This comment from Anthony Rowcraft was posted a few days ago:

“A perfectly good care home, Shanford, in Budleigh Salterton was closed a couple of years ago amid much controversy and speculation as to who would benefit. Elderly patients were moved out against their wishes and staff given notice. It’s still empty!!!! Could it be reopened rather than using hotels??”

This has prompted Owl to commision an investigation into the current situation.

This investigation indicates that, despite attempts to sell  the unoccupied “Shandford” it  is still owned by Julie Rhodes of Agency Assistance who bought it at auction from Abbeyfield at the height of the Covid epidemic in December 2020.

To recapitulate the history of Shandford:

Shandford started as a care home in 1958 for local people funded by the people of Budleigh Salterton. In 2012, the trustees ceded it to Abbeyfield under a covenant that should Abbeyfield sell the property then the proceeds should be returned to “the people of Budleigh Salterton”

The closure was based on Abbeyfield’s declared aim of “freeing up assets” as it changes its business model to concentrate on larger homes; and County Councillor Christine Channon’s handpicked adviser, Chris Davis, who claimed that Shandford was no longer viable. Owl understands Chris Davis’ report has never been made public.

A local community effort to take back control failed despite the intervention of newly elected Simon Jupp MP.

During this process Owl received plausible arguments that showed that there were grounds to challenge the case for non-viability.

However, it now seems the proceeds (less expenses) have been returned to “the people of Budleigh Salterton” by way of the charity: “the Shandford Trust” registered just over a year ago.

A search of the Charity Commission web site reveals:

THE SHANDFORD TRUST – Charity 1192048 at year ending 31 December 2021 expended £696 on charitable activities, retaining £728.30k for future use.

“The Trust provides grant funding to older people for their accommodation or care, particularly those in financial need, those who are frail or with disabilities, who live in Budleigh Salterton, East Budleigh, Otterton, Colaton Raleigh or Bicton. It is indiscriminate as to age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, race, religion or belief, sex or sexual orientation.”

The charity commission lists Christopher Haward Davis as Chair of trustees. 

Dr Richard Mejzner is also listed as another of the eight trustees. It is Interesting to note that Mejzner is also a trustee of two other charities: LEAGUE OF FRIENDS OF THE BUDLEIGH SALTERTON HOSPITAL; and the recently registered SEACHANGE DEVON. This would seem to be the CIO (Charitable Incorporated Organisation) now running the old BS Cottage Hospital, previously managed by Westbank as a “Hospital Hub” (a hospital without any beds).

Sarah Hicks is Chair of Trustees of Seachange Devon and is also currently CEO of Westbank Community Health and Care. It’s a small world.

Is Budleigh about to lose its “hospital” as well?

Budleigh Salterton was one of the first hospitals to lose all its hospital beds which served as a convalescent stepping stone between acute care and returning home. It was retained as a “hospital hub”.

Of further interest is the fact that this hospital site has not only been offered up as a potential development site in the draft EDDC Local Plan (by the freeholders Clinton Devon Estates?), but has been allocated as such. Under the terms of the lease, the site reverts to the freeholder when it is no longer used as a hospital.

Below is an extract from  the Site Selection and Settlement Boundary Setting (under Tier 3 settlements)

Settlement: Budleigh Salterton 

Site reference number: Budl_06 

Site Address: Budleigh Salterton Community Hospital, East Budleigh Road, Budleigh Salterton, Devon, EX9 6HF

Accessibility assessment: Budl_06 is within 1600 metres of at least 8 different types of services and facilities, including a GP practice, community hall, post office, pubs, shops and a primary and school. The site is close to an hourly bus route. Pedestrian access into the town centre is available along safe walking routes.

Other known site constraints: The site is currently used but the NHS as a health and wellbeing hub, providing local employment and a community facility.

Site opportunities: It would be possible to convert existing buildings to residential use. 

Amended Maximum Yield following discounted areas on site: 20

Brief summary of the key positives and negatives of the site: Budl_06 may provide an opportunity for conversion of existing buildings and some new development on a brownfield site very well related to services and facilities if it is no longer required for community use.

Should the site be allocated?     YES

East Devon is not the only one drawing up plans, but Teignbridge’s target looks “modest” compared with the East Devon Total of 6,615 – see calculations shown below the paragraphs on Teignbridge. – Owl

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com (Extract)

A blueprint for future development across Teignbridge to meet housing need for the forthcoming future has been published. The draft Teignbridge Local Plan, which would shape development in Teignbridge until 2040, outlines where and how homes in the district will be built.

The draft plan sets out new land allocations for 4,560 homes, with about a quarter of all new properties to be affordable and more homes built for people with mobility issues. This is in addition to land previously allocated for development in the current Teignbridge Local Plan. About 65 hectares of land is allocated in the draft plan for employment sites while two sites are identified for gypsies and travellers.

The plans includes three major expansion areas to existing settlements. Land is allocated at Bradmore, west of Houghton Barton, on the outskirts of Newton Abbot, for approximately 1050 homes. This is in addition to the 1,800 homes for the area already allocated in the existing Local Plan.

On the edge of Exeter, approximately 900 homes are planned for Markham village, which will be created as a small new village, which will sit in green surroundings, between the villages of Ide and Shillingford Abbot. A mixed use development of approximately 750 residential units at Peamore, as part of the West Exe Business Park, near to the M5 is also proposed.

Sufficient land will be made available in this plan to increase the rate of new housebuilding to an average of 741 homes per year. All new-build open market homes on allocated sites, whether occupied as an owned, rented or leasehold home, will be occupied as a primary residence, as secured through a legally enforceable mechanism.

Under the draft local plan, brownfield sites would be prioritised to help regenerate town centres while most new homes would be located close to jobs, services and sustainable transport. Some small development sites are also identified in larger villages where new homes would help sustain essential local services.

The approximate distribution of new homes across the district will be: • Newton Abbot and Kingsteignton Garden Community – 37% • Edge of Exeter – 46% • Coastal and rural towns – 5% • Villages – 12%

For details of the individual town and village proposals see www.devonlive.com

For East  Devon the new housing target is 6,615 calculated as follows:

The Government set out minimum numbers of homes that should be built each year. In December 2020 the Government advised that the figure for East Devon should be at least 928 new homes per year (but it is subject to year on year review). It is marginally below our current local plan policy that identifies a need for an average of 950 homes to be built each year. It is also considerably lower than the figure of 1,614 homes per year that a now abandoned Government proposal, from autumn 2020, generated.

