NHS reminder about face-to-face appointments angers GPs

NHS bosses have sent a letter to GPs to remind them to offer face-to-face appointments where necessary, sparking an angry response from professional bodies who say such comments risk insulting hard-working doctors.

Nicola Davis www.theguardian.com

In March, GPs were urged to move to remote consultations where possible in a bid to reduce the spread of Covid-19. The result was a surge in the number of appointments conducted at a distance: in May alone, 48% of GP appointments were carried out over the phone.

Now NHS England has written to GP practices reminding them they must make sure patients are aware face-to-face appointments are available, where clinically appropriate, and warning practices they face investigation by local commissioners if they fail to offer such appointments where needed.

“We know that the vast majority of practices have made significant efforts to remain accessible to patients through the pandemic, and to keep staff and patients safe,” the letter states.

But, it adds: “It is important that no practice suggests in their communication that the practice is closed or that the practice is not offering the option of face-to-face appointments.”

Nikki Kanani, the medical director of primary care for NHS England, said general practice had adapted quickly during the coronavirus outbreak to offer remote services, while providing face-to-face appointments where necessary.

“While many people, particularly those most vulnerable to Covid-19, want the convenience of a consultation over the phone or video, the NHS has been and will continue to offer face-to-face appointments and I would urge anyone who feels they need medical support to come forward so they can get the care, support and advice they need – the NHS is here for you,” she said.

Prof Martin Marshall, the chair of the Royal College of GPs, said the proportion of appointments carried out face-to-face is increasing, with more than 300,000 delivered each day last week.

“General practice is open and has been throughout the pandemic. GPs have been delivering a predominantly remote service in order to comply with official guidance and help stop the spread of Covid-19,” he said.

“Where face-to-face appointments are necessary, they are being facilitated, and we have called on CCGs to work with practices where this is not possible – for example, if all GPs at a practice are at high risk of Covid-19 – to ensure that they can be.

“Any implication that they have not been doing their job properly is an insult to GPs and their teams who have worked throughout the pandemic, continued delivering the vast majority of patient care in the NHS, and face an incredibly difficult winter ahead.”

Dr Richard Vautrey, the GP committee chair at the British Medical Association, agreed, adding that doctors have experienced a significant increase in workload.

“GPs have been working incredibly hard to keep their services as accessible as possible during the Covid-19 pandemic, with most offering virtual triage as the first point of contact in order to help keep their workforce and communities safe. This is exactly what the government has been encouraging them to do,” he said.

“This does not mean practices have stopped face-to-face appointments, and they continue to be offered where safe and necessary. Any inference that in-person consultations were put on hold does a great disservice to the committed GPs who have continued to go to work throughout the pandemic.”

Chief scientist Patrick Vallance ‘was told off’ for backing lockdown

The government’s chief scientist was ‘told off’ for pushing too hard for lockdown as coronavirus cases soared, a private email revealed today. 

James Tapsfield www.dailymail.co.uk

Sir Patrick Vallance said he ‘argued stronger than anyone’ for harsh restrictions early in the crisis, as he defended his own performance during internal wrangling.

In the message to fellow science officers, Sir Patrick complained that he had been rebuked by chief medical officer Chris Whitty and then-Cabinet Secretary Mark Sedwill over the tough stance.

The spat – disclosed in an email released to the BBC under freedom of information rules – sheds light on the tensions at the heart of government as it struggled to cope with the challenge from the deadly disease.

Sir Patrick and Prof Whitty in particular have always tried to present a united front, as they are jointly responsible for interpreting the complex evidence on coronavirus for Cabinet and often flank the PM at press conferences. 

It comes as experts condemned the government’s response handling of coronavirus as ‘one cautious, catastrophic error after another’. Professors Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, from Oxford University warned that the draconian ‘Rule of Six’ restrictions imposed today had ‘no scientific basis’ and could ‘tip the public over the edge’.  

The internal row emerged as Sir Patrick and colleagues were discussing how to respond to allegations from the Sunday Times that there had been too much delay in announcing a lockdown – which finally happened on March 23.

The message from Sir Patrick, dated May 23, said it was ‘very clear what we warned of and what needed to be prepared for’.

He added: ‘It is also the case that I argued stronger than anyone for action for lockdown (with a telling off from CMO, PS DHSC and CabSec).’

