At the start of this summer, Richard Foord was happily working in the academic sector, having retired from the army, enjoying family life in Devon. 

A hundred days on, he has won an historic by-election which helped trigger the downfall of Boris Johnson and become the LibDem spokesperson for Defence as the war in Ukraine rages. He has seen the sad passing of Queen Elizabeth II and the proclamation of King Charles III. He has witnessed the government acquire a new leader, followed by an immediate economic crash triggered by the “fiscal event”. Arguably few new MPs have ever entered Parliament at such an historic time.

Richard will be talking about his first hundred days, in conversation with East Devon District Council Leader and historian, Paul Arnott.

 The event is to be held at Axminster’s Guildhall starting at 10.30am (doors opening 10.15am) on Saturday 22nd October 2022.

The event is non-political and open to the public. No charge, though contributions to cover hall hire welcome.

This old Etonian has been denigrating the: Office for Budget Responsibility; International Monetary Fund; Office for National Statistics and the Bank of England in only the way an old Etonian can. (All because they are not fawning over the other Etonian, Kwasi Kwarteng’s unfunded, unpublished “Growth Plan”). So much scrutiny is so tiresome. – Owl

Andrew Woodcock www.independent.co.uk

Downing Street has administered a slapdown to Jacob Rees-Mogg after the business secretary publicly denigrated the government’s official economic forecaster and suggested the chancellor might ignore its findings.

Mr Rees-Mogg’s broadside against the Office for Budget Responsibility was greeted with incredulity by economists, with one saying that its input was vital to the credibility of any statements made by chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng.

And today, Liz Truss’s official spokesperson said the prime minister had full confidence in the OBR’s ability to forecast accurately.

The spokesperson also said that the IMF – which came in for another tongue-lashing from Mr Rees-Mogg – played an “important role”, which was valued by Mr Kwarteng.

The business secretary’s highly unusual criticism of the independent budgeting watchdog came just days after the OBR delivered its initial assessment of the impact of the chancellor’s 23 September mini-Budget to the Treasury.

His comments sparked speculation that the findings are damning and that an effort is underway to undermine faith in them before the eventual release of their final verdict on 31 October.

Speaking on ITV’s Peston on Wednesday, Mr Rees-Mogg said that the OBR’s “record of forecasting accurately hasn’t been enormously good”.

He added: “The job of chancellors is to make decisions in the round rather than to assume that there is any individual forecaster who will hit the nail on the head…

“There are other sources of information. The OBR is not the only organisation that is able to give forecasts.”

But asked on Thursday whether Ms Truss has confidence in the OBR’s ability to deliver accurate forecasts, the PM’s official spokesman replied: “Yes.”

The spokesperson said: “The OBR is the Government’s official forecaster and the prime minister has said on a number of occasions that she values their scrutiny and respects their independence. They are a highly-regarded body worldwide.”

Asked which alternative forecasts are available, the official said: “It is true to say that other forecasts are made and it’s important to consider all available evidence and views when making these sorts of important decisions, but the OBR remains the government’s official forecaster.”

Pressed on whether it was helpful for Mr Rees-Mogg to disparage the OBR, he said: “The OBR are very transparent and recognise those are the challenges when you are making forecasts themselves. But, nonetheless, their work is highly respected worldwide.”

Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies thinktank, said that it was clear that economists could never be entirely accurate in their predictions about the future.

But he said that, contrary to Mr Rees-Mogg’s implication, the OBR had previously had a record of painting an overly rosy picture of the economy, rather than being excessively gloomy.

“The OBR has historically been over-optimistic consistently on the economy,” said Mr Johnson. “The economy has actually done worse than the OBR has suggested”.

He added: “Of course they matter. It’s really important for credibility, which has become so important over the last few weeks, that we have these official forecasts and the chancellor responds to that by saying: ‘This is how I see my fiscal policy’.”

Earlier in the day on Thursday, Mr Rees-Mogg said that figures from the Office of National Statistics could not be relied upon and suggested that the Bank of England might be to blame for the market panic which followed the chancellor’s mini-Budget.

His views were given short shrift by economic experts.

Nigel Peaple, director of policy and advocacy at the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association, said the market turmoil was “caused mainly by the mini-budget (and) uncertainty about the government’s plans”.

Deutsche Bank’s chief UK economist Sanjay Raja said the mini-Budget was the “straw that broke the camel’s back”.

And Financial Times US editor-at-large Gillian Tett, responded to Mr Rees-Mogg’s remarks by telling Channel 4 News: “To use a non-technical term, that’s pretty much bollocks.”

Resolution Foundation chief executive Torsten Bell said: “If you spend the summer telling people you are intending to abandon fiscal orthodoxy, if you then announce a package that dumps fiscal orthodoxy, then if you say on Sunday you are going to keep doing it, then I don’t think it should be a surprise to any of us that this is where you end up.”

to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.

From now on we can expect Simon to become an even more loyal supporter of this shameful government. Especially with its selective policies on levelling up and growth:

emphasising growth through investment zone tax breaks rather than long-term investment in the infrastructure we are all crying out for;

deregulation across the board to encourage “build,build, build” housing development at all costs [loose talk from Kwarteng having spooked the bond markets, causing interest rates to rocket and kicking the housing market over a cliff];

local government chronically starved of cash, with Devon County on the brink of bankruptcy.

Despite this “eyes and ears” appointment being unpaid, Simon has de facto accepted Truss’ shilling and joined the sinking ship.

Not a good time, nor a good cause, to start climbing the greasy pole.

From Simon Jupp MP’s web page:

I have been appointed a Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. It’s an unpaid, non-ministerial role. With a new PM, there’s a lot to cover – including levelling up, national planning policy, overseeing local government, and introducing more devolution with deals being discussed in Devon and Cornwall. As your MP, East Devon will of course come first.