Analysis from a base date of 1 April 20209 shows a projected 11,945 extra homes will be built in East Devon under the current local plan up to 31 March 2031. A 20 year requirement (from 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2040) at 928 homes per year would give a grand total of 18,560 homes needed. Deducting 11,945 already projected to be built from a need of 18,560 leaves a residual figure of at least an extra 6,615 new homes up to 2040. 

Time running out to have your say on future development in East Devon

Time is running out to have your say on future developments in East Devon’s Local Plan consultation

www.thedevondaily.co.uk 

The deadline to have your say on how much building takes place in East Devon from now until 2040 is fast approaching – East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) Local Plan consultation ends on Sunday, 15 January!

Thousands of people have already commented on proposals in the new draft Local Plan including on how many new homes need to be built and where. The consultation seeks views on specific sites for development which could be next to your house.

The plan sets out various other aims, including: 

• How the district would address the climate change emergency;

• How and where new jobs should be created how we should support our town centres;

• How East Devon protects its built heritage and natural environment;

• How EDDC intends to deliver housing to meet the needs of local residents and ensure new homes are net zero carbon ensuring they are more efficient and cheaper to run.

The new Local Plan will be a key document when making planning decisions in East Devon so it is vital people tell EDDC what they think of the proposals now.

Everyone who lives, works and spends time in the district has been asked to share their views about the future of the district as part the consultation.

Councillor Dan Ledger, EDDC’s portfolio holder for strategic planning, said: “It is so important that people look at this consultation and tell us what they think before the consultation closes.

“There has been lots of stories in the press about potential future changes to the planning system and how these might reduce the number of homes that we need to build.

\“These changes are currently unclear but what is clear is that we will still need thousands of new homes, business and community spaces and we need to hear as many views as possible on the proposals in our new Local Plan to help us decide which are best for the future of East Devon.”

The consultation can be viewed online at www.eastdevon.gov.uk/local-plan.

The feedback EDDC receives on this draft plan will be used to help inform and refine EDDC’s thinking as the Local Plan is progressed.

In just over a years’ time, EDDC hopes to have a final version of the plan informed by the comments it receives that will be consulted on and then subject to an examination in public by a Government-appointed planning inspector.

Devon County Council’s Flood Risk Management Team said that the applicant had not submitted sufficient information in relation to surface water drainage.

It added: “The applicant does not appear to have provided any drainage strategy. Changes in ground levels can alter surface water flowpaths and may require mitigation to ensure there is no increased surface water risk to neighbouring land/property.”

exmouth.nub.news 

Plans to raise and level football pitches at Warren View Sports Ground have been submitted to East Devon District Council on behalf of Exmouth Town Youth Football Club.

According to the planning documents, the site floods regularly due to poor drainage and is located within flood zone three, the highest risk category.

The land is also reportedly “undulating with an uneven surface”.

If approved, the proposals would see the playing pitches raised “very marginally” (by around a metre or less in most places), levelled, and re-seeded.

Sport England, a public body, said it supported the raising of the playing field land and levelling of the pitches but asked for further information about drainage and pitch construction.

Devon County Council’s Flood Risk Management Team said that the applicant had not submitted sufficient information in relation to surface water drainage.

It added: “The applicant does not appear to have provided any drainage strategy. Changes in ground levels can alter surface water flowpaths and may require mitigation to ensure there is no increased surface water risk to neighbouring land/property.”

The plans have received five objections from the public at the time of writing, one neutral comment, and one comment in support.

Concerns raised include drainage issues, the height of the new pitches, and a perceived impact on wildlife.

Mark Hansford, objecting, said: “The fields are a habitat for a huge range of wildlife. There is at least one foxes den/set on the edge of the pitches and the foxes are out on the pitches at night and during the daylight. There is a badger set. There are oystercatchers and wading birds, bats, birds of prey and many small mammals.”

Penelope Cowman, remaining neutral, said: “I support the comments of the DCC Flood Risk Management Team that there is no drainage strategy. There is no mention of a geotechnical assessment of the ground or whether percolation tests have been carried out to ensure that soakaways will work or what alternative is proposed if they don’t?”

Robin Humphreys, objecting, said: “There are already considerable traffic and access problems when the football club is in operation which will be made worse if the surface is improved, allowing increased use of the site.

“Having been a resident overlooking the site for over 20 years the rationale for the development, that of flooding, has not been apparent.”

The application is currently awaiting a decision from the district council.

Nero fiddling while Rome burns? – Owl

Rishi Sunak has refused to accept that the NHS is in crisis, despite acknowledging the “enormous pressure” the health service is under this winter.

Adam Forrest www.independent.co.uk

The prime minister also refused to say whether he uses a private GP, insisting the issue is a “distraction from the things that really matter”.

Asked about overwhelmed emergency services, record waiting lists and whether the NHS was “in crisis”, Mr Sunak told BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg: “The NHS is undeniably under enormous pressure.”

Pointing to the Covid pressures, the PM added: “Recovering from Covid is going to be tough and we’re seeing that play out on our TV screens every day and in communities up and down the country.”

Mr Sunak refused three times to discuss reports that he uses a private GP, saying: “As a general policy I wouldn’t ever talk about me or my family’s healthcare situation … it’s not really relevant, what’s relevant is the difference I can make to the country.”

Asked if he was registered with a private GP, Mr Sunak said: “Yeah, my dad was a doctor. I grew up in a NHS family.” Asked why he won’t tell people if he used a private GP, he replied: “It’s just a personal choice. I think healthcare is somewhat private.”

It comes as Royal College of Nursing (RCN) general secretary Pat Cullen, in an interview with The Independent, said Mr Sunak’s pledge to bring down waiting lists would fail without pay being addressed and said the upcoming strike would be the biggest of its kind in the world.

Ms Cuillen also said Mr Sunak needs to “come clean” about whether he uses a private GP. “I think he needed to come clean,” the RCN boss told the BBC. “As a public servant he is elected by the public, so he is accountable to the public – and when you’re accountable to the public you have to be honest with them.”

The NHS is set for more disruption when nurses strike on 18 and 19 January, while ambulance staff are striking on 11 and 23 January. Junior doctors will walk out for three days in March if they back industrial action at Monday’s ballot.

Mr Sunak said he wanted to have a “reasonable, honest, two-way conversation about pay” with the unions – but suggested health secretary Steve Barclay would only talk about next year’s pay settlement when he meets NHS union chiefs on Monday.

Mr Barclay has hinted at pay increases on the table if the unions will agree to efficiency savings – but will try to discuss the 2023-24 pay review process, which starts in April, rather than this financial year’s pay row.