CMO is an abbreviation for ‘chief medical officer’, Prof Whitty, while PS DHSC refers to the permanent secretary at the Department of Health, Chris Wormald and ‘CabSec’ at the time was Sir Mark. 

Sir Patrick came under heavy fire early in the crisis for citing the idea of ‘herd immunity’, that the disease would need to be contracted by a large proportion of the population.

However, he has denied that was the government’s active policy, and insisted in the email that ‘herd immunity is what is achieved by vaccines and that is what stops epidemics’. 

A government spokeswoman said: ‘As recorded in the SAGE minutes there was no disagreement on the substance of the scientific advice to Ministers.

‘This is a new virus and at every stage, we have been guided by the advice of world renowned scientists.

‘There was no delay to lockdown. SAGE advised on March 16th that further measures should be introduced as soon as possible.

‘Our response ensured the NHS was not overwhelmed even at the virus’ peak, so that everyone was always able to get the best possible care.’

Sir Patrick is regarded as one of the most sceptical major players in government over the chances of overcoming the disease quickly.

At a press conference with Mr Johnson and Prof Whitty last week, he voiced doubts about the prospects that a ‘moon shot’ mass testing system could remove the need for lockdown and social distancing soon.

He cautioned that there was a lot of uncertainty around the development of accurate saliva tests. 

Asked whether the ‘moonshot’ technology worked, Sir Patrick said: ‘Some of them we don’t yet know that they work. 

‘So things like lateral flow tests are not yet being used widely, they’ve not been validated.

‘There are prototypes which look as though they have some effect, but they’ve got to be tested properly and so there are, as always with technologies, unknowns and we would be completely wrong to assume this is a slam dunk that can definitely happen. I think this needs to be tested carefully.’ 

 

Shooting And Hunting Exempt From Covid ‘Rule Of Six’ Ban 

Exclusive: Cabinet ministers were sent an agenda item titled “Exemption: hunting and shooting”.

[An example of what this Government sees as a priority – Owl]

By Paul Waugh www.huffingtonpost.co.uk 

Boris Johnson is facing a fresh row over his new coronavirus “rule of six” curbs after it emerged that the government has exempted grouse shooting and other “hunting” with guns from the restrictions.

Pro-hunting and shooting groups can continue to hold gatherings of between six and 30 people because they are covered by a loophole that permits licensed “outdoor activity”.

New regulations published by the government for England just before midnight on Sunday have a string of exemptions for sports clubs, wedding receptions and even political protests.

But they also have an exemption for when “a gathering takes place outdoors (whether or not in a public outdoor space)” for the purpose of “a physical activity which is carried on outdoors”, where a licence, permit or certificate is held by the organiser.

HuffPost UK has learned that the Cabinet Office’s special Covid-19 Operations ministerial committee – chaired by Michael Gove – scheduled a meeting on Saturday, with one agenda item titled: “Exemption: hunting and shooting.”

The meeting was abruptly cancelled just hours beforehand, with cabinet ministers and officials told that this issue would be discussed later or via ministerial correspondence.

Insiders believe that the meeting was axed to avoid any ministers raising objections.

Instead, the “outdoor activity” wording was inserted into the regulations, opening the way for an exemption for so-called “country sports” such as grouse and pheasant shooting and hunting.

One source said the entire issue held up the publication of the regulations until shortly before the new law was due to kick in at midnight on Sunday.

Brand new government guidance published by the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) on Monday lists “shooting (including hunting and paintball that requires a shotgun or firearms certificate license)” as a “sport or organised outdoor activity”.

It appears that foxhunting may not be exempted, but the current position is unclear.

When asked by HuffPost UK if the reference to “shooting (hunting)” included foxhunting, a spokesperson said “the exemptions are as listed in the guidance”.

Former minister Tracey Crouch said: “Many will find this topsy-turvy prioritisation from government.

“I’ve had queries about choirs, community bands, addiction therapy groups, all of whom would be worthy of an exemption and instead we are scrabbling around prioritising shooting animals. It’s bonkers.”

Shadow environment secretary Luke Pollard added: “Across the country, people are struggling to get COVID-19 tests anywhere near their homes.

“But the Conservatives are distracted with trying to exempt the bloodsport passions of their big donors from coronavirus regulations. It shows where this government’s priorities really lie.

“It is clear there’s one rule for the cabinet and their mates and another for the rest of us.”

