtown House, Sowden Lane, Lympstone.Southtown House Sowden Lane Exmouth EX8 5ADRef. No: 23/0140/CPL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Creation of three off-street parking spaces Highfield House Combe Raleigh Devon EX14 4THRef. No: 23/0141/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed single storey rear extension 35 Woodville Road Exmouth EX8 1SWRef. No: 23/0142/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use to unfettered class E Unit 35 Skypark Clyst Honiton Exeter EX5 2GERef. No: 23/0143/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed alterations to Byways including new balcony and roof terrace, re-roofing swimming pool and amendments to windows. Byways Green Lane Exton Exeter EX3 0PWRef. No: 23/0144/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• To construct a new dormer window above the garage on the rear side, and construct a single storey, ground floor rear extension behind the garage. 3 Withalls Gardens Greenhill Avenue Lympstone EX8 5JHRef. No: 23/0145/FUL | Validated: Thu 26 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Detailed application for the construction of a manure storage building Coryton Farm Kilmington Axminster Devon EX13 7RERef. No: 23/0147/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Detailed application for the construction of a manure storage building Coryton Farm Kilmington Axminster Devon EX13 7RERef. No: 23/0148/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Detailed application for the construction of a manure storage building Coryton Farm Kilmington EX13 7RERef. No: 23/0149/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Detailed application for the construction of a manure storage building Coryton Farm Kilmington EX13 7RERef. No: 23/0150/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Two storey side extension Glebe Stables Southleigh Colyton EX24 6SDRef. No: 23/0139/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single-storey rear extension.1 Sanson Close Stoke Canon Devon EX5 4AQRef. No: 23/0146/CPL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a manure store Woodend Farm Shute Axminster EX13 7PTRef. No: 23/0137/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a manure store Woodend Farm Shute Axminster EX13 7PTRef. No: 23/0136/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a manure store Woodend Farm Shute Axminster EX13 7PTRef. No: 23/0134/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Screening opinion for residential development Land Adjacent To Harepath Road Seaton Devon EX12 2WHRef. No: 23/0002/EIA | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• 1x Scots pine: fell. Chowns Cottages Parsonage Way Woodbury Devon EX5 1HYRef. No: 23/0131/TCA | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use of land from agriculture to equestrian and construction of menage. Change of use only of agricultural building to equestrian to provide stables (no physical works proposed to building). Lavenders Branscombe Seaton EX12 3BLRef. No: 23/0130/FUL | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed agricultural building to cover existing silage clamp Lower Westcott Farm Talaton Exeter EX5 2RNRef. No: 23/0129/AGR | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Decided
• Proposed residential loft conversions to include new dormer windows to the front elevation, rear extension to 3rd floor, new balconies to the front elevation and internal alterations. 8B, 8C, 9B & 9C Trafalgar House Mamhead View Exmouth EX8 1DSRef. No: 23/0128/FUL | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T36, Sycamore: crown reduction of 2-3m, removing all major deadwood and balancing the remaining canopy to around 16m in height, making dia. cuts less than 50mm Fern House The Drive Farringdon Exeter EX5 2JDRef. No: 23/0138/TRE | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a manure store Woodend Farm Shute Axminster EX13 7PTRef. No: 23/0135/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed steel framed storage shed plus 2 x storage containers to stand beside shed. Raxhayes Farm Holcombe Lane Ottery St Mary Devon EX11 1PQRef. No: 23/0121/AGR | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement rear extension, side porch and rear garden terrace. 84 Halsdon Avenue Exmouth EX8 3DHRef. No: 23/0124/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness to erect a polytunnel on a fifteen-acre farm.Stockers Farm Wick Honiton EX14 4TYRef. No: 23/0113/CPL | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Repairs to roof and walls of outbuilding. Build new roof structure. Replace broken tiles with reclaimed. Rebuild collapsed stone walls and make good other walls using lime mortar. Replace rotten timber with black-painted, feather-edge boarding. 37 Church Street Sidbury Devon EX10 0SBRef. No: 23/0104/FUL | Validated: Thu 26 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Sycamore : re pollard to exsisting pollard points, to prevent failure of regrowth. T2, Ash tree : remove to ground level. Myrtle Lodge Millford Road Sidmouth EX10 8DPRef. No: 23/0115/TCA | Validated: Wed 25 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed first floor front dormer extension, raised decking and change of window, roof and dormer materials. Whiteoaks Higher Marley Road Exmouth EX8 5DTRef. No: 23/0101/FUL | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of new dwelling on land behind existing bungalow. Happy Valley Wiggaton EX11 1PYRef. No: 23/0095/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Extension to agricultural building Nags Head Farm Nags Head Road Gittisham Honiton EX14 3AWRef. No: 23/0096/FUL | Validated: Tue 24 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of outbuilding to residential use Sutherlake Broadclyst EX5 3BLRef. No: 23/0087/FUL | Validated: Wed 25 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of outbuilding for holiday use. Sutherlake Elbury Lane Broadclyst EX5 3BLRef. No: 23/0088/FUL | Validated: Thu 26 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey rear extension 10 The Grove Sidmouth EX10 8ULRef. No: 23/0055/FUL | Validated: Wed 25 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Outline planning application (with details of access to be considered and all other matters reserved) for mixed use development comprising of up to 130 dwellings to the east of Harepath Road and the laying out of a new community football pitch, parking and welfare facilities to the west of Harepath Road, formation of accesses on Harepath Road and Colyton Road, public open space and other associated infrastructure. Land Adjacent To Harepath Road Seaton Devon EX12 2WHRef. No: 22/2781/MOUT | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• A single storey side extension to replace the existing conservatory plus a two storey front extension 29 Brand Road Honiton Devon EX14 2FDRef. No: 22/2784/FUL | Validated: Wed 25 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Outline application with all matters reserved to demolish existing storage sheds and greenhouse and construct new two storey dwelling 1 Warren Close Payhembury Honiton EX14 3NARef. No: 22/2606/OUT | Validated: Mon 23 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retrospective application to retain 1.8m fence to front of property, bordering turning area Touch Wood 3 Hylands Close Higher Broad Oak Road West Hill Ottery St Mary EX11 1XJRef. No: 22/2253/FUL | Validated: Wed 25 Jan 2023 | Status: Awaiting decision