Despite Mr Barclay’s previous refusal to discuss pay, Mr Sunak denied it amounted to a shift in the government’s stance. “The door has always been open,” the prime minister told the BBC. “When it comes to pay, we’ve always said we want to talk about things that are affordable, that are reasonable.”

Pressed again if ministers were willing to talk about pay for this year, he said: “We’re about to start a new pay settlement round for this year [2023-24]. Before that process starts, the government is keen to sit down with the unions and talk about pay, and make sure they understand where we’re coming from.”

His comments come after Ms Cullen said the RCN would be willing to “meet the government halfway” on pay – effectively cutting the union’s pay demands from 19 to 10 per cent.

Ms Cullen said there was a “chink” of optimism and detected a “little shift” in the government’s stance on pay from Mr Sunak’s comments on Sunday – but said she still did not expect Mr Barclay to engage with this year’s pay demands.

“What the government wants to talk about is pay going forward … and that’s not going to avert strike action that’s planned for 10 days’ time,” she told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg. “It must it must be about addressing pay for 2022-23.”

She added: “The prime minister talked about coming to the table, now that’s a move for me, because I have said, let’s meet halfway,” she said. “Grasp the nettle, come to the table. I can’t negotiate on my own, and I can’t negotiate on the airwaves.”

Mr Barclay is expected to unveil extra funding to expand bed capacity in hospitals and care homes as part of a package to be announced on Monday.

Hundreds of millions of pounds will be spent on block buying thousands of care home beds, according to the Sunday Times, in a bid to free up 1,000 to 2,000 hospital beds and ease pressure on emergency services.

Government officials reportedly believe there are enough spare beds at Care Quality Commission approved facilities, and could have a positive impact within four weeks.

The government’s plans will also propose more “virtual wards”, in which patients are “remotely monitored” in their own homes, using wearable devices, according to the Telegraph.

The government has been accused of trying to blame the NHS pressures on Covid. Mr Sunak said: “I think it’s not right to ignore the impact that Covid has had. Has the NHS had pressures before? Of course it has, but Covid has undeniably had an enormous difference.”

Prof Clive Kay, chief executive of King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, asked if it sounded like the prime minister understood the gravity of the crisis facing the health service, said: “No, if I’m honest.”

Prof Kay told BBC: “I don’t think I heard [the PM] grasp the fact that this is a really, really difficult situation. This is not just a winter 2023 problem. We need some realistic conversations. The suggestion that’s going to be a quick fix, a sticking laster, it’s not a reality.”

Simon Jupp received £16,500 from five donations, including from FW Carter.

Richard Foord received £6,820 from four donations.

Details can be found using this interactive tool:

Sky News and Tortoise Media interactive tool

Every year, millions of pounds pour into Westminster – into the accounts of the people, groups, organisations and parties that work and operate at the centre of government. Although most of this money must technically be disclosed to the public, the way that information is reported, stored and displayed almost guarantees the records will not be widely scrutinised.

Payment records are spread across different government websites, often split into small files covering short periods of time and regularly published with duplicate entries, spelling mistakes and other errors. The data required to examine the financial interests of just one Member of Parliament is laborious to gather.

Tortoise Media and Sky News have programmatically collected and analysed thousands of donations and payment records from MPs, political parties, and all-party parliamentary groups (APPGs). The resulting database is an extensive, though not comprehensive, record of the financial interests in Westminster.

Because the purpose of this database is to look at exterior sources of money and influence, it does not cover the everyday expenses required to run a central government’s main legislative body. Notably, you won’t find any reference to Members’ annual base salary of £84,144. Nor will you find references to the additional compensation made by government ministers and MPs with other extra responsibilities.

It also doesn’t cover outgoings. For example, members sometimes report that they’ve donated a sum to charity or given it to their local party, but our database doesn’t make that distinction. (You can find more detail on how and why we made decisions like this in our publicly-accessible methodology.)

What the database does include is the following datasets for the entirety of the current parliament – from its start on 19 December 2019 to the most recent disclosures:

• From the Register of Members’ Financial Interests: Earnings from secondary employment, donations, gifts (including all gifted international travel), and other benefits for all sitting and former members of the current parliament
• From the Register of All-Party Parliamentary Groups: Donations, gifts and other benefits for all APPGs that have operated at any point during the current parliament, as well as membership lists for each group
• From the Electoral Commission: Donations, gifts and other benefits received by all political parties currently represented in the House of Commons

Simon Jupp received £16,500 from five donations,

Richard Foord received £6,820 from four donations.

Theresa May has earned more outside parliament since leaving Number 10 than any other MP, and nine times more than she earned in her two years as prime minister.

Catherine Neilan www.tortoisemedia.com

May has been paid £2.5 million for speaking engagements since 2019. That includes a six-figure fee for a speech in Saudi Arabia and is more than double the outside earnings of Boris Johnson since his stint in Downing Street – although he is expected to overtake her soon. 

The two ex-prime ministers are among 25 MPs who have earned more outside parliament since the last general election than from their salaries. A larger group of 36 MPs have earned more than £100,000 outside parliament overall in the same period. 

In total, MPs have earned £17.2 million from second jobs, but the vast majority of that money has gone to a relatively small number of people: 20 MPs receive more than two thirds of their income from second jobs. In fact, May’s outside earnings account for nearly 16 per cent of the total.

The top 5 earners are all Conservative MPs: 

• Theresa May – £2.55 million
• Geoffrey Cox – £2.19 million
• Boris Johnson – £1.06 million
• Fiona Bruce – £711,749
• John Redwood – £692,438

May’s clients for speaking engagements have included JPMorgan, the US investment bank, and Deutsche Bank, but she often doesn’t say who she is speaking to. 

One fee for £107,600 from the World Travel and Tourism Council was for a speech to a conference in Riyadh. The largest single item she has declared is £408,200 from the Cambridge Speaker Series, for six speeches last spring. She is the only MP to have registered any payments from this firm, which is based in California.

Other US-based speaking agencies which May has received six-figure sums from include the Washington Speakers Bureau and the Distinguished Speaker Series. Again, precisely who she was speaking to – and what was said – remains unclear. 

These earnings are among thousands of payments to MPs and associated bodies brought together by the Westminster Accounts tool, a searchable database developed by Tortoise and Sky News which makes it possible to create leader boards and league tables showing where the largest sums flow from and to.

The payments are from lobbyists and – often in kind – from all-party parliamentary groups (APPGs; informal networks of MPs often supported financially by companies seeking to forward an agenda) as well as second jobs. But not all second jobs are created equal. 

Matt Hancock, the former health secretary, lost the whip for his stint in the Australian jungle – the earnings for which had not been registered at the time of writing. But little is said of the many other sidelines supplementing MPs’ wages over many more hours and with much less clarity over the ultimate source of income. 