Chris Luffingham, director of campaigns at the League Against Cruel Sports, said: “The Government is giving the shooting industry carte blanche to continue its murderous activities despite the threat posed by gatherings during this awful pandemic.

“The recent Government People and Nature Survey for England found that an increasing number of people (42%) are saying that nature and wildlife are more important than ever for their wellbeing – this government exemption flies in the face of that and condemns many animals to being shot for ‘sport’.

“Lockdown offered animals a respite from the activities of hunters so we think the Government’s move to allow shooting is a backward step.”

Much of the Tory party has long been proud of its links to hunting and shooting, believing it boosts rural communities with vital income, and has received donations from its advocates.

Former Countryside Alliance chairman Simon Hart is now in Johnson’s cabinet as Welsh Secretary.

Chancellor Rishi Sunak, who sits on the Covid-19 Operations committee, was this summer praising the work that grouse shooting can do for moorland.

Johnson himself has written in the past that he “loved” foxhunting with dogs, once writing in the Spectator magazine of the “semi-sexual relation with the horse” and the “military-style pleasure” of moving as a unit.

Sir Humphry Wakefield, father-in-law of the PM’s chief adviser Dominic Cummings, who has shoots on his Chillingham Castle estate in Northumberland, has said “I love shooting, hunting”.

The party’s fundraising balls have frequently auctioned pheasant shooting events in Scotland. In 2017, one supporter handed over £15,000 for an eight-person excursion to shoot pheasants on a Scottish estate.

However, several Tory MPs have long campaigned against foxhunting and other “blood sports”.

Shooting – including grouse, pheasant and pigeon shooting and “recreational deer stalking” – was one of several activities permitted when lockdown was eased this summer, with no restrictions on how far people could travel to do so. 

Mask-wearing shooters were out in force for “the Glorious 12th”, the first day of the grouse shooting season in August.

A UK Government spokesperson said: “We have exempted over thirty types of sport, exercise and physical activity such as football, rugby and other outdoor pursuits

“Outdoor activity is safer from a transmission perspective, and it is often easier to social distance. Where such activities take place, safety measures must be taken including conducting a risk assessment and compliance with COVID-19 Secure guidance.”

The British Association for Shooting and Conservation said in a statement last week: “The latest guidance says that there will be exceptions where groups can be larger than six, including work or voluntary services as well as outdoor sport and physical activity events.

“BASC continues to press ministers for further detail but believes that these exemptions encompass shooting where shoots operate in accordance with Covid secure guidance issued by representative shooting organisations, including BASC.”

The Countryside Alliance also said last week: “From our understanding at present businesses and organised sports operating in England to Covid secure standards will be exempt from the new restrictions on social gatherings.

“Details to follow, but we are confident rural activities will be able to continue with current safeguards in place.”

 

Sasha’s Sensational Diaries – The Hissy Fits Start

SARAH VINE: I hope Sasha Swire has got her tin hat on

[And the toilet seat down – owl]

Sarah Vine www.dailymail.co.uk 

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I’ve met Sasha Swire, the wife of former Tory MP Hugo Swire whose sensational memoir, Diary of an MP’s Wife, was the subject of an interview with her this weekend

I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I’ve met Sasha Swire, the wife of former Tory MP Hugo Swire whose sensational memoir, Diary of an MP’s Wife, was the subject of an interview with her this weekend.

But to be honest, once would have been enough. 

She is one of those women who leaves an indelible impression on the mind, a force of nature whose innate self-confidence and complete inability to self- censor makes her the centre of attention at any social gathering.

She certainly used to make me feel like a bit of a wallflower, and that’s no mean feat. 

A big part of it, I think, was to do with class: She has that effortless, unconscious entitlement common among the British upper classes, that unbridled sense of self-importance that comes with growing up around power.

And, judging by the interview and extracts, she hasn’t changed. Still as mischievous as ever, still fond of her own opinions and unsparing in her criticism of those – invariably almost everyone – found wanting.

The daughter of the former defence secretary and one-time Lazard bank chairman Sir John Nott (who, as it happens, has form when it comes to racy memoirs, once confessing that he fancied Margaret Thatcher something rotten), she is married to Old Etonian Hugo Swire, whom David Cameron fired as shadow culture secretary after he intimated that the Conservatives might put an end to free museum entry.

At the time Sasha was furious and made no secret of the fact – something I rather respect her for. 

But it was always understood that Cameron, a fellow Etonian, would make it up to his old pal Swire. He never made it into the Cabinet – but Cameron did knight him in his resignation honours list.