Watch “The Plan Is To Make You Permanently Poorer | Aaron Meets Gary Stevenson” on YouTube

(Brought to Owl’s attention by two correspondents, one who referenced it in a recent comment.)

One of her former cabinet colleagues, Simon Clarke is reported to be still close to her and Boris Johnson. What mark did Simon Clarke leave on his ambitious PPS, our very own Simon Jupp, whilst both were dutifully, even enthusiastically, serving Liz on levelling up (for all of six weeks)? – Owl

Jessica Elgot www.theguardian.com 

Senior economists and the former chancellor George Osborne have cast doubt over Liz Truss’s account that she was not warned about the risks to the UK economy as she prepared her mini-budget.

Truss, in her first major intervention since leaving office, wrote that she had “not [been] given a realistic chance to enact my policies by a very powerful economic establishment, coupled with a lack of political support”.

She said she had expected her mandate as prime minister to be respected but admitted mistakes had been made, including that the fallout from her mini-budget had left the UK close to not being able to fund its own debt.

The former prime minister said specifically that no officials in the Treasury had raised concerns about liability-driven investments, which pension funds use to cover their obligations. The Bank of England said pension funds with more than £1tn invested in them came under severe strain with a large number in danger of going bust.

But Dr Charles Read, an economist and proproctor at the University of Cambridge, said he had spoken to civil servants about the risk of a fast rise in interest rates and enclosed a paper sent to the then chancellor, Kwasi Kwarteng, on 8 September, a fortnight before the mini-budget. The Treasury acknowledged receipt of the letter.

“The argument of the paper was that if interest rates rise any faster than they were, Britain’s financial stability will be imperilled and there is likely to be another financial crisis stemming from systemic risks in the non-banking sector,” Read told the Guardian.

“Needless to say, it later emerged that the budget was explicitly designed to force the Bank of England to raise interest rates faster than it was by pushing up market interest rates further; to claim that they were not sent warnings that such a course of action would imperil financial stability is highly misleading and should be called out.”

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, in the first of a series of interventions before the spring budget, Truss said scepticism about the growth potential of the British economy was “sadly endemic at the Treasury”, blaming pessimism as a barrier to changes.