NHS trusts with record waiting lists are promoting ‘quick and easy’ private healthcare services in their own hospitals, offering patients the chance to skip years of queues observer can reveal.

ukdaily.news 

Hospitals offer hip replacements from £10,000, cataract surgery from £2,200 and hernia repairs from £2,500. MRI scans are offered for between £300 and £400.

This comes as figures show a record 7.21million people waiting for NHS treatment in England, routinely exceeding the maximum waiting time of 18 weeks for non-urgent referrals. Health experts warn of the danger of creating a “two-tier” healthcare system. On observer Investigation has revealed:

• The East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust has thousands of patients awaiting diagnostic tests but is offering “quick access” to scans through its private department.
• Great Western Hospitals NHS Trust in Wiltshire is warning patients that services are “extremely busy” while its private department is promoting self-pay treatment for those who “don’t want to wait for an NHS referral”.
• James Paget University Hospitals NHS Trust in Norfolk advertises private services on its NHS website, stating: “We provide highly experienced, consultant-led services… with no waiting list.”

The premium treatments are provided through private patient units owned and operated by NHS trusts, usually located on hospital premises. Procedures are often carried out by the same staff who would ultimately treat patients if they remained on the NHS waiting list. Under a code of practice, private services cannot impact NHS patient care and profits go back to the health service.

Sussex Premier Health, part of the East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust, is doing MRI scans in 48 hours for £379, according to a recent Instagram promotion. The Trust has more than 7,800 patients awaiting diagnostic testing.

Sussex Premier Health MRI scan promotion. Photo: Instagram/sussexpremierhealth

Great Western Hospitals NHS Trust in Wiltshire provides private health care through a 20 bed unit, the Shalfourne suite. The private patient website states: “We believe that quality healthcare should be easily accessible.”

A woman whose elderly mother was treated by the Trust in October claims she was told she could avoid long waiting lists if she paid. “My 86-year-old mother has to wait two years for the NHS or can see the same surgeon in the same hospital and be treated for £1,200 in two weeks. How is that right?” she wrote on Twitter.

A North East teacher, who asked not to be named, said she borrowed £350 for an MRI scan. “At the appointment there were posters on the walls saying the times for results to be returned: three days for private, three weeks for the NHS.” The scan revealed she had a swollen cyst on her knee, which is treating had to become.

The private Candover Clinic, part of the Hampshire Hospitals NHS Trust. Photo: Instagram/Candoverclinic

Another trust, Hampshire Hospitals NHS Trust, sponsors services through its private Candover clinic. More than 53,500 patients were waiting for non-urgent elective treatment at the foundation in October.

Meanwhile, Kingston Private Health, the private unit of Kingston Hospital’s NHS Trust in south-west London, is offering “rapid access” without “long waiting lists”. Treatments include hip replacements costing £10,100. Patients will be cared for by “skilled NHS nurses”, the website says.

The Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust writes on its private department’s website of a “quick and easy way to get immediate access to the healthcare you need”.

Under the Health and Social Care Act 2012, NHS hospital trusts were allowed to derive up to 49% of their income from private patients. By 2015/16 almost £600m a year was being generated by the NHS treating private patients.

The pandemic and record waiting lists prompted a review of private services by some trusts. The NHS Trust at King’s College Hospital in south London has suspended inpatient and outpatient private services during the pandemic to allow inpatient beds to be used for NHS patients. The stationary service has not yet reopened.

Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean for free every weekday morning

Newcastle Hospitals NHS Trust, which has some of the longest waiting times in England, says its private patient facilities are “currently being used for NHS services”.

David Rowland, director of the Center for Health and Public Interest, said while it was “potentially defensible” for trusts to offer private services when the NHS was not under pressure, it was “very ethically dubious” during a crisis.

Advocates of private patient units say they can help boost revenue for trusts, but some experts say the benefits are unclear, arguing that if private departments lose money they could drain NHS resources.

Hampshire Hospitals NHS Trust said: “NHS care always comes first. Any revenue generated from our operations will be fully reinvested in the NHS.”

The Great Western Hospital NHS Trust said it has not operated a full private patient unit since Covid and where it offers private treatment “it is out of hours and where there is capacity in empty ambulances”, with NHS patients always “priority care”.

Kingston Hospital NHS Trust said it scaled back private activities over the winter and used the space to ease pressure on the NHS. “Of our 417 adult beds, we currently only have 2 patients in private beds,” a spokesman said.

The Royal Free said it has cut waiting lists over the past two years. “All profits from our private patient unit are reinvested into the trust. It is entirely separate from our NHS capacity and has no impact on the care provided to NHS patients.”

The Department for Health and Social Care said: “NHS hospitals have always been able to generate small extra revenue by treating private patients, which can then be used to improve services for NHS patients.”

Which comes first: the “garden village” of 2,000 or the relief road; and will the “garden village” development stop at 2,000? 

Sounds familiar? – Owl

Ollie Heptinstall www.devonlive.com

Plans for a new Cullompton relief road are progressing despite full funding not yet being secured. Mid Devon District Council is still awaiting the outcome of a fresh bid to the government’s levelling-up fund, which will provide most of the road’s revised new £28 million cost.

However, to prevent further delays, the authority’s ruling cabinet agreed on Tuesday to use a further £210,000 of £10 million cash already secured from Homes England to carry out further technical work. The planned road to the east of the town will improve capacity at junction 28 of the M5.

The aims it also to help reduce traffic through the town centre and unlock the development of 2,000 homes nearby, including an initial 500 properties as part of what is being called Culm Garden Village. It will also provide improved pedestrian and cycle access to the planned new Cullompton railway station, which could be in use by 2025.

Mid Devon approved a new bid to the government levelling-up fund’s second round last June, after an initial bid was rejected in December 2021. Originally set to cost £15 million, the road has now ballooned to a projected £28 million; blamed on increased construction costs, replacing sporting facilities and the potential amount needed to buy land.

Planning permission has already been granted for both the road and a new home for Cullompton Cricket Club, which will need to relocate. Devon County Council supports the project and has pledged £1.5 million, while the area’s Liberal Democrat MP Richard Foord has also given his backing.

Cabinet member for planning and economic regeneration, Councillor Richard Chesterton (Conservative, Lower Culm), told this week’s meeting: “It is the first of more than just this infrastructure that will be needed to deliver ultimately the Culm Garden Village.

“That’s part of what has made the levelling-up bid, we think, quite a good bid that hopefully government will accept, because it does bring forward so much else for the town and allow things that the government are obviously wanting to deliver in terms of the garden village.”