Indeed the Swires were a key part of the support network the Camerons fell back onto after the fallout from the 2016 referendum (Hugo toyed with the idea of coming out for Brexit, but in the end decided to support Dave instead). They were guests at the Camerons’ house in Cornwall just a few weeks ago.

So quite how this book will go down in their immediate social circle is anyone’s guess. But judging by the messages I had yesterday from various mutual friends, not entirely favourably. 

Theresa May is described as ‘Old Ma May’, while George Osborne becomes ‘Boy George’ in the book. 

One described it as ‘an act of social suicide’, another as ‘baffling’. Another said, ‘Sasha always felt that Hugo should have been in the Cabinet. She never quite forgave Dave for that. Perhaps this is her revenge.’

Who knows. Perhaps she just needed the money, but more likely, I suspect, is her desire to be seen as a writer in her own right. Certainly allowing herself to be photographed next to a prominent copy of the Alan Clark diaries gives you a sense of how she sees herself. 

And she has written at least one literary novel (not bad, by all accounts) that has never been published, and when interviewed she was keen to mention its existence. Perhaps her hope is that this will now see the light of day.

Nevertheless, it does seem odd that someone whose position in society has always been of paramount importance should choose to spill the beans so dramatically. I wonder if, because of the breezy confidence her background has instilled in her she may have dramatically underestimated the ripples this may cause.

Swire herself grew up in London, living in the family’s grand house in Chelsea but also, for a while, in Admiralty House in Whitehall when her father was defence secretary under Thatcher. 

According to another mutual friend she harboured ambitions of being an ‘It girl’; that never quite transpired, possibly because in truth she’s more country than town, the kind of woman who makes a pair of wellies look impossibly sexy, and who talks enthusiastically about ‘bonking’ – more Jilly Cooper than Candace Bushnell, if you know what I mean.

I certainly always got the impression that she thought the whole lot of us were utter fools, and that she and Hugo were the only people with any iota of sense. And I’m not sure she was even that certain about Hugo.

If I recall rightly, the first time I encountered her was at supper at the Camerons house, in their old place in North Kensington, probably circa 2005.

Those suppers were always fairly convivial, relaxed affairs, but I remember her being amazingly confident in her own opinions and, it seemed to me, overtly and unnecessarily combative. 

She had a way of haranguing people, particularly men, that hovered somewhere between a come-on and a punishment beating.

Poor things never quite knew how to respond to this rangy blonde with legs that seemed to go on forever. 

Hugo would look on in abject adoration as she held forth with breezy confidence about everything, from welfare cheats to the Big Society.

I’ve not had sight of the book itself. In the extracts published she describes me as ‘always meddling’, and she pooh-poohs my friendship with Samantha Cameron, painting me as some sort of willing skivvy, making fish pie while Samantha swanned around being glamorous.

Sasha Swire’s candid journal about her life as wife of former Foreign Office minister Sir Hugo Swire is due to be published next week. In it, she calls Boris Johnson a ‘calculating machine’ and his partner Carrie Symonds a ‘hot young vixen’ 

I honestly don’t recall ever making fish pie for Samantha, in fact I don’t think I’ve ever made a fish pie in my life (not one you could serve to guests at No10 Downing street, at any rate). 

As to being Samantha’s skivvy, yes it’s true I used to help her out – but only insofar as good friends do when life gets busy and complicated. 

There were many during those years who saw our friendship as a threat to their own sphere of influence, and it would appear that Swire was one of them.

But perhaps what’s most disturbing – and many of those I spoke to yesterday about the book echoed this sentiment – is the calculated nature of these diaries. The idea that, after every dinner party or weekend away, she was recording events in a manner designed clearly to be malicious, feels somewhat sinister.

Over the years people have often asked me if I’ve been keeping a diary, but the truth is I have not (more fool me, if the rumours of the large advance she received are true). 

I’ve done and witnessed some incredible things in my time, and while I’m always happy to share some of the more harmless anecdotes of my existence (often with readers of this newspaper), there are some which will forever be out of bounds to all but those concerned.

And that’s the trouble with these kinds of memoirs: No one’s interested in reading about the good times; being nice doesn’t sell. 

To be successful you have to be as uninhibited and unsparing in detailing the foibles of others as possible. And, judging by what I’ve read so far, Sasha has certainly managed that.