Boris Johnson faces questions about whether $150,000 speech broke rules

Boris Johnson is facing questions over whether he followed rules on paid employment after leaving No 10 after receiving $150,000 (£135,000) for a speech to a group of US insurance brokers.

Rowena Mason  www.theguardian.com

The former prime minister gave a speech to the Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers in Colorado Springs this week, only just over a month after leaving Downing Street.

Johnson did not seek approval from the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) before giving the speech. Sources close to the former prime minister suggested there was no need because it was a one-off.

Former ministers need to apply for permission to take up outside employment only if they have signed an ongoing contract with a business, such as a speakers’ agency. Cabinet ministers are also expected to wait three months before taking up employment.

Johnson was recently added as an available speaker to the website of an agency called the Premium Speakers Agency but his profile disappeared and those close to him claim he was mistakenly listed.

Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, challenged Johnson to prove that he has stuck to the rules.

“Boris Johnson might claim that this was just a one-off but the rules state that ex-ministers … joining agency circuits or scribing newspaper columns must submit an application before accepting them.

“The disgraced former prime minister and now part-time MP once again has questions to answer about whether he has followed the rules he was once responsible for.

“The anti-corruption watchdog was already toothless, but under the Tories, it’s been muzzled and neutered, leaving an open door to former ministers who want to line their pockets as soon as they leave office. Labour will clean up politics by ensuring proper and enforceable sanctions for rule breaking and banning former ministers from lobbying government for at least five years after they leave office.”

The Times reported on Wednesday that Johnson’s Colorado speech was greeted with a standing ovation. He made jokes about it having been expensive for him to have been born in the US – he renounced his US citizenship in 2016 but prior to that had faced hefty tax demands – and gave his assessment of the situation in Ukraine.

His appearance involved a 30-minute speech and a 45-minute “fireside chat” but no questions from the audience.

Johnson also set up his own office this week, likely to be the vehicle for accepting earnings, registering The Office of Boris Johnson Ltd with Companies House.

Johnson previously broke Acoba rules when he failed to declare a column from the Daily Telegraph after leaving office as foreign secretary.

However, there are no formal sanctions for a breach of the rules, leading to accusations that Acoba is a toothless watchdog.

John Penrose, Johnson’s former anti-corruption tsar, has suggested ministers should have to sign legal deeds agreeing to abide by Acoba’s rules before taking office.

He told the Guardian earlier this year: “Acoba isn’t fully legally binding at the moment, and it ought to be. So what [the Boardman review] has suggested is that civil service contracts should make Acoba’s decisions binding and, because ministers aren’t technically employees, the equivalent for them is that they sign a legal deed that says: ‘I will be bound by the decisions of Acoba.’ It’s a nice, simple way of giving Acoba the teeth and claws it needs.”

The mystery of who killed the economy?

The most striking line from Liz Truss in Prime Minister’s Questions was when she said there wouldn’t be any government spending cuts.

Chris Mason Political editor BBC

But how is that going to work if the government is also intent on not junking any more of its budget plans announced a few weeks ago?

I’ve just spent 20 minutes in what we call a “huddle” here in Parliament, where political reporters fire questions at the prime minister’s official spokesman.

There are two explanations, both of which do point to shrinking budgets.

The first is that the colossal injection of public money being spent helping families and businesses with energy bills is included, so there isn’t a cut overall but government departments still face cuts to their budgets.

The second, more likely explanation, is that the numbers in the spreadsheets won’t fall, but won’t rise as fast as inflation.

That allows the prime minister to answer the question in the way she did, but government departments will face budgets that mean the money they have doesn’t go as far as it did.

Her official spokesman wouldn’t be drawn on whether this was a plausible explanation, but didn’t deny it.

When I was a small boy at school, Andrew Bailey was a prefect and, then as now, a distant figure of authority. We called this stout disciplinarian “Bastard Bailey” because he showed little mercy towards any pupil he discovered enjoying an illicit Rothmans behind the science labs. Entreaties for clemency based on fictional bereavements or medical conditions were routinely ignored. Names were obtained, noted and passed on for appropriate action.

Sean O’Grady www.independent.co.uk

Seems he hasn’t changed that much. The distressed pension funds begging him to buy their devalued British government bonds have been met with that same stony resistance. He’s right, in the sense that propping up pension funds in trouble isn’t the role of the Bank of England. It’s not their fault that they’re in trouble – that’s because the panic-inducing effects of the mini-Budget are still being felt throughout the financial system and the economy.

Maintaining financial stability is the task of the Bank, which is why the Bank ended up buying the funds’s gilts, but it couldn’t do so endlessly or across the entire £1 trillion industry. It seems Bailey concluded that there’d be no “contagion” from his move. It’s up to the government and the pension fund trustees and regulators to order any rescues, and the Bank will no doubt advise on making them work.

In effect, like it did with the failed banks in the financial crisis of 2008, Britain may need to effectively nationalise some of these final salary funds, if the deficits become that large. If that happens, then final salary scheme pensioners will have some or all of their income guaranteed by the UK taxpayer, which some might find odd.

More to the point, the resulting debt taken on by the government will add to the national debt, along with the massive liabilities racked up over a couple of world wars, the global financial crisis, the Covid furloughs and Brexit.

There are hints that Bastard Bailey may, unusually, relent and carry on propping up these pension funds, but the dilemmas remain. It’s not financially sustainable for the Bank; and it’s not easily consistent (if at scale) with selling gilts to push interest rates higher to push inflation down.

It feels like the financial system is continuing to come under stress because investors do not trust the government to manage the economy and public finances responsibly. The solvency of pension funds and banks are intimately linked to UK plc, because these institutions rely on gilts as a “safe” asset – and now they’re not. That’s a systemic problem. A very big one.