He added: “Hopefully the levelling-up [bid] will be granted but obviously, in the meantime, we have to deliver the relief road to be able to progress long-term on the other items that are on the agenda for Cullompton.”

Highlighting the project’s importance, Councillor Margaret Squires (Conservative, Sandford and Creedy) referred to a comment made by a Cullompton resident, stating: “The existing Cullompton could be dying if the relief road’s not delivered, so I welcome any progress.”

Councillors were previously told how the terms of the funding already provided by Homes England requires the road to be built by March. A council director acknowledged this agreement would need to be reviewed, probably when the outcome of the levelling-up bid is known.

Cabinet members agreed to use a further £210,000 of funding already in place to carry out further technical work, subject to an “agreement on appropriate indemnity” to protect the council from paying back the money if the levelling-up bid fails. It expects to hear whether the bid has been successful by the end of January.

They could pay double next year

Mid Devon plans to double council tax for second homeowners when new powers come into force.

Ollie Heptinstall, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

The government included the surcharge for second homes in its levelling up and regeneration bill last year, but they are not expected to be introduced until next year at the earliest.

On Tuesday [3 January] Mid Devon District Council’s cabinet agreed to adopt the policy, subject to further approval by full council, becoming the latest of Devon’s local authorities to provisionally sign up.

Before Christmas, South Hams Council also agreed to double council tax for people who own second homes, once it has the power to do so. Cornwall Council has agreed likewise.

According to a report, the 100 per cent premium could bring more than £400,000 in extra council tax revenue per year.

It is hoped the change will also free up more properties and ease the current housing crisis in Devon,  with claims that key workers are struggling to move to the area due to the lack of suitable housing.

At this week’s meeting, deputy council leader Clive Egington (Conservative, Taw Vale) said: “I’m sure a number of members are content that the provision for second homeowners will be increased to 200 per cent with effect from 1 April 2024.

“I know this is something that cabinet for a number of years has discussed and wish to have implemented and I’m glad to see that the wherewithal has now given us, effectively, the opportunity to do this.”

When the levelling-up bill was first unveiled last year, including allowing English councils to be able to double tax on unoccupied second homes, housing secretary Michael Gove told Times Radio that he didn’t think second homes were “immoral.”

But he added: “I think it’s important to recognise that when you have people in places like Devon who are local folk who can’t get onto the housing ladder, because the price of property has been bid up by second homeowners, sometimes you need to take appropriate steps in order to make sure that communities can flourish.”

Mid Devon’s cabinet also provisionally agreed to adopt another new power in the levelling-up bill, allowing councils to double council tax faster on properties that have been empty of furniture and residents for 12 months – a reduction from the current two years.

A full meeting of the council will be asked to rubber-stamp the decisions in the coming weeks.

“No tricks, no ambiguity” – Rishi Sunak

Downing Street has been accused of “quietly editing” one of Rishi Sunak’s five new promises to voters.

Kevin Schofield www.huffingtonpost.co.uk 

The prime minister unveiled the pledges in a major speech setting out his plans for 2023.

They included a vow to halve inflation this year, grow the economy and cut hospital waiting lists.

Sunak said: “No tricks, no ambiguity – we’re either delivering for you or we’re not.”

The original version of the announcement published on the government website after Sunak made his speech on Wednesday says: “By March, NHS waiting lists will fall and people will get the care they need more quickly.”

The fourth bullet point claims waiting lists will fall “by March”.

UK government

However, visitors to the same page are now told that it was “updated” on Thursday and the March reference has been removed.

That pledge now says: “NHS waiting lists will fall and people will get the care they need more quickly.”

The page has since been edited and the March reference removed.

UK government

Shadow health secretary Wes Streeting told HuffPost UK: “Just 48 hours after promising the British people a series of cast-iron promises, Sunak is already quietly editing the small print.

“The longer we give the Conservatives in power, the longer patients will wait.”

Answering questions from journalists after his speech, the PM said: “By spring of next year, we will have practically eliminated those waiting over a year, with the overall waiting list falling.”

A Downing Street source said the target for bringing waiting lists down is March 2024, and the government website had been edited to avoid any confusion.

HuffPost UK can also reveal that former health secretary Sajid Javid first made the March 2024 vow almost a year ago.

Speaking last February, he said: “Assuming half of the missing demand from the pandemic returns over the next three years, the NHS expect waiting lists to be reducing by March 2024.

“Addressing long waits is critical to the recovery of elective care and we will be actively offering longer waiting patients greater choice about their care to help bring these numbers down.”

A company linked to the Conservative peer Michelle Mone was referred to the UK’s health products watchdog for an investigation after it allegedly presented a false document to the government when tendering for PPE contracts.

Can it get any worse? – Owl

David Conn www.theguardian.com 

The referral of the company, PPE Medpro, was described in a high court document made public this week, setting out the legal claim against the company by the Department of Health and Social Care. The DHSC is seeking the return of £122m in public money it paid for the supply of sterile surgical gowns, plus £11.6m for storing and disposing of them.

It has accused PPE Medpro of delivering gowns that were not sterile, did not comply with the regulations for the production of medical devices, and could have compromised patients’ safety had they been used in the NHS.

The DHSC awarded that gowns contract, and another contract worth £80.85m for the supply of face masks, to PPE Medpro within weeks of Mone approaching Conservative ministers in May 2020 offering to supply PPE through “my team in Hong Kong”.

In the court document setting out its claim, the DHSC states that PPE Medpro “made multiple offers to supply different types of PPE”. The referral of the company to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) related to a different tendering process from the one that led to the DHSC granting the company the gowns contract, the legal claim states.

“[PPE Medpro] was found to have supplied a test report (numbered SHAT06648491) purporting to be from an entity called Intertek, but which Intertek denied having issued. As a result, PPE Medpro was referred to the MHRA’s compliance unit for further investigation.”

Intertek is a large, global, UK stock market-listed quality assurance company, which provides technical testing, inspection and safety certification services in a wide range of industries, including medical devices.

PPE Medpro did not respond to a question from the Guardian this week about the DHSC’s allegation that it supplied an allegedly false document purporting to have been produced by Intertek, nor about the referral to the MHRA. Regarding the DHSC’s legal claim, the company said it refuted all the allegations, argued that the gowns it supplied did meet “correct quality standards and specification”, and said it will “rigorously defend” the court action.

In a statement, Intertek said: “We are not involved in the MHRA investigation or court process. We have reviewed the reference to us in the court document and we have no further comment to make.”