No doubt these diaries will provoke a good deal of mischief and scandal. Inevitably, though, there will be a price to pay and, as someone who has seen first hand what a rough old game politics can be I do hope for Sasha’s sake she’s got her tin hat firmly on.

 

Firms get public data in Dominic Cummings tech drive

“Mr Cummings is also working to set up a “skunkworks” in No 10, with the establishment of a fellowship scheme for ten data analysts and advertisements for a £200,000-a-year role as chief data officer working alongside Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister. The term “skunkworks” was first used by workers at the aircraft maker Lockheed Martin to describe a group working on innovative projects, unencumbered by bureaucracy.”

George Grylls www.thetimes.co.uk 
Private companies will get access to public data under a pilot scheme announced by the government to start Dominic Cummings’s unshackling of the tech industry.

The National Data Strategy, published last week, says that “perceived and genuine” legislative barriers had prevented greater data sharing. The paper claimed that releasing anonymised data could aid research. It gave the example of court submissions being shared with researchers to establish patterns of repeat criminal behaviour.

Oliver Dowden, the culture secretary, speaking at London Tech Week alongside representatives from Facebook and Microsoft, said that data was one of the most valuable commodities in the world. “Forget oil,” he said. “The fuel of our modern economy . . . is data.”

The £2.6 million pilot scheme will “test the possibilities” of sharing data with private companies, initially on a project to detect online dangers such as cyberbullying. A contract is understood to be going out for tender.

Mr Cummings, the prime minister’s chief adviser, has long been critical of data privacy laws. No 10 now appears convinced that there needs to be a permanent change in the way that public data is used after collaborating with companies during the pandemic. Palantir, Faculty, Amazon, Google and Microsoft were invited to use government databases to help to co-ordinate the response to the coronavirus.

Anonymised information provided included chest scans and NHS bed occupancy levels. Mr Dowden noted that the pandemic had set a “high watermark” for data-sharing.

Mr Cummings is also working to set up a “skunkworks” in No 10, with the establishment of a fellowship scheme for ten data analysts and advertisements for a £200,000-a-year role as chief data officer working alongside Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister. The term “skunkworks” was first used by workers at the aircraft maker Lockheed Martin to describe a group working on innovative projects, unencumbered by bureaucracy.

It comes after the government proposed the use of online ID cards for anything from drinking in pubs to registering with a GP.

Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, the civil liberties group, criticised the influence of Mr Cummings. “When most governments are trying to rein in data grabs by the private sector, our government seems to be doing the opposite,” she said. “This government is churning out increasingly dystopian plans at a huge cost to the public purse and civil liberties.”

The tech industry, however, welcomed the proposals. Darren Hardman, general manager of Amazon Web Services in Britain, said: “Making more effective use of data . . . is key to the UK’s long-term economic growth.”

Chi Onwurah, the shadow digital secretary, said that without a regulatory framework the plans amounted to “a power grab by No 10 for people’s personal information”.

Mr Dowden maintained in his speech that the government would only use people’s data “ethically”.

Planning applications validated by EDDC for week beginning 31 August

Revealed: ex-MPs use parliament access passes over 2,500 times in a year

A “strategic counsel” for the lobbying firm Crosby Textor is among 324 former MPs who together used grace and favour passes to access the Houses of Parliament more than 2,500 times in a single year.

Katherine Purvis www.theguardian.com 

Data released after a significant freedom of information victory by the Guardian reveals how frequently individual former MPs have been using their “category X” parliamentary pass, which grants the bearer continued access to the corridors of power after they step down, along with parliament’s subsidised restaurants and bars.

MPs who serve a single parliamentary term are automatically eligible to apply for a pass, but critics argue the system is open to abuse.

Commons authorities attempted to prevent the information being released, claiming it would infringe former members’ personal data rights. However, the information commissioner ruled in the Guardian’s favour, determining that the public interest in the material was of such strength that it should override data protection safeguards.

The data revealed that Stewart Jackson, the Conservative MP for Peterborough from 2005 to 2017, used his grace and favour pass 82 times in the year from July 2018 to June 2019 – almost one in every two days on which parliament sat in that period.

According to his LinkedIn profile, he has worked as a lobbyist since August 2018, first for Crosby Textor as a “strategic counsel” and latterly for his own outfit, Political Insight, as well as being a columnist for The Telegraph. Jackson did not respond to attempts to contact him.