Though as yet undeclared, the United Kingdom seems to be tumbling into a full-blown sovereign debt crisis. That is, of course, simply financial jargon for a country at risk of being insolvent – unable to honour its debts as they become due. Investors seem less and less willing to fund the activities of the British government, and less and less inclined to allow the nation, in colloquial terms, to roll over its overdraft or max out the credit card again. It could scarcely be more serious.

The Bank can try and keep liquidity up and interest rates down to save the pension funds; or it can restrain inflation by pushing interest rates up – but it hasn’t the means to do both. Britain may need a loan if the markets close to it. That is what the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is for – to restore order and confidence, as well as lend money.

It is astonishing. All investors want to know, in return for lending His Majesty’s government thousands of millions of pounds, is how sure they can be that they’ll get their interest paid and their money back. It is not too much to ask. They are not much interested in fairy tales about “unleashing potential” and Brexit opportunities.

At the moment, America seems the safest haven, and Britain the least safe among the major economies. It is not a good place to be. If things spiral downwards, because Liz Truss cannot get either tax increases or spending cuts, or both, through parliament, then the IMF will be needed to rescue the British from their own incompetence. There may be another change of prime minister, of chancellor, or a general election and a new government. In any case, we cannot go on as we are, because the money has run out. So much for “taking back control”. Trust is at a discount.

The storm that began on 23 September was and is a direct result of Kwasi Kwarteng’s disastrous mini-Budget. Mini-Budget; maxi trouble. Despite attempts to row back, the storm has blown up again. Having dismissed the permanent secrecy to the Treasury, Sir Tom Scholar, presumably because Sir Tom had the temerity to point out the flaws in the chancellor’s approach, Kwarteng has now appointed another civil service lifer, James Blower, to try and restore confidence. It has been to little avail.

Nor has his decision to bring his next mini-Budget forward to 31 October, and, at last, the appropriate forecasting from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). And of course he has U-turned on the abolition of the 45 per cent additional rate of income tax. It settled things for a while, but it will take much more to get investors to invest in Britain. Ironically, that was the whole purpose of the mini-Budget as the driving force in Truss’s ill-fated dash for growth.

The UK has spent decades trying to improve its credibility as a destination for international investors. Part of that was building up a strong institutional framework whereby monetary and fiscal policy would be scrutinised and made transparent – an operationally independent Bank of England accountable to parliament on its performance; a strong independent Treasury with the ability to reevaluate politically motivated or vanity projects; the OBR; and a range of ratings agencies, think tanks and parliamentary committees able to raise legitimate questions and keep ministers “honest”. Successive chancellors worked within this system, aside from a brief hiatus when Rishi Sunak was supposed to turn the Treasury into an arm of No 10.

However, during the Tory leadership campaign, Truss, as candidate, and Kwarteng, as her campaign aide, and then again as prime minister and chancellor, systematically trashed this structure. They derided the “abacus” mentality of the Treasury and its “orthodoxy” and briefed how they’d love to break it up.

Kwarteng carelessly rubbished the Bank’s record, bullied its governor, Andrew Bailey, while Truss openly discussed changing its remit to make it more pro-growth (and thus weaker on inflation). The OBR was sidelined in the mini-Budget process. The civil service was ignored. All of these institutions were called a “blob”, and Truss implied they were part of some “anti-growth coalition”. It’s absurd, and the stuff of conspiracy theories. How did the Tory party end up here?

Such is their delusion that Truss and Kwarteng blithely assumed that the markets would take the vague “plan for growth” at face value, and that trend growth would soon be restored to 2.5 per cent per year. Investors were confidently thought to be willing to believe that the biggest tax cuts in half a century would pay for themselves before long. They didn’t, which was bad enough, but now Truss and Kwarteng are believed to be so untrustworthy, there is an additional risk premium being applied to Britain, due to it being led by such unimpressive figures.

Britain is not a basket case, even if its present incipient sovereign debt crisis bears an uncomfortable resemblance to the problems that Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain suffered during the various euro crises around a decade ago. When the Callaghan government turned to the IMF for help in 1976, it did Britain some good, and the loan wasn’t needed until a year later. But, as in those cases, some outside intervention was needed to restore confidence.

An IMF team sitting in the Treasury and taming Kwarteng’s tendency to arrogance and restoring investor confidence would at least start the process of recovery. Our pension funds and banks will be all the safer if the present government is replaced by an IMF committee. So much for taking back control.

Childhood days on the beach or messing around in rivers can have significant lasting benefits for our wellbeing in adulthood, according to a study.

South West Water permitting – owl

www.theguardian.com

It found that exposure to blue spaces – such as coasts, rivers and lakes – as a child made revisiting blue spaces in adulthood more likely, as these adults showed greater familiarity with and placed greater value in natural settings.

More than 15,000 participants in 18 different countries were surveyed for the study, published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology by researchers at the University of Exeter.

“Learning to swim and appreciate the dangers in terms of rip currents, cold temperatures etc is of course primary,” says Mathew White, a senior scientist at the University of Vienna and co-author of the study, “but the message we are trying to get across is that to only teach children about the dangers of water settings may make them overly afraid of, and ill-equipped to benefit from, places that can also be hugely beneficial to their health and wellbeing as they grow up.

“The vast majority of blue space visits both for adults and children do not involve getting wet – so there are also many advantages from spending time near water, not just in it.”

There has been a growing body of research over the last decade about the specific beneficial effects of blue space on mental health.

A review published in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health in 2011 suggested visits to blue space could increase people’s physical activity levels and lower stress and anxiety, while boosting their mood and psychological wellbeing.

Another review published by the Environmental Agency in 2020, found that blue spaces were associated with improvement of mood and feelings of restoration to a greater degree than green spaces.