However, one Whitehall source said there was a “difficult climate” to give advice during the preparations for the mini-budget, after Kwarteng had sacked the permanent secretary, Sir Tom Scholar.

Roger Bootle, the former chief economist for HSBC, said he had been broadly supportive of Truss’s agenda but said she should have realised how the markets would react.

“One of the things I think undid her plan, was that she hadn’t realised just how febrile the markets were … I don’t think she and the chancellor quite realised how different the market circumstances were,” he told GB News.

The former chancellor George Osborne said he agreed that the regulators should have anticipated some of the pension problems. But he said that was not the primary cause of Truss’s downfall. “She was brought down by the free market, the free market in government bonds,” he said. “And that bond market destroyed her government before, actually, the problems then emerged a few days later in those pension funds.

“She dismissed the economic establishment. She fired the permanent secretary at the Treasury. She went around telling everyone, as did her chancellor, that the Bank of England governor was useless. She didn’t consult the office … To then turn around and say ‘no one told me’, well I mean, she went out of her way not to listen.”

Asked about the essay on Sunday, the business secretary, Grant Shapps, said Truss’s mini-budget “clearly wasn’t the right approach” before the government had tackled inflation.

Shapps told Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme: “You have got to deal with the fundamentals first. You have got to reduce inflation, which is the biggest tax cut anybody can have.

“I notice she said they hadn’t prepared the ground for these big tax changes. What you have got to do is deal with the big structural issues first, deal with inflation first, deal with debt, and then you look towards tax cuts.”

In the essay, which will be followed by an interview with the Spectator on Monday, Truss said she knew after sacking Kwarteng and reversing most of her positions that she would be unlikely to be able to stay as prime minister.

“Fundamentally, I was not given a realistic chance to enact my policies by a very powerful economic establishment, coupled with a lack of political support,” she said.

“I assumed upon entering Downing Street that my mandate would be respected and accepted. How wrong I was. While I anticipated resistance to my programme from the system, I underestimated the extent of it.”

The former Conservative party chair Sir Jake Berry told BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg that he did still agree with “Liz’s diagnosis of the disease that is facing the country and I think she accepts in this story that the prescription that we wrote – [for] which I have to take part of the blame – wasn’t delivered in the correct way.

“But I think her point of, we need to lower taxes, we need to create a growing economy, that’s what people want.”

Required reading for Government and Whitehall – Owl

How can inflation be dropping at the same time job creation is soaring?

Robert Reich, www.theguardian.com 

It has taken one of the oldest presidents in American history, who has been in politics for over half a century, to return the nation to an economic paradigm that dominated public life between 1933 and 1980, and is far superior to the one that has dominated it since.

Call it democratic capitalism.

The Great Crash of 1929 followed by the Great Depression taught the nation a crucial lesson that we forgot after Ronald Reagan’s presidency: the so-called “free market” does not exist. Markets are always and inevitably human creations. They reflect decisions by judges, legislators and government agencies as to how the market should be organized and enforced – and for whom.

The economy that collapsed in 1929 was the consequence of decisions that organized the market for a monied elite, allowing nearly unlimited borrowing, encouraging people to gamble on Wall Street, suppressing labor unions, holding down wages, and permitting the Street to take huge risks with other people’s money.

Franklin D Roosevelt and his administration reversed this. They reorganized the market to serve public purposes – stopping excessive borrowing and Wall Street gambling, encouraging labor unions, establishing social security and creating unemployment insurance, disability insurance and a 40-hour workweek. They used government spending to create more jobs. During the second world war, they controlled prices and put almost every American to work.

Democratic and Republican administrations enlarged and extended democratic capitalism. Wall Street was regulated, as were television networks, airlines, railroads, and other common carriers. CEO pay was modest. Taxes on the highest earners financed public investments in infrastructure (such as the national highway system) and higher education.

America’s postwar industrial policy spurred innovation. The Department of Defense developed satellite communications, container ships and the Internet. The National Institutes of Health did trailblazing basic research in biochemistry, DNA and infectious diseases.

Public spending rose during economic downturns to encourage hiring. Even Richard Nixon admitted “we’re all Keynesians”. Antitrust enforcers broke up AT&T and other monopolies. Small businesses were protected from giant chain stores. By the 1960s, a third of all private-sector workers were unionized.