The most prolific returnee was Nick de Bois, the Conservative MP for Enfield North from 2010 to 2015, who visited 84 times. He said he served as Dominic Raab’s chief of staff and later as a volunteer for his campaign to be leader of the Conservative party during the year in question. He was also a radio host during the same period.

Phil Woolas, the deputy leader of the Commons at the time the passes were introduced and subsequently a Labour minister, said the reasons for introducing the scheme were purely social.

“If you’ve worked for somewhere for 40 years, and you get your gold watch and you get thrown out, it’s quite nice to be able to meet your old mates. It was as simple as that,” he said. “It was just a reason for ex-MPs to meet up and have dinner.”

Woolas, who used his pass once, was removed as MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth in 2010 after an electoral court found his campaign had made false allegations that his Liberal Democrat opponent was linked to Islamist extremism.

He now works for the consultancy UK Partnerships. He said he had not held a category X pass for several years and did not use it in connection with business purposes.

Ivor Caplin, the Labour MP for Hove from 1997 to 2005 who now runs Ivor Caplin Consultancy, used his grace and favour pass 48 times.

A profile on the website of a volunteering charity where Caplin serves as a trustee describes how his consultancy work “has continued to bring him into regular contact with both politicians and officials” in the UK and abroad.

However, Caplin said he did not use the pass for his private work, visiting in his capacity as a national spokesman and then chair of the Jewish Labour Movement.

“Given the antisemitism crisis in the party at that time I made numerous visits to the house to discuss this with MPs, peers and others, including journalists,” he said. “I do not and never have used the house for the purposes of my business.”

Stephen Dorrell, a health secretary under John Major and now chair of the companies Dorson Group and LaingBuisson, visited 29 times. However, he also denied using his pass for any company business and said in an email that his visits related to his work with the European Movement campaign group.

“I attended numerous meetings convened by MPs of all parties who were opposed to Brexit, and keen to link with European Movement grassroots activity,” he wrote. “I also attended occasional meetings in parliament in that period in connection with my role as chair of the NHS Confederation and, in a social capacity, to visit former colleagues who remain friends,” he added.

The Guardian first wrote to the House of Commons requesting information about the use of grace and favour passes in August last year. Citing data protection, the Commons released a list of the numbers of times each pass had been used in a single year, but refused to link each number to a named former MP.

Following a complaint by the Guardian, the Information Commissioner’s Office, which regulates freedom of information and data protection regulations, ordered that the information be released and warned that the parliamentary authorities’ current system was so unregulated as to be vulnerable to misuse.

The ruling observed that while ministers, MPs, peers, political journalists and parliamentary assistants are required to make transparent their identities and financial interests, ex-MPs with grace and favour passes are not.

“Given that the evidence suggests that several of the passholders are employed by lobbying or public relations companies, there is a legitimate concern about how such passes are used,” it read. “Whilst the commissioner is not aware of any evidence to suggest widespread misuse of the passes, she does consider that the current system is vulnerable to abuse.”

Rachel Davies Teka, the head of advocacy at the anti-corruption campaign Transparency International UK, said grace and favour passes threatened the integrity of parliament and should be banned.

“Close access to lawmakers is highly valued by those seeking to influence public policy. Using a parliamentary security pass in the course of paid lobbying activity is an abuse of that privilege,” she said. “We cannot see any justification for this entitlement that warrants accepting this risk.”

A Commons spokesperson said: “It has been practice for some time to provide Palace of Westminster security identity passes to former members of parliament,” adding that it was forbidden for former MPs to use their passes for lobbying.

Additional reporting by Katherine Purvis and Felix Irmer

The Diaries on why Hugo Swire launched campaign to save local hospital – to annoy Claire Wright!

Second extract:

“Hugo launches a campaign to save a local hospital for no other reason than to annoy an independent candidate in his constituency who’s been getting on his nerves,……”

“A dynastic sense of entitlement to rule runs through the book……..”