The study’s lead author, Valeria Vitale, a PhD candidate at Sapienza University of Rome, said via email: “We recognise that both green and blue spaces have a positive impact on people’s mental and physical health. Also, prior studies examining childhood nature exposure and adulthood outcomes have largely focused on green space, or natural spaces in general. However, as we highlighted in our paper blue spaces have unique sensory qualities (light reflections, wave motion, sounds, etc) and facilitate a distinct range of leisure activities (swimming, fishing, water sports).”

She added: “We believe our findings are particularly relevant to practitioners and policymakers because of the nationally representative nature of the samples. First, our findings reinforce the need to protect and invest in natural spaces in order to optimise the potential benefits to subjective wellbeing. Second, our research suggests that policies and initiatives encouraging greater contact with blue spaces during childhood may support better mental health in later life.”

Further evidence has been heard this week in the planning inquiry into the proposed 100-acre quarry at Straitgate Farm near Ottery St Mary. The applicant, Aggregate Industries, is appealing against Devon County Council’s refusal of their planning application last December. 

Philippa Davies www.sidmouthherald.co.uk 

Last week the inquiry began with local councillors outlining their objections. The county councillor for the Otter Valley, Cllr Jess Bailey, Ottery town councillor Roger Giles and West Hill parish councillor Amanda Townsend addressed the hearing. Their concerns included flood risk caused by the quarrying, potential risk to the quality of water supplies, and the potential traffic danger on the B3174 if the quarry went ahead, caused by more heavy lorries using the busy road. 

The inquiry then heard a large amount of technical evidence on the impact of the proposed quarry on water quality, water flow and flood risk. Hydrogeology experts appointed by all three parties – Devon County Council, Straitgate Action Group and Aggregate Industries – were cross-examined by the respective parties’ barristers. 

On the fifth day of the inquiry there were discussions on the impact of the proposed quarry on protected species living on the site, in particular bats and dormice, and mature trees. 

The inquiry heard evidence from Devon County Council’s tree consultant Michael Steed and its ecologist Miss Christine Mason. Aggregate Industries’ consultant was Stuart Wilson of SLR Consulting. 

Cllr Bailey said: “Although I had previously robustly objected to the proposed quarry focusing on road safety and trees, I took the opportunity to ask a question of Aggregate Industries’ consultant about two particular trees. I am most concerned about the plight of the magnificent oak trees at the entrance to the proposed quarry on Birdcage Lane and I sought clarification on their future.  In response to my question Aggregate Industries insisted that the root protection areas could be preserved in order that the trees can be retained.” 

Speaking afterwards, Cllr Jess Bailey said she was ‘not at all convinced’ by this evidence. 

She said: “I completely agree with Mr Steed for the county council who suggested that there is no justification for felling any 200-year-old oak trees, let alone two, and that the scheme should be refused on this basis or consideration should be given to alternative access”. 

The hearing is expected to finish on Friday, October 14, with the result announced at a later stage.

The prime minister has been forced to delay the start of her “Operation Rolling Thunder” blitz of pro-growth reforms after failing to agree a deregulation plan with Jacob Rees-Mogg, her business secretary.

According to the Times

Planning reforms have also been pushed back until next month, in a sign of disarray in agreeing the policies that Liz Truss insists will show how growth can square the circle of lower taxes and better public services……

[…..The programme of reform announcements had been nicknamed “Operation Rolling Thunder” by some officials in a reference to the US bombardment of Vietnam, although the name is not now in use after the market turmoil provoked by last month’s mini-budget.

It is now referred to as “Operation Shitstorm” by many, with the government so far struggling to nail down specific policies. ….]

And don’t mention the “this not a budget” next fiscal event – Owl

A correspondent writes:

Simon Clarke, the levelling up secretary, not only threatens to water down environmental protections but equally threatens to water down affordable home requirements across England.

In his plans, Clarke is pushing for developers in England to be given “greater flexibility on affordable housing requirements”.

East Devon is facing an affordable housing crisis. A report by Devon Home Choice in March 2021, says more than 2,618 households in the district were registered as in need of social housing in East Devon.

We have seen more and more house building in East Devon. The reason sold to us was that the country needed “social housing” and housing developments would provide them.

Has all this house building reduced the numbers needed?

How many of Exmouth’s needs for 607 affordable homes have been provided?

Do the developers in Exmouth need to be given “greater flexibility on affordable housing requirements”. 

3West Developments Ltd, a Woodbury-based developer of Goodmores Farm managed, with the present policies in place, to reduce the numbers. In a green wedge, extant Local Plan Policy required 49% of the proposed development to be affordable dwellings, amounting to 88 . What is being built? Just 5 % or 16 houses now agreed due to the developer pleading non-viability. This is a development of 298 houses.

“Greater flexibility” could result in numbers counted on one hand.

Who benefits from this?

A new partnership to help nature’s recovery and improve sustainable stewardship has been formed by Natural England and the University of Exeter.

www.bbc.co.uk

Image source, Paul Glendell / Natural England

The partnership said its activities, initially over three years, would focus on understanding environmental change.

It was hoped the work would restore landscapes and improve them for people and wildlife, it added.

The organisations had already worked on more than 60 joint research projects over the last 10 years, they said.

Professor Lisa Roberts, vice chancellor of the University of Exeter, said it was “the critical decade in which we must tackle the environment and climate emergency”.

She added: “The University of Exeter has brought together more than 1,400 researchers working on the environment and climate, and, through this partnership, we will use our research power to protect nature and landscapes.”

Dr Tim Hill, Natural England’s chief scientist, said the project was already “building on years of close working on a wide range of projects” with the university.

He said working with the university would significantly further aims of “moving from being an evidence-based organisation to being an evidence-led organisation”.

Government plans to slash requirements on developers to build affordable homes amount to a betrayal of more than a million families on housing waiting lists and will be “devastating” to rural communities where young people already struggle to find places to live, campaigners have warned.

Andrew Woodcock www.independent.co.uk 

The CPRE countryside charity said that the proposals being considered by housing secretary Simon Clarke would “turbocharge the conversion of the countryside into a millionaires’ playground of second homes and weekend retreats”.