Large corporations sought to be responsive to all their stakeholders – not just shareholders but employees, consumers, the communities where they produced goods and services, and the nation as a whole.

Then came a giant U-turn. The Opec oil embargo of the 1970s brought double-digit inflation followed by the Fed chair Paul Volcker’s effort to “break the back” of inflation by raising interest rates so high the economy fell into deep recession.

All of which prepared the ground for Reagan’s war on democratic capitalism.

From 1981, a new bipartisan orthodoxy emerged that the so-called “free market” functioned well only if the government got out of the way (conveniently forgetting that the market required government). The goal of economic policy thereby shifted from public welfare to economic growth. And the means shifted from public oversight of the market to deregulation, free trade, privatization, “trickle-down” tax cuts, and deficit-reduction – all of which helped the monied interests make more money.

What happened next? For 40 years, the economy grew but median wages stagnated. Inequalities of income and wealth ballooned. Wall Street reverted to the betting parlor it had been in the 1920s. Finance once again ruled the economy. Spurred by hostile takeovers, corporations began focusing solely on maximizing shareholder returns – which led them to fight unions, suppress wages, abandon their communities and outsource abroad.

Corporations and the super-rich used their increasing wealth to corrupt politics with campaign donations – buying tax cuts, tax loopholes, government subsidies, bailouts, loan guarantees, non-bid government contracts and government forbearance from antitrust enforcement, allowing them to monopolize markets.

Democratic capitalism, organized to serve public purposes, all but disappeared. It was replaced by corporate capitalism, organized to serve the monied interests.

Joe Biden is reviving democratic capitalism.

From the Obama administration’s mistake of spending too little to pull the economy out of the Great Recession, he learned that the pandemic required substantially greater spending, which would also give working families a cushion against adversity. So he pushed for the giant $1.9tn American Rescue Plan.

This was followed by a $550bn initiative to rebuild bridges, roads, public transit, broadband, water and energy systems. And in 2022, the biggest investment in clean energy in American history – expanding wind and solar power, electric vehicles, carbon capture and sequestration, and hydrogen and small nuclear reactors. This was followed by the largest public investment ever in semiconductors, the building blocks of the next economy.

Notably, these initiatives are targeted to companies that employ American workers.

Biden has also embarked on altering the balance of power between capital and labor, as did FDR. Biden has put trustbusters at the head of the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the justice department. And he has remade the National Labor Relations Board into a strong advocate of labor unions.

Unlike his Democratic predecessors, Biden has not sought to reduce trade barriers. In fact, he has retained several from the Trump administration. But unlike Trump, he has not given a huge tax cut to corporations and the wealthy. It’s also worth noting that in contrast with every president since Reagan, Biden has not filled his White House with former Wall Street executives. Not one of his economic advisers – not even his treasury secretary – is from the Street.

I don’t want to overstate Biden’s accomplishments. His ambitions for childcare, eldercare, paid family and medical leave were thwarted by senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. And now he has to contend with a Republican House.

Biden’s larger achievement has been to change the economic paradigm that has reigned since Reagan. He is teaching America a lesson we once knew but have forgotten: that the “free market” does not exist. It is designed. It either advances public purposes or it serves the monied interests.

Biden’s democratic capitalism is neither socialism nor “big government”. It is, rather, a return to an era when government organized the market for the greater good.

• Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com

My economic plan for this country was a work of genius, and the only reason we are not reaping the rewards today is because the financial markets are run by communists and leftist ideologues.

newsthump.com 

My 2012 opus ‘Britannia Unchained’ laid the foundations for the mini-budget delivered by my new regime, so I fail to see how anyone could have been surprised by the contents. It was all there if any of you had been bothered to look.

I felt that an unprecedented cost of living crisis was the perfect time to introduce a budget that gave a totally unfunded tax cut to higher rate income tax payers, forced 120,000 people on benefits to try harder to get work or face sanctions, and scrapped a number of measures designed to bring in a little bit more tax from people who could afford it.

The only explanation for the catastrophe that followed is that city workers who trade in bonds and currencies are communists and left-wing ideologues who would rather see this country collapse in on itself rather than have give some real freedom to its people.

Scaredy cat risk-averse traders ruined everything, and they did it because of their politics. Not because they saw a disaster unfolding before them in that UK government bonds were no longer worth the paper they were written on and the pound was suddenly a very risky investment indeed, but because they knew their liberal ideals would be made to look like the nonsense they so clearly are if a genuine right-wing government was a success.