Decca Aitkenhead www.thetimes.co.uk 

Sasha Swire on the Camerons, Boris and her sensational secret diaries

…..Swire couldn’t care less about the optics of democracy. Her diary is full of references to her “marchioness dowager” mother-in-law, who travels with a butler, records Hugo bunking off from parliament to go shooting and quotes him cracking an eye-wateringly offensive joke about people on benefits while hosting an A-list Tory party fundraising auction. When Cameron’s resignation honours list, in which Hugo was knighted, is roundly condemned in the press, she writes: “I don’t know what all the fuss is about. Why can’t Dave pack out the list with his cronies if he wants to?” Hugo launches a campaign to save a local hospital for no other reason than to annoy an independent candidate in his constituency who’s been getting on his nerves, yet Swire fumes indignantly about Cameron promoting MPs on the basis of their “good back story — ethnic, woman” because “this isn’t the serious politics of government”. By the end of the book I realise I’ve scribbled “Pot, kettle!” in the margins of at least a dozen pages.

A dynastic sense of entitlement to rule runs through the book. One entry huffs, “The thing that’s really got my goat is the fact that [her father] John is not in the Lords,” and Hugo even puts in a call to No 10 to complain on Nott’s behalf. This strikes me as a bit rich, for Swire is endlessly ridiculing everyone else for their vanity and ambition. At one point, I remind her, she notes that the diplomat Hugh Powell, “being a Powell, has a genetic assumption of divine rule and is wondering when and how he is ever going to get into Downing Street”. She nods. “Mmm, he won’t like that. But it’s true.” Weren’t she and Hugo just as bad as everyone else? “Of course we would have been,” she concedes casually…..

 

Sasha Swire’s Sensational Secret Diaries – which local councillors are the “Toilet Seats”

[Owl can make an educated guess but doesn’t want to spoil the fun for readers.]

Sasha Swire on the Camerons, Boris and her sensational secret diaries

Decca Aitkenhead www.thetimes.co.uk (a short extract from her interview published in the Sunday Times Magazine)

Two thoughts occur within minutes of picking up Diary of an MP’s Wife. The first is that this is clearly a spoof — probably written by the creators of The Thick of It, or if not then Yes, Minister. The second is: if Sasha Swire really did write this, she has amazingly forgiving friends.

Lady Swire is gloriously rude about almost everyone in the Tory circles she has shared for 20 years. Theresa May is Old Ma May, the former chancellor is Boy George, the foreign secretary is Raab C Brexit. A pair of diligent local councillors are referred to as “toilet seats”, and her close friend Amber Rudd’s dress sense is despaired of. One entry achieves a simultaneous swipe at the wives of both Michael Gove and David Cameron. “Poor old Sarah Gove, who bends over backwards to please the Camerons, was lumbered with cooking all the food while Samantha was upstairs learning to cut patterns (she wants to set up a fashion business). She then had her hair done! Turning up at her own party feeling perfectly relaxed while Sarah is laden down with dishes of fish pie she has herself cooked.” When Cameron, Swire’s great friend, arrives at her Devon manor house, he spots one of her barns and exclaims: “You could put a snooker table in there!” As the prime minister walks on she mutters witheringly to her husband: “So home counties.”

So when we sit down to lunch and she tells me the story of how her private diary came to be published, one of my first questions is naturally: at what point did she contact everyone who appears in it, to request their permission? She stares across the soup at me in surprise. “Oh, I haven’t done that.” She didn’t even tell her husband, she adds, until a publishers’ bidding war was already under way…………………………………

Tory MPs rage at housing plan to ‘concrete’ over the shires

Owl still doesn’t know what Simon Jupp and Neil Parish think.

North Somerset faces an increase of 134% and Somerset West and Taunton 129% (East Devon sounds a mere trifle in comparison at 70% = 1,614 houses p.a.) – from tabulation in print edition. Owl highlights comments by Bob Seely, the Tory MP for the Isle of Wight, which seem to echo what we see here.

Caroline Wheeler, Deputy Political Editor www.thetimes.co.uk

Robert Jenrick, the housing secretary, has been accused of “concreting out, not levelling up” as 30 Tory MPs join a rebel WhatsApp group aimed at fighting his planning reforms.

The cabinet minister is facing a backlash from his MPs after he launched a plan last month to build more than 300,000 homes a year, giving councils compulsory targets and creating local zones in which development is automatically approved.

The plan will use an algorithm to produce targets for every area in England based on “relative affordability” and the extent of development.

But figures released by Stantec, the design firm, show huge increases in house building targets in Tory-held suburbs and shires at the expense of largely Labour controlled cities and towns in the Midlands and the north.

According to analysis being circulated among MPs, the 12 biggest reductions in housing targets on 2018-19 delivery are in Labour-controlled urban areas.