Meanwhile, environmentalists voiced dismay at suggestions that an effective moratorium on developments near fragile wetlands could be lifted.

A letter leaked to The Times revealed that Mr Clarke is proposing to increase from 10 houses to 40 or 50 the maximum size of a developments which can be built without any requirement on builders to include affordable homes.

Housing charity Shelter said the move would cut the number of affordable homes delivered under the rule by 20 per cent – or more than 560 properties a year.

The cut would come at a time when 1.2m households are on waiting lists for social housing in England and just 6,051 affordable properties were constructed last year.

The charity’s director of campaigns Osama Bhutta said prime minister Liz Truss had no right to “betray over a million households stuck on social housing waiting lists by slashing the already tiny number of social homes that get built”.

“The government should be doing all it can to build the stable, genuinely affordable homes this country needs, but it’s doing the opposite,” said Mr Bhutta. “The government must change its mind, it can do it now or do it after grasping the anger of millions of people.”

And CPRE CEO Tom Fyans warned: “Housing sites in rural areas are typically small, which means the supply of affordable and social homes could be choked off altogether.

“It would consign thousands of key workers and young families to the margins of society, turbocharging the conversion of the countryside into a millionaires’ playground of second homes and weekend retreats.”

Reducing the number of new affordable homes will be “self-defeating” because it will result in fewer new builds overall and reduce the contribution of house-building to growth, said Mr Fyans.

“The government seems intent on repeating failed housing policies and laying the blame on the planning system and environmental protections,” he said. “The reality is that our rural communities are crying out for more – not less – homes for social rent and genuinely affordable prices to prevent destitution and homelessness.”

Mr Clarke’s Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities(DLUHC) declined to comment on his plans. A government spokesperson said only: “The government is committed to exploring policies that build the homes people need, deliver new jobs, support economic development and boost local economies.”

But Ms Truss’s official spokesperson confirmed that changes to the affordable housing threshold were under consideration.

“We want to keep it under review to make sure we’re delivering the new homes we need, while not discouraging the development of homes on small sites and by small builders,” he said.

Shadow housing secretary Lisa Nandy responded: “The Tories crashed the economy. It led to soaring mortgage rates, rents, energy bills and food prices. Their answer now is less affordable housing. It beggars belief.

“Labour has set out plans to support people onto the housing ladder, including giving first-time buyers first dibs on new developments, as well as building a new generation of affordable and council houses and giving tenants greater security with a new Renters’ Charter.”

And Alicia Kennedy, the director of pressure group Generation Rent, said that the 1.2m households on waiting lists included 100,000 children living in temporary accommodation.

“By letting developers only build homes for the market, the people most in need of a decent, stable home will keep waiting in miserable conditions,” said Ms Kennedy. “The government needs to explain how it is going to deliver enough homes to fix homelessness and bring down rents.”

The PM’s spokesperson also confirmed that ministers are considering the relaxation of rules restricting development in designated parts of Norfolk, Hampshire, Devon and the northeast to protect the health of wetlands.

Currently, new developments are barred in designated areas if they are likely to increase levels of the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus in the water, which can cause excess algae growth and reduced food supplies for protected species.

Environmental groups are concerned over the potential damage to natural sites and wildlife if the controls are lifted.

Paul de Zylva of Friends of the Earth said: “Ending this moratorium would be a significant blow to our natural world.

“On the one hand the government claims it wants to stop sewage harming our rivers and freshwaters, yet on the other, it appears to be planning to allow new housing developments that could pollute our wetlands.

“We should be planning to build a greener, better future with high quality homes fit for the challenges of the 21st century – we won’t get there with poorly regulated housing developments.”

Ms Truss’s spokesperson said: “The prime minister has talked about some of her concerns about nutrient restrictions leading to an effective moratorium on new housing in some parts of the country, so that is something we want to look at.

“Obviously a strong environment and a strong economy go hand-in-hand and we have legally-binding targets as part of the Environment Act, which we adhere to.”

Who said that?

Liz Truss in 2018 as chief secretary to the Treasury, speaking at the LSE.

Is there any constancy in her ideas and beliefs?

The Mirror has the embarrassing footage here

The International Monetary Fund has added to pressure on Liz Truss’ government to U-turn on unfunded tax cuts announced in last month’s mini-budget, saying changes in policy would help calm jittery financial markets.

Larry Elliott www.theguardian.com 

On a day when fresh action by the UK central bank failed to halt the upward move in government borrowing costs, the Washington-based IMF said a shift in policy from Truss and her chancellor would “change the trajectory” of interest rates.

The IMF said the Bank and the Treasury were “like two people trying to steer a car in different directions” as it highlighted the turbulence in markets caused by the chancellor’s 23 September package. “That’s not going to work very well,” said the Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, the IMF’s economic counsellor.

The comments came after fresh action by Threadneedle Street to prevent a “fire sale” of UK government bonds – or gilts – by pension funds caught out by the sharp increase in interest rates in the past two and a half weeks.

Citing a “material risk” to financial stability, the central bank launched the second expansion for its emergency scheme in as many days with a promise to buy index-linked gilts – securities where the interest rate moves up and down with inflation.

In the final week of the scheme, which is due to expire on Friday, it stepped up its efforts to smooth febrile market conditions by buying more than £3.3bn of UK government debt in its single biggest daily market intervention.

Despite efforts in Westminster and the City to smooth over turmoil in the markets unleashed by the mini-budget, leading finance industry figures said the Bank could be forced to extend its emergency scheme beyond this week to prevent a “doom loop” from re-emerging in the bond market.

Speaking at an event in Washington on Tuesday, the Bank’s governor, Andrew Bailey, said Threadneedle Street had no plans to continue with bond buying after the end of this week, adding that his message to the pension industry was: “You’ve got three days left now and you’ve got to sort it out.”