An MHRA spokesperson said the agency could not confirm the outcome of the referral to its compliance unit: “We are not able to provide updates regarding the state of any referrals or investigations due to the confidentiality requirements set out in the Medicines and Medical Devices Act 2021.

“However, we review all information and referrals we receive and where necessary we will take appropriate regulatory action.”

Mone has been under intense public and political pressure since the Guardian reported in November that leaked bank documents indicated she and her three adult children secretly received £29m originating from PPE Medpro’s profits on the government deals. Her lawyer told the Guardian at the time: “There are a number of reasons why our client cannot comment on these issues and she is under no duty to do so.”

Mone has previously denied via her lawyers that she had any involvement in PPE Medpro, despite her approach to ministers in May 2020 and the Guardian reporting last year, based on leaked files, that she did appear to have been secretly involved. Her lawyer has also said she did not declare PPE Medpro on her Lords register of interests because “she did not benefit financially and was not connected to PPE Medpro in any capacity”.

Lawyers for Mone did not respond to requests for comment about the DHSC’s legal claim or the purported Intertek document.

PPE Medpro is the subject of an ongoing potential fraud investigation by the National Crime Agency (NCA). Lawyers for PPE Medpro have declined to comment on the NCA investigation.

The scandal-hit baroness was elevated for years by the party now backtracking over the PPE firm linked to her that won millions in pandemic contracts

bylinetimes.com

Michelle Mone is today’s tabloid baddie.

The baroness stands accused of earning a fortune from two 2020 contracts that went to PPE Medpro worth £203 million to supply masks and medical gowns during the pandemic.

The claim is that the company, which was only a few weeks old when it landed its first contract, was lobbied for by Conservative peer Mone herself. If true, this might constitute an abuse of power, given that she enjoys a seat in the House of Lords. 

It has been alleged that millions of pounds worth of the medical gowns were never even used, even though PPE Medpro claims it delivered the contract to its terms and supplied equipment “fully in accordance” with the contracts.

It has also recently been revealed that a company linked to Mone’s husband donated £171,480 to the Conservative Party. The payments were made through UK firm Lancaster Knox LLP, which forms part of the Doug Barrowman Knox Group. The donations were made before he and Mone were alleged to have benefited from the PPE deal struck during the pandemic.

In response, the Government has announced it is suing PPE Medpro, which won contracts through the so-called ‘VIP lane’ of suppliers, claiming that the gowns supplied “did not comply with the specification in the contract”.

Mone’s reputation stands in tatters. But she isn’t the only villain in all of this.

The baroness is the product of a Conservatism that has uplifted and honoured her up until this point of hubris. She was steadfastly very much the epitome of a modern day Tory, and the Government suing the firm linked to her shouldn’t mask what’s really under all that political greasepaint.

When that is removed, it is clear that – in truth – Mone represents stolid Conservative values.

First, she is the epitome of the Conservative ‘rags to riches’ promise. Born in the east end of Glasgow, her story is one of being raised in a one-bedroom house with no bath and becoming a millionaire through hard work and perseverance. It is the ‘pull yourself up by your bootstraps’ political trajectory that she shares with the likes of Nadine Dorries, Sajid Javid and Gillian Keegan.

Although just one in 100 Conservative MPs have come from a working-class job, Mone’s rise from The Barras to the Baronetcy is held up as heady proof that Thatcher’s promise holds true. The self-same entrepreneurial spirit that saw Mone make her millions out of lingerie was lauded until it made the Conservative Government look bad. 

Mone’s story is representative of a Conservative ethos that has all too clearly been recently revealed: that political connections are not there to debate ethical principles and work together for society. They are there for profit. Her messages to Michael Gove – WhatsApp discussions the Government once refused to admit even existed – were just a fraction of the secret lobbying endemic in Westminster.  

Connections matter. Yes Gove, poor man, claimed he was “bullied” into giving her company a contract. But don’t forget that – as reported by this newspaper – more than half a billion pounds in Government PPE deals went to Conservative backers. Remember too that companies which were referred by Conservative MPs and peers to the expedited ‘VIP lane’ have since seen their profits quadruple. When it comes to Conservatives profiting from the pandemic, Mone is not alone.

But Mone’s own place and behaviour in the Lords also reflects a wider pattern that seems noticeable among some Conservative peers.

The baroness, who joined the second chamber in 2015, has not taken part in a vote since last April and has not spoken in a debate since March 2020. She has now taken a ‘leave of absence’ from the Lords – a seeming technicality given her attendance rating – but hers was always a lukewarm commitment to public service that exposes the upper house for what it has become.

Take Lord Evgeny Lebedev, co-owner of the Evening Standard and the Independent newspapers. He was appointed to the Lords by Boris Johnson in December 2020, but has since turned up to just 1% of sessions. Similarly, Lord Bamford, the JCB owner and Conservative Party donor, attended only 32 times between April 2015 and March 2022. Indeed, of the 1,042 peers who have sat in the House of Lords since April 2015, 142 (13.6%) attended the Palace of Westminster on 25 days or less, with 58 having never attended during that period. 

Under the Conservatives, the House of Lords has become more sclerotic, not less. The fact that this roughly 800-member club has seen appointments such as Johnson’s brother, Lord Johnson of Marylebone, has already raised concerns. And that, of all upper houses in the world, only the Chinese National People’s Congress is bigger shows just how much it’s been packed by donors and sycophants.

Mone’s place there – or her absence – is reflective of a wider decay of an institution whose average age is 71. No wonder Labour wants to get rid of it.

Then there are her opaque business interests in the Middle East. Whether working with the Sultan of Oman or trying to sell apartments in Dubai using crypto-currency, Mone reflects a wider Conservative obsession with the oil-rich states. 

‘Follow the money’ might be an investigative journalist’s mantra, but it is also a Conservative’s own. From scandals such as the Conservative Party chair Ben Elliot failing to disclose client ties with Middle East envoys, to Middle East-based magnates being revealed as major party donors, and the UK Government being paid more than £300 million by Saudi military for weapons systems training, there are countless political scandals linking Conservative politics to the Gulf states. These are the result of stronger post-Brexit ties with countries like Oman and Saudi Arabia driven forward by a Tory Party desperately seeking economic allies, regardless of their human rights records.  

Finally, there is Michelle Mone’s own poor character. There was the Met Police investigation, for instance, into allegations that she sent a racist message after a banker of Indian heritage Richard Lynton-Jones complained to the police. During a disagreement following a fatal yacht collision in 2019, Mone told him in a WhatsApp message that he was “a waste of a man’s white skin”. She settled for £50,000.