They had to ruin my plan, and so ruin it they did.

In years to come my plan to cut the taxes of the rich and make things harder for the poor during an unprecedented cost of living crisis will be seen as the nation’s biggest missed opportunity.

It is an economic philosophy from which I will never waver. I don’t care how many times we try it or how many times it goes disastrously, I will always believe that the next time we try the same thing it will work perfectly.

It’s the very definition of positive thinking.

Liz Truss has said she was never given a “realistic chance” to implement her radical tax-cutting agenda by her party, in a 4,000-word essay in the Sunday Telegraph.

No apology for crashing the economy. – Owl

Analysis by Jonathan Blake contained in wider report:  www.bbc.co.uk

After 100 days of “soul searching” we have a version of events from the shortest serving UK Prime Minister in history.

This is Liz Truss’s catastrophic time in office, described and defended in her own words.

At some length, she attempts to argue her case and answer for her actions. There is reflection and regret but not the apology which many might expect.

What burns through this 4000 word essay is a sense from Liz Truss that almost everything was against her as she makes a case for what might have been.

The system, officials, Conservative MPs all played a part, she argues, in stopping her from achieving her aim of economic growth through tax cuts and de-regulation.

There are breath taking reminders of how high the stakes were as her policies sent shockwaves through the economy – Kwasi Kwarteng had to go to avoid “a serious meltdown for the UK” and “the starkest of warnings” came from officials that the country may have to default on its debt.

Despite her downfall, Liz Truss argues many still share her enthusiasm for what she was trying to achieve.

Teignbridge is cancelling a planned council tax rise next year, although one councillor feels that it should invest more money in creating jobs instead.

Rob Kershaw, local democracy reporterwww.radioexe.co.uk 

The district council is set to propose a budget of £59 million for the next financial year, with a third of a million pounds left over from the council’s income this year.

Teignbridge wants to continue to waive council tax for those on the lowest income and while there is a council tax increase, it will not come into effect until 2024-25.

The £5.54 reduction in council tax for all households in 2023-24 will cost £330,000, but Conservative leader Cllr Phil Bullivant (Bradley) feels that the money might be put to better use elsewhere.

“I’m trying to think of how best to spend that £330,000 given our £4.3 million black hole,” he said at an overview and scrutiny committee meeting on Thursday [2 February]. “I feel it would be better spent on creating jobs than giving out £5.54 as council tax support.”

Cllr Richard Keeling (Liberal Democrat, Chudleigh) explained that Teignbridge only gets 10 pence on the pound of council tax, so it wants to use that to support its residents.

“We have spent a lot of time on how can Teignbridge help our residents with the cost of living crisis with those who are struggling the most so we are planning to give back to householders the Teignbridge share of the council tax increase,” he said.

Only a quarter of the 40 hospital construction projects that were at the heart of Boris Johnson’s 2019 general election manifesto have secured full planning permission, the Observer can reveal, amid angry claims from NHS figures that there is no chance the schemes will be delivered on time.

“There’s a 0% chance there’s going to be 40 new hospitals by 2030,”

Promises, promises – Owl

Michael Savage www.theguardian.com 

Ministers have repeatedly claimed that the hospitals will be delivered by 2030, despite concerns from health chiefs and economists that “woefully insufficient” funding and rising costs will scupper the plan and put NHS capacity at risk.

However, an investigation by the Observer has revealed that only 10 of the 40 projects have the full planning permissions they need to go ahead. Those involved in some of the projects said they had already faced lengthy delays, leaving them with decrepit and often unusable buildings.

“There’s a 0% chance there’s going to be 40 new hospitals by 2030,” said the boss of one of the NHS trusts awaiting a new hospital. “We’ll be moderately lucky to have eight. At the moment we’re doing loads of maintenance work on an ongoing basis, trying to sort out roofs and theatres and all those things. Some hospitals are literally falling down.”

Analysis by the Observer, combined with official data obtained by the Lib Dem deputy leader, Daisy Cooper, reveals that some projects only have outline planning permission, which is insufficient to allow building work to commence. Many of the projects have no planning permission at all.