Borrowing costs on long-term government debt rose on Tuesday despite the Bank’s interventions, remaining at levels close to the peak seen in the market turmoil after the mini-budget.

Pensions industry bosses said an extension until the chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng delivered his debt-cutting plans to the Commons on 31 October could be required. Sir John Gieve, a former Bank deputy governor for financial stability, said it was likely to extend the scheme for at least a couple of weeks, while warning that turbulence was directly linked to the chancellor’s unfunded tax cuts.

“He’s actually got to now produce a set of projections which add up,” he said.

The IMF has welcomed Kwarteng’s decision to scrap plans to abolish the 45% income tax rate paid by those earning more than £150,000 and will make a fresh assessment of the UK after Kwarteng’s fiscal statement.

But concerns over the UK and the possible knock-on effects from the turmoil to other countries were voiced at press conferences to launch two flagship IMF publications – the world economic outlook and the global financial stability review.

Gourinchas, responsible for the WEO, said fiscal policy – the tax and spending decisions made by the Treasury – should be aligned with actions taken by the Bank to bring inflation down from a near 40-year high.

The IMF had pencilled in a sharp slowdown in UK growth from 3.6% this year to 0.3% in 2023 before the mini-budget. Growth would be raised “somewhat” but at the expense of making the fight against inflation more complicated.

Tobias Adrian, the IMF’s financial counsellor, said some of the market reaction since 23 September had been “disorderly”, adding that a different fiscal policy would take pressure off the Bank.

“A change in fiscal policy would change the trajectory of interest rates going forward,” Adrian said.

“The change in fiscal policy changed the expectations of monetary policy and meant the Bank of England would have to raise interest rates that much more to bring inflation back to its mandated target.”

Asked whether the only way to solve the UK’s financial markets problems was to reverse the mini-budget, Adrian said: “A shift in fiscal policy would certainly change the trajectory in yields”.

Kwarteng announced £45bn of tax cuts plus energy price curbs for consumers and businesses in his mini-budget, and is working on new proposals designed to reassure markets that the government finances are sound.

Although the chancellor U-turned on plans to abolish the 45p rate of income tax on higher earners, he moved ahead on Tuesday with a cut in taxes on dividends worth £600m for wealthy investors.

Struggling households will however be forced to wait until the end of October to find out whether the government will give the green light to a rise in welfare payments in line with inflation, or whether they will be subject to a real-terms cut amid the cost of living crisis.

Kwarteng stressed to the Commons that “no decisions have been made”. However, the wait for clarity was criticised by Save the Children, which said it was unfair pensioners had been assured their income would rise at least with inflation while parents and carers of children in poverty faced an agonising delay.

Sacked minister in line for a knighthood is the one who walked in on Boris and Carrie in a ‘compromising situation’

Jack Peat www.thelondoneconomic.com 

The sacked ex-minister who is on track for a knighthood has also been revealed to be the person who walked in on Boris Johnson and Carrie in a “compromising situation”, it has been revealed.

Conor Burns was sacked and had the Tory whip suspended pending an investigation into “allegations of inappropriate behaviour” at the party conference in Birmingham.

According to BBC reports, an eyewitness saw Burns touching a young man’s thigh at a hotel bar, prompting complaints.

It has since emerged that he is in line for a knighthood in Mr Johnson’s resignation honours list.

And there could be a good reason why.

In July, the Independent revealed that Burns was the one who walked in on Boris Johnson and then-girlfriend Carrie Symonds in an allegedly ‘compromising situation’ when he was Northern Ireland minister.

Downing Street said that Burns “flagged up” the couple’s relationship to Foreign Office officials after finding them “having a glass of wine together” alone in Johnson’s Commons office as foreign secretary in 2018.

Burns, one of Johnson’s most loyal supporters, had a “sixth sense” that their relationship was “one to watch”, said a senior No 10 source.

On discovering Johnson’s relationship with Carrie as a result of Mr Burns walking in on them, Ben Gascoigne and other members of Johnson’s Foreign Office team threatened to resign if he went ahead with a plan to appoint her as his £100,000-a-year Foreign Office chief of staff.

The Independent was also told by other sources that Johnson’s team discussed the possible risk to him of blackmail – or kompromat – as foreign secretary if any of Britain’s enemies learned he was having an affair.

In the event, they decided not to confront him over his relationship with Ms Symonds but successfully blocked his attempt to make her his chief of staff without informing him that it was linked to their belief, based on what Mr Burns had seen, that they were in a relationship.

At a full meeting of the council on Thursday [6 October], a motion by Liberal Democrat councillor Martin Wrigley (Dawlish) called for the “antiquated” site to be “re-modelled” into rental homes with some reserved for NHS and social care staff.…

….But Councillor Paul Crabb (Conservative, Ilfracombe) questioned “the assumption that we should just convert whatever bit of real estate we can find, we can wonder around, close offices [and] see if we can wang some flats in there.” (Doesn’t sound as if Cllr Crabb is “on message” with Liz Truss’ growth agenda – Owl)

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

County hall in Exeter is unlikely to be built on for the forseeable future, despite a call to use some of the site for key worker housing.

Located off Topsham Road in Exeter, one of the key routes into the city centre, the Grade II* listed building sits on 22 acres of land and has been the county council’s headquarters since the 1960s.

It cost £2.37 million to maintain last year, a figure expected to fall £600,000 this year, and with Devon in a housing crisis and many council staff no longer working from the office full-time, some councillors believe parts of the site could be put to better use.

At a full meeting of the council on Thursday [6 October], a motion by Liberal Democrat councillor Martin Wrigley (Dawlish) called for the “antiquated” site to be “re-modelled” into rental homes with some reserved for NHS and social care staff.