There was also the time she replaced Rod Stewart’s wife with his ex, choosing Rachel Hunter as the face of her bra company Ultimo, ditching model Penny Lancaster. The singer branded Mone “a manipulative cow”. Mone said she had done it “for the publicity”.

Then, in 2016, she faced her fourth employment tribunal over claims of bullying and failure to pay wages, her company having lost or settled the previous three. Mone had bugged employees’ offices and listened to the recordings for evidence of disloyalty.

Mone’s behaviour – evident in her litigious threats to reporters covering the PPE scandal – appears to show a person who seems to care little for the feelings of others. And, in this way, given all the scandals of bullying by Conservative ministers – with Dominic Raab, Priti Patel and Gavin Williamson all exposed as martinets – she seems to fit right in.

Mone then does seem to be driven forward by a desire for power not principle, whatever the cost. And just over her shoulder, stood the Conservative Party – facilitating, or at the least not condemning, her behaviour all the way.

At a cabinet meeting on Wednesday (4 January), East Devon District Council agreed a series of council tax reduction (CTR) changes to help people in arrears during the cost-of-living crisis.

sidmouth.nub.news 

Currently, 18 per cent of households in tax arrears in East Devon are of working age, up from 13 per cent in 2019 before the start of the covid pandemic.

It was decided that the council should cover 100 per cent of council tax for band one households – up from 85 per cent – and matching the discount already being applied by North Devon, East Devon and Teignbridge.

The council agreed that self-employed people who work at least 16 hours per week are entitled to support, in line with universal credit. This means people who are self-employed who do not work more than 16 hours a week due to caring responsibilities are covered under the scheme.

Claims can be backdated for up to 12 months, with any increased income from universal credit also being considered when dealing with tax reduction claims to ensure that those receiving such funding or other emergency schemes don’t lose out.

Devon Fire and Rescue Service, and Devon and Cornwall Police, both supported the scheme, although Devon County Council objected on the grounds that it is forecast to cost the council more than half a million pounds.

Of the 178 members of the public who responded to a six-week consultation, 25 were “very against” the planned council tax reductions for eligible people.

Some respondents felt that discounting taxes based on low income did not ‘incentivise working,’ and that cases involving self-employed workers should be considered using their actual income, rather than the hours they work.

Others suggested that allowing backdating for 12 months would be “excessive,” and that considering emergency income through other schemes is “unfair” to those whose income does not include government support.

Cllr Paul Hayward (Independent East Devon Alliance, Yarty) asked that those against the proposal show a little more compassion.

“It reads like watching the first 10 minutes of Christmas Carol over and over again,” he said. “And it appears that the milk of human kindness has just curdled for some of these people who respond.

“It’s just astonishing that… we are simply attempting to help those most vulnerable people who have the least, who are struggling.”

Libby Jarrett, the officer presenting the proposal, reasoned that increasing band one support to 100 per cent has the same effect on the tax received as simply writing off the arrears. Cllr Hayward agreed.

“If we don’t do this, they’ll end up reneging, they’ll end up defaulting, and we’ll end up in the same position,” he said. “So actually we can be ahead of the game and help people at this time of absolute crisis, so I’m delighted to propose this.”

“We believe in what we believe in, and we go from there.” (Cllr Phil Skinner leader of the EDDC Conservatives).

Well that clarifies things, Owl is always in favour of transparency!

For those wanting to know where our “Blue Leader” is coming from, you only have to type “Skinner” into the Watch search box (above right) to find out, or refresh your memory. Our Phil has plenty of “form”.

As Leader, all Tory candidates will be expected to follow his example or “beliefs”.

Really think you can win Phil, having won less than one third of the seats in 2019 and with the Tories polling 113 votes in the October by-election coming third behind Labour?

The leader of the Conservatives in East Devon is feeling positive ahead of local elections in May.

sidmouth.nub.news 

The 2019 elections in East Devon dealt a blow to the party which, having won 35 seats in 2011, added another to that tally in the next full poll four years later.

However, the Tories came out of the elections four years ago with just 19 seats, and after the Liberal Democrats, the East Devon Alliance, the Green Party, and three Independents joined forces to form the Democratic Alliance, the Conservatives lost control of the council they had led since the district was created.

Right now, though, East Devon District Council has no overall majority, and Conservative leader Cllr Paul [sic] Skinner (Conservative, Tale Vale) ) believes the time for change has come.

“It’s difficult from a Westminster perspective [that the Tories will do well],” he said. “But as far as [local] Conservatives, I think the true values that people sit within are at the core of the Conservative party.

“I think people believe, in a general sense, in a capitalist state, but what we want is a capitalist state that’s also got responsibility in ensuring people are able to afford and pay for services, and that’s what we want.

“I think Rishi Sunak, from a perspective of central government, is doing a fantastic job. And I happen to think that, in many aspects, East Devon District Council are not doing a very good job.

“I think there’s a change of administration required at East Devon District Council, and I’m very optimistic going forward.

“We’ve nearly fulfilled most of our places now for our seats, so there’s many people wanting to stand as Conservatives, and no one’s shying away from that – why would we?

“We believe in what we believe in, and we go from there. As leader of the Conservative boot, I’m very optimistic in the teams we’ve got going forward. That optimism is shown by many candidates coming forward and by existing councillors.”

Cllr Skinner is confident of taking back overall control of East Devon.

“Absolutely, and I firmly believe that,” he said. “That’s not just a limp comment, I firmly believe that. We are tainted I’m afraid to say with what central government does, because people see that as a concern when you mention Conservatives on the doorstep; people immediately revert to central government.

“There are lots of people who know local cabinets, and who know that we do things for the area which we live in. We’re very passionate about delivering for East Devon.”

Other parties have been asked for their views about the forthcoming elections.

The Democratic Alliance said that it was “too soon” to make any predictions, while Labour said they did not want to speculate, but will be “fighting to win.”

Sunak’s cunning plan:

The laugh of the day is the following from our man who says he is PM.

Ben Jennings www.theguardian.com 

Rishi Sunak tells hospitals not to cancel operations despite pressure on NHS.

I assume he has obtained the number of elective operations that are needed each month.

Then that he has found out how long they take.

Then multiplied them together to get the total operation hours needed.

Then divided by the number of operation hours a team can carry out in a month, not forgetting that they have time off leave and sick leave just like other human beings.

That will give him the number of operating teams needed for elective surgery..

Next I presume he has compared the number needed with the number available, so he knows whether he is asking for the possible.

And next I assume he has costed the work to check it is within budget.

That is why people need to do maths. And it is one of the things those administrators in hospital have to be able to handle.