“This is truly scandalous,” said Cooper. “The Conservative government is on course to break their flagship NHS promise and refuse to admit it. Communities already suffering from dangerously long ambulance waiting times are also left with crumbling hospitals which are falling apart at the seams. The government needs to stump up the cash to keep ageing hospitals running and ensure patients are treated in safe environments.”

The programme has been beset with controversy ever since Johnson pledged to build “40 new hospitals” in the 2019 Conservative manifesto. Since then, it has emerged that many of the proposed projects are not new hospitals, but extensions or refurbishments. The independent National Audit Office is also investigating the programme.

According to the latest filings, 13 of the projects have no planning permission. Another 17 have only secured some kind of preliminary agreement, or have no confirmed permission. Several of the NHS trusts involved said they were awaiting a funding settlement from the government to progress the planning and design stages of their proposed projects.

One of the projects causing most concern is the redevelopment of Epsom and St Helier hospital, south London, which has already been hit with delays. “The development is needed now more than ever before,” said an official. “We have crumbling, cramped buildings, many of which pre-date the NHS. Our patients deserve a better environment to receive treatment. Our staff deserve a better environment to deliver care.”

Any delays pose a significant political problem for the prime minister, Rishi Sunak. One trust chief executive with a scheme in the programme, speaking anonymously, said: “Let’s say there’s an election in 2024, 2025, if they had eight or a dozen or 20 hospitals that were well on the way to construction and you had cranes outside, you’d get loads of good photos out of that. But with the best will in the world, you’re just going to have a few hospitals with a hole in the ground. I think they’ve lost their opportunity to maximise political benefit around this.”

Another said: “Our own hospital is crumbling before our eyes – so much so, that parts are completely unusable. Delays are hugely inefficient and are costing millions which is bad for the economy, taxpayers and the health of our patients.”

In England, there are still 284 hospital buildings pre-dating 1948, when the NHS was created. Most of the hospitals due to be replaced in the new hospital programme have buildings constructed before the service’s inauguration. Latest estimates suggest the maintenance backlog for the NHS estate reached £10.2bn in 2021-22, more than twice as high as it was a decade ago. With inflation in the construction sector reaching 10% in September 2022, the cost of clearing the maintenance backlog might yet increase further.

Laurie Rachet-Jacquet, an economist at the Health Foundation, said: “Last year we estimated that, depending on NHS productivity, we would need 23,000-39,000 new beds in England by 2030: this is equivalent to around 38–64 average sized hospitals. Hospital costs vary greatly but based on an estimated cost of around £450m, then this is approximately £17bn–£29bn in the next seven years.

“The promised new hospitals for the government’s programme fall within the bottom of this range. But the delays and uncertainty about funding are worrying. The money allocated thus far is woefully insufficient and given rising inflation will deliver still less than anticipated and it is not clear that the government’s proposals go far enough to meet future hospital care needs.”

Saffron Cordery, the deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, said: “Trusts need clarity and commitment from the government about the much-delayed New Hospitals Programme (NHP). Shovels and picks at the ready, trusts in the NHP are poised to get to work but are still waiting for confirmation of funding. Those forced to delay for many months now face spiralling, inflation-driven cost increases far above initial forecasts. The NHP can transform healthcare by providing badly needed renewal for acute, mental health, community and ambulance services. But we need to get a move on.”

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “We are investing £3.7bn for the first four years of the New Hospital Programme and remain committed to all schemes that have been announced as part of it. Requirements for planning permission are dependent on construction timelines over the decade and we continue to work closely with trusts on their plans. We are developing a national approach to constructing new hospitals so schemes can be built more rapidly and ensure value for money.”

“Ambitious road map” leading nowhere – Owl

Elise Wach theconversation.com 

The UK government’s environment improvement plan pledges to restore 500,000 hectares (1.2 million acres) of wildlife-rich habitat, create or expand 25 national parks, invest in the recovery of hedgehogs and red squirrels, tackle rising sewage pollution and improve access to green spaces in England over the next five years.

Since 69% of land in England is farmed, much of the plan’s success in improving nature will hinge on its reform of the country’s agricultural sector. Farming is implicated in the extinction risk of 86% of threatened species globally, and accounts for roughly one-third of all greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change, not to mention soil erosion and river pollution.

The government has described the plan as an “ambitious road map” to a cleaner, greener country. Some of the targets certainly are ambitious. For example, the plan aims to bring 40% of farmland soils into sustainable management by 2028.