“Converting the existing office blocks and building new homes on the enormous supply of parking space would provide a highly desirable and green residential location with good connection to the RD&E hospital site and the city centre,” his motion stated.

“The hundreds of rented flats delivered would not only provide homes for local families, but also a long-term rental income for the council that should exceed the cost of out-of-town office space.”

However, the Conservative-controlled council rejected it, along with a subsequent watered-down amendment from Cllr Wrigley which included asking the council to “consider other uses for excess spaces such as parts of county hall for full or partial conversion to revenue generating rented, residential accommodation for key workers and others.”

Tory councillors instead voted to confirm that “in the short to medium term (three-to-five years) the council does not have plans to dispose of county hall.”

Their successful amendment also backed a review of the use of council assets as part of its financial sustainability programme to “identify opportunities for the provision of (in particular) DCC key worker accommodation.”

Debating the issue, Cllr Wrigley clarified he was not calling for the council to build on the vast amount of green space on the site, rather to convert existing buildings and turning car parks into purpose-built flats for rental.

“We do have what really to the outside world here looks like a gentleman’s club, with oak panels, with big sofas, with lots of space, with a cricket field, with a [skittles] alley I discovered in the back of the Coaver Club [a social club and gym for council staff].

He added: “Be bold. Take the decision. Go for change. Repurpose these assets. Provide something good for the community – some rented, socially rented homes for key workers in the city, where it’s sustainable, where it’s useful.

“It will reduce some of the traffic on the main road because we won’t have so many people working here if we move them to purpose-built offices where we already have them.”

Fellow Lib Dem councillor Alan Connett (Exminster & Haldon) mentioned other listed sites that have been converted, including the city’s former Exe Vale Hospital, and added: “I don’t think anyone is proposing that we sell county hall, we close it down, that we should go somewhere else.

“I think what we’re saying is, in the changed world of covid where more people are working from home and rightly so, where fewer people need to travel in here, maybe there’s an opportunity to do the right thing.

“The right thing might be to say, can we have residential use? Can we bring in an income which supports the capital, which indeed the leader of the council says he’s been so successful at at just £13 million. Think, there could be more coming in to help with the capital work.”

Labour councillor Rob Hannaford (Exwick & St Thomas) agreed that “some of the site could possibly and should be used” for key worker housing, especially around the Matford Lane area, but added: “I wouldn’t be supportive of turning all of county hall into that.

“I think we’ve done a lot of restructuring here. I think the post-covid work trends are still not set. I think people will start coming back. A lot of space has been moved around.”

He also said the site is “absolutely alive” in the evenings: “There’s young people playing here, sport is going on and it’s a real hub of community activity.”

But Councillor Paul Crabb (Conservative, Ilfracombe) questioned “the assumption that we should just convert whatever bit of real estate we can find, we can wonder around, close offices [and] see if we can wang some flats in there.”

“The most efficient way to run the council I suspect is to stack a load of portacabins up outside, but what sort of message does that send?”

He added: “You’ve got local councils, local plans. You can develop affordable homes at the drop of a hat if you’ve got the will to do so and you’ve got the planning officers prepared to put it in.”

Council leader John Hart (Conservative, Bickleigh & Wembury) said the site is also used by the NHS and the coroner’s office and said: “This place is pretty well used.

“We don’t know what’s going to happen at the end of the day as far as covid is concerned, but certainly if the last four weeks is anything to go back, there’s been a substantial increase in the number of people using these offices.”

He also said the Exe Vale Hospital was vacant before it was converted and rejected Cllr Wrigley’s “gentleman’s club” claim: “It’s actually a working hub and I think our staff are being insulted when you say it’s an old man’s club.”

Another part of Cllr Wrigley’s motion to “withdraw the sites at Manor Farm, Markham’s Farm and other county farms from local plan allocations for housing and preserve farm viability” was also rejected.

The council instead backed the Conservative amendment to “support the inclusion of strategic DCC farm land in relevant local plan allocations (including land at Markham’s and Manor Farm) as part of the council’s work to support housing provision across the county.”

It would also ensure that “farm holdings remain viable and where possible land is replenished (subject to financial resources being available) to maintain the farms estate at [around 10,000] acres.”

Devon County Council’s leader has pleaded for more money from his own party’s government and warned it against further cuts to “badly strapped” local authorities.

(Psst John, Kwarsi’s blown it all on tax give-aways, aided and abetted by Liz. Best thing you can do for the County is to stop voting Conservative like a lemming. – Owl)

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

Conservative councillor John Hart, who has been in charge at county hall since 2009, discussed the recent mini-budget and his hopes for the upcoming autumn statement at a full council meeting on Thursday [6 October].

It comes as the council battles to balance the books, with high inflation and increasing demand for children’s and adult services pushing up costs.

Despite Devon already finding millions of pounds of savings and extra income through a ‘financial sustainability programme,’ its budget overspend could be as much as £27 million this financial year, according to an update last month.

“We in local government are being so badly strapped at the present moment that we’re struggling to survive, let alone expand our services,” Cllr Hart said last week.

“When I heard a minister saying in the last few days that ‘local government has got to take some more pain because it still has fat on it,’ my comment was, ‘I’ve got bone left and we’ve already been chipping into some of that over the last year or two.’

“We need more money in local government,” Cllr Hart declared. “And it’s not just me saying this on behalf of Devon, it’s nationally. Every local authority has already been going public on the fact that we could do with better support from government in an autumn statement – promises of cash.

“Frankly, the impression I got is there will not be any.”

Cllr Hart also thought a reported £18 billion of public sector cuts being drawn up by the government, which he said was talked about during a fringe meeting at the Tory party conference, “suggested it was going to come out of NHS and schools.”

“Well frankly, there’s no spare in my view in schools at the present moment but … I do have a personal feeling that the back offices of the NHS are rather heavily staffed, and there’s not enough money going to the front office.”