So Rishi wants everyone to learn maths and he wants hospital operating teams to move faster than the speed of light, something Einstein told us is impossible.

Hotels in the South West are being used to care for patients who are ready to be discharged from hospital as pressure on the NHS continues to grow.

ITV News www.itv.com

People who are medically fit enough to leave hospital but can’t get the social care they need in the community are being put up in the hotels to help free up beds.

Hospitals in Plymouth and Bristol are among those using hotels to relieve pressure, and the scheme is currently being discussed by health bosses in Cornwall.

It is understood the Leonardo Hotel in Plymouth City Centre, previously a Jury’s Inn, is among those being used to provide care.

NHS Devon has been using their care hotel since mid-October 2022 with 40 beds available across two self-contained floors.

A spokesperson for NHS Devon said: “Care hotels are just one of many positive measures health and care partners have put in place to reduce pressure on busy health services this winter.

“They are not used for hospital patients and are used to provide social care for people who are medically fit and do not require hospital care but do need additional living support after a stay in hospital or to prevent them from needing to be admitted.”

One anonymous user of the service praised the “camaraderie from everyone” at the site, adding: “You have all been so kind to me, nothing is too much trouble. Such pleasant memories.”

While another patient at the Devon care hotel added: “I feel very grateful the carers have been very caring and good to me.”

Meanwhile in Bristol 30 beds have been put aside at an unknown hotel in the city centre for patients leaving hospitals in the area.

The average length of stay at the site, which has been running since the end of last year and will continue until the end of March 2023, is expected to be around three weeks per patient.

A spokesperson for the Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire Integrated Care Board (ICB) said: “Local health and care services are under significant pressure and this temporary care facility delivered at a local hotel will help us to improve the ‘flow’ of patients through our hospitals by ensuring more people can be discharged as soon as they are medically fit to leave hospital.

“Nobody should have to stay in hospital longer than necessary and this facility will ensure more people can be discharged promptly.

“It will also improve the flow of patients through our hospitals while helping to address ambulance handover delays.”

The care facility is being provided by CQC-registered homecare company Abicare and is being delivered by live-in care workers on a 24/7 basis with visiting clinical teams providing rehabilitation and primary care support.

In Cornwall, discussions are underway about the use of the care facilities in the Duchy.

A spokesperson for the Royal Cornwall Hospitals Trust said: “Health and care system discussions to set up a facility – similar to a care hotel that was in operation last year – are currently underway, however details are yet to be confirmed.”

Extra council cash has been found to help those in East Devon struggling with the cost-of-living crisis, writes local democracy reporter, Rob Kershaw. eastdevonnews.co.uk

East Devon District Council (EDDC) has agreed to change the name of its Covid-19 Hardship Fund to the Cost-of-Living Hardship fund, with the money left over from the pandemic support scheme being used to help households in need.

It follows a meeting of the council in October 2022, during which Councillors asked officers to create “an additional discretionary energy support fund based on evidence from the poverty dashboard data.”

Currently, the district council has £257,000 left from the renamed scheme, and it intends to use it to provide “targeted” assistance to those struggling to make ends meet.

The fund is currently due to be rolled out on April 1,2023, after the end of the current Housing Support Fund (HSF) being delivered across Devon.

Under the HSF scheme, qualifying households in the county receive grants of up to £650 to help with bills, enabling them to avoid falling behind on their council tax.

This scheme, which in East Devon runs on a budget of a third of a million pounds, is being delivered through vouchers that must be collected before the end of March. Any money not used by then will be taken back.

However, if the HSF cash runs out before March 31, EDDC may start eating into the £257,000 pot, playing virtually the same role as HSF.

The difference is that additional groups in need of support can be helped by the cost-of-living fund, but they are yet to be identified.

As for energy bills, EDDC will soon roll-out an Additional Support Fund – a £400 payment for residents who live in park homes or on commercial premises, such as flats above shops.

The council also hopes to have an Additional Fuel Fund to help those whose homes are not heated by mains gas or electricity.

This will be targeted at households that did not receive the Government’s £400 discount on their energy bills in the second half of 2022.

However, it is not yet known whether either of these funds will cover the scores of residents of Cranbrook, many who were left without hot water and heating in December 2022 due to maintenance problems.

Controversial plans for a 100-acre quarry near Ottery St Mary have been given the go-ahead after planning refusal was overturned at appeal. 

Economic benefits outweigh any harm – the all too often verdict of an appeal and a deeply disappointing result. – Owl

Philippa Davies www.midweekherald.co.uk 

Devon County Council rejected the Straitgate Quarry application in December 2021. Their reasons included potential harm to ‘heritage assets’ such as Cadhay House, the health risks caused by potential dangers to the water supply, a lack of evidence of measures to conserve protected species and lack of a surface water management plan and subsequent potential flood risks. 

The quarrying company Aggregate Industries (AI) appealed against the refusal and both sides argued their case during a hearing in October which lasted several days. 

Today, Thursday December 5, the planning inspectors published their decision to allow the appeal. This gives the company planning permission to extract up to 1.5 million tonnes of raised sand and gravel over 10 to 12 years, and transport it to Hillhead Quarry near Uffculme for processing.

The appeal hearing examined all the areas of concern, but in each case the planning inspectors concluded that there were not sufficient grounds to block the scheme. They said AI had provided a ‘robust’ hydrogeological assessment and ‘it has been clearly demonstrated that the development would not be likely to result in unacceptable adverse effects on water supplies and human health’. 

With regard to heritage assets, they said ‘there would be no harm to Cadhay House or its garden, and that although there would be less than substantial harm to Straitgate Farmhouse during operations, that harm would be outweighed by public benefits’. 

Concerns had also been raised about potential road safety risks of HGVs using the B3174, but the planning inspectors said this could be managed by limiting the HGV movements. Responding to concerns about damage to the natural environment, they said ‘the proposal would not result in any unacceptable adverse effect in terms of its impact on trees and hedgerows’. 

The county councillor for the Otter Valley, Cllr Jess Bailey, said she is ‘horrified’ by the decision to overturn planning refusal. 

She said: “From my initial reading of the decision notice it certainly appears to me that the Inspectors have failed to recognize the very great harm and risks associated with this proposal and some of their conclusions appear flawed. I strongly disagree with their decision and as far as I am concerned the proposal remains completely unacceptable.” 

The Straitgate Action Group, which has been opposing the quarrying for more than 20 years, said it is ‘disappointed’ with the planning inspectors’ decision. A statement on the group’s website says: “We would like to thank all those who have have campaigned with us, and all those who have so generously supported us over the years – we are so sorry that the end result was not the one we had all hoped for.”