This would be a monumental shift in how soil is cared for in England. Intensive agriculture has slashed the amount of carbon soils store by 60% and put 6 million hectares across England and Wales at risk of erosion or compaction, costing an estimated £1.2 billion a year.

But the plan doesn’t actually explain how sustainable management will be expanded. The only action proposed is to create a “baseline map” of soil health in England by 2028.

The plan also aims for 65%-80% of landowners and farmers to adopt nature-friendly farming by 2030. “Nature-friendly farming” is not defined, nor is it based on any internationally recognised principles, making it impossible to assess the government’s progress.

The plan only aims for this to be adopted on 10%-15% of farmers’ land too, which would amount to a mere 6%–12% of England’s farmland overall. Research shows that protecting small pockets of land won’t benefit biodiversity if the majority of farming in the surrounding landscape is ecologically destructive.

All carrots, no sticks

The main instrument the government has chosen to shake up agriculture is the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) scheme. SFIs are payments to farmers based on actions which benefit the environment. For example, a farmer could receive up to £40 a hectare for their efforts to improve soils on arable fields.

An integrated strategy for converting farmland to more sustainable management would mean increasing the diversity of crops grown, helping healthy soils regenerate and eliminating pesticides, all at the same time. Instead, SFI payments reward farmers for making standalone changes.

This might mean putting out seeds for birds in winter or leaving a grassy strip on an unused section of land to provide habitat for insects, though it could also mean significantly cutting down on pesticides. This system offers flexibility for landowners, but research shows that farmers are more likely to choose environmental improvements which don’t require significant changes to how they farm.

This is the fatal flaw in the government’s flagship farming reform. Farmers can continue doing things which harm soils and wildlife on the (majority) productive parts of their land while receiving benefits for sprinkling pro-environment measures around the edges.

Wildflower margins which are planted around pesticide-soaked crops under the pretence of supporting pollinators offer a common example. Not only is the continued use of pesticide on the crop harmful in itself, the wildflowers actually accumulate the chemical residue, sometimes in higher concentrations than in the crops themselves. This renders the wildflower pollen harmful, rather than beneficial, to bees, butterflies and other bugs.

Adding wildflower strips to field margins won’t undo the damage of intensive farming. Paul Maguire/Shutterstock

The environment improvement plan heavily relies on voluntary participation in lieu of regulation, not only through SFIs but quality assurance schemes such as Red Tractor. For example, fertilisers and slurries (semi-liquid manures) emit ammonia, a greenhouse gas which is bad for human health. Rather than regulate this, the plan favours an “industry led” approach with Red Tractor certifications.

Red Tractor is yet another voluntary scheme, and has been criticised as ineffectual for encouraging improvements to the environment and animal welfare on farms. The plan has only suggested that it will consider regulating dairy and intensive beef farms in the same way that it regulates intensive poultry and pig farms.

Even if regulations were to be expanded, environmental regulators visit farms so rarely and superficially that it might not make a difference. On average, it is estimated that English farms can expect an environmental inspection once every 263 years. Despite being regulated, intensive poultry and pig operations are a major cause of river pollution.

Beyond England’s borders

In post-Brexit policy discussions, some landowners and consumers worried that payments for environmental improvements would outweigh income from food production, meaning less homegrown fare. Government discourse has since emphasised that farmers will receive support to deliver on environmental outcomes “alongside” food production. Nothing in the plan ensures this.

Other countries have a food strategy which guides farmers to grow produce necessary for healthy diets and determines how much should be imported or exported. Responsibility for food in England is divided between 16 different departments, with no overarching framework or body.

SFIs and the new plan do very little to stem the environmental consequences of food produced beyond England’s borders. The aggregate ammonia emissions from crops and livestock imported into England are significantly higher than those stemming from domestic production.

And despite its favourable growing conditions, the majority of fruit and vegetables eaten in England are imported, contributing to water scarcity and pollution in other countries. Preserving the environment at home while polluting and degrading environments abroad is nonsensical, as all ecosystems are interconnected. But it is also shameful to shift the environmental burden of English diets onto other people.

If the government and citizens are serious about improving the environment, then policies must require that ecological principles are integrated into food production. At present, voluntary measures and weak regulation are all that is offered.