Councillors were reminded that, unlike central government, local councils have a legal obligation to balance their budgets at the end of every financial year.

Cllr Hart warned: “We’ve already picked the low branches, the medium branches. We’re now taking the top branches to try and keep local government going.

“I hope government gets that message and it’s being talked not just by me, but all local councils – Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat.”

A government spokesperson said in response: “We have made available an additional £3.7 billion to councils this year, including an extra £40 million for Devon County Council.

“We are also providing a discount on energy prices this winter for councils whose bills have been significantly inflated by the global energy crisis and stand ready to speak to any that have concerns about balancing their budgets.”

How to Think about the Economy: A Primer 

This little book was written to accomplish something big: economic literacy. It is intentionally kept very short to be inviting rather than intimidating, as economics books typically are. If I managed to meet this bar, you, the reader, will gain life-changing understanding of how the economy works in practically no time. This is lots of value at a very low cost.

mises.org

The chancellor’s decision to bring forward the date of his plan to balance the government’s finances failed to reassure markets on Monday.

The financial plan is in a mess and we are all going to suffer. – Owl

By Daniel Thomas www.bbc.co.uk 

Government borrowing costs rose sharply after Kwasi Kwarteng said he would fast-track his plan to 31 October.

The plan will set out how he will fund tax cuts and reduce debt after his mini-budget sparked market turmoil.

An independent forecast of the UK economy’s prospects will be published at the same time.

In the wake of the September mini-budget, the pound slumped to a record low, government borrowing costs surged and the Bank of England was forced to step in and take emergency action after the dramatic market movements put some pension funds at risk of collapse.

The volatility eased but on Monday the yields – or effective interest rates – on UK government bonds were almost at the levels seen at the height of the market turmoil.

Further efforts by the Bank of England to calm markets, along with the appointment of an experienced civil servant as Permanent Secretary to the Treasury also seemed to fall short.

Former Treasury chief Lord Macpherson warned the government that there could be an even tougher response from the financial markets in the coming weeks if the chancellor could not show his sums added up.

“Unless the government can restore economic credibility, the market response in the weeks ahead could be a whole lot worse than we’ve seen so far,” he told the House of Lords.

‘Critical to millions’

Mr Kwarteng had initially said he would wait for 23 November to give details of his economic plan but faced mounting pressure from his MPs to change course.

The new date means Mr Kwarteng’s fiscal statement will be published before the Bank of England announces its latest decision on interest rates on 3 November.

The Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) is widely expected to raise interest rates for the eighth time since last December with many economists forecasting a sharper rise than previous increases.

But Mel Stride, chairman of the Treasury Select Committee, tweeted that he hoped Mr Kwarteng’s decision to release the report earlier would result in a smaller rate rise.

He tweeted this would be “critical to millions of mortgage holders”,

Noting that that the plan will be published on Hallowe’en, Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner tweeted: “Trick or cheat? The Tory horror show rattles on.”

The OBR, the independent budget watchdog, will now publish a report alongside Mr Kwarteng’s statement at the end of October. Its forecasts will give an indication of the health of the nation’s finances.

Analysis

By Dharshini David, BBC economics correspondent

The chancellor bringing forward his explanation of how he intends to get down government debt and the official watchdog’s assessment of his plans to Hallowe’en is aimed at quelling the market turmoil which has driven up borrowing costs for households and government.

Providing reassurance on that score will likely mean confirming unpalatable news for others. For most economists reckon that, even if the government can boost growth, it will realistically need to find savings of perhaps £40bn or more, if it is to bring down debt in a few years.

But by anyone’s measure that’s not small change, it’s an amount greater than the defence budget, and won’t be raised through efficiency savings. Many public services are already hampered by pandemic disruption and rising inflation. The Institute for Fiscal Studies reckons the latter means departments have to find £18bn from existing budgets just to provide planned services.

On top of that balancing act, they’ll be bracing for a new wave of austerity.

Borrowers have faced paying the price for the markets’ lack of faith in the government’s plans – millions more may feel the cost of regaining it.

There was some confusion after the chancellor denied there had been any changes to the date of the fiscal statement.

However, Treasury sources then clarified that the chancellor would, indeed, bring it forward and that it had simply been waiting to officially announce the change of date in Parliament.

Since then the government has been forced into a series of embarrassing climbdowns under growing pressure from its own MPs.

Last week, Mr Kwarteng scrapped a decision to cut the top rate of income tax.

Ms Truss fired Sir Tom Scholar, the civil servant who previously held the job and planned to bring in a high profile outsider – a move some feared would further spook the markets.

Ms Truss still faces a potential rebellion from her MPs after declining to say whether she would increase benefits in line with inflation next April.

Her approval ratings have plummeted since the mini-budget. The prime minister says her tax cuts will boost the UK economy after years of lacklustre growth.

But there are fears the government will have to borrow huge sums to fill the spending gap. The cost of government borrowing consequently jumped, as investors demanded higher rates of interest on UK government bonds.

This has fed through to the mortgage market where hundreds of products were pulled due to concerns about how to price these long-term loans.

Last week, interest rates on typical two and five-year fixed rate mortgages topped 6% for the first time in over a decade.

‘Clearly nervous’

On Monday, the Bank of England announced measures to ensure an “orderly end” to an emergency bond buying scheme it was forced to launch after Mr Kwarteng pledged additional tax cuts on top of those outlined in the mini-budget.

Susannah Streeter, senior investment and markets analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, said that the government and the Bank had launched “a two pronged attempt to calm markets” as the pound remained weak and government borrowing costs were rising again.

“Policymakers and politicians are clearly nervous about seeing a repeat of the mini-financial crisis unleashed following the presentation of the Truss administration’s slash and spend plans,” she said.

“All eyes will be on the independent assessment of his spending plans, and the risk is that if the numbers don’t add up, the markets could take fright again.”