These include Salford (-59% dwellings a year), Newcastle upon Tyne (-56%), Liverpool (-48%), Nottingham (-38%), and Leeds and Manchester (both -30%).

Instead, rural and suburban areas will see the biggest rises, including Three Rivers in Hertfordshire (+292%), Eastbourne (+274%), Epsom and Ewell (+266%), Thurrock (+263%), Oxford (+262%), Havant (+261%), Thanet (+246%), Bromsgrove (+244%,), Tonbridge and Malling (+241%), Arun in Sussex (+239%), Sevenoaks (+222%), Isle of Wight (+199%) and Worthing (+198%).

Leaked messages on the rebel WhatsApp group, which has been named the housing algorithm concern group, show the level of dissent among Tory MPs.

One wrote: “This is lighting a slow fuse for an explosion … when our constituents see that we are fast-tracking housing developments in all the wrong places.”

Another added: “This is the equivalent of Gavin Williamson’s disastrous exams algorithm fiasco.”

A third said: “I have spoken to the chief whip and told him there is no way on earth I will vote for this.”

Bob Seely, the Tory MP for the Isle of Wight, said: “Take my constituency … the proposals will see our target increased by more than 100%. Half the island is designated as an area of outstanding natural beauty, yet we will be ordered to build more houses a year than either Portsmouth or Southampton, both cities with major infrastructure and services, and populations almost 70% larger.”

He added: “It won’t help our young, either. Increasing house building does not necessarily result in increased affordability.

“As with many other parts of the UK, we need one- and two-bed homes for residents, built in sensitive numbers in existing communities, with rent-to-buy schemes to support the young.

“We get three- and four-bed, generic housing in soul-destroying, low density, greenfield estates because that is what suits developers.

“From all sides of the political spectrum, people are fed up. This is concreting out, not levelling up.”

Last night a source close to Downing Street said the prime minister was iaware of the backbench concerns.

Jenrick is likely to face a battle on two fronts as he also seeks to push through his devolution white paper, which will create hundreds of new mayors and merge county and district councils into combined authorities.

One Tory MP said: “Both plans are desperately unpopular in the Tory shires, which are the areas that will be most affected by the reforms. This could finish off Jenrick’s cabinet career.”

A ministry of housing, communities and local government spokesman said: “The current formula for local housing need is inconsistent with our aim to deliver 300,000 homes by the mid-2020s and so we committed to reviewing it at this year’s budget.”

 

When things go horribly wrong: re-brand and re-launch

Owl recommends the classic Business School solution to Matt Hancock and Dido Harding to save the need to pay consulting fees to Deloitte:

Morten Morland Sunday Times Cartoon

13 September, 2020

Leaked figures reveal scale of coronavirus test shortage

“The government’s “world-beating” testing programme has a backlog of 185,000 swabs and is so overstretched that it is sending tests to laboratories in Italy and Germany, according to leaked documents.”

Thinking about  the “Moonshot” and the way the Government has outsourced the track and trace system, Owl is reminded of the following quote from John Glenn, US astronaut : “As I hurtled through space, one thought kept crossing my mind – every part of this rocket was supplied by the lowest bidder.” 

Gabriel Pogrund, Tom Calver and Caroline Wheeler www.thetimes.co.uk 

A Department of Health and Social Care report marked “Official: sensitive” also confirms that most British laboratories are clearing fewer tests than their stated capacity, as they are hit by “chaos” in supply chains.

The government claims that it has capacity for 375,000 tests a day. However, the actual number of people being tested for the coronavirus stalled to just 437,000 people a week at the start of the month — equivalent to just 62,000 a day.

Throughout last week, people in Covid-19 hotspots across the north of England struggled to get tests and were told to travel hundreds of miles for an appointment. In Bolton, which has the highest infection rate in Britain of more than 180 weekly cases per 100,000 people, no tests were available on the government’s online booking system between Thursday and Saturday.

One man in London with symptoms of the disease yesterday claimed that he had tried to book a test 60 times but found none available. Earlier in the week people in the capital had been told that the nearest site was in Aberdeen, an 18-hour round trip.

Boris Johnson used prime minister’s questions this week to reject claims by Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, that the government’s testing effort was on the brink of collapse.

He has also commissioned Operation Moonshot, an ambitious plan to introduce up to 10 million daily tests by the spring, at a cost of up £100bn.

However, an investigation by The Sunday Times casts fresh doubt on the government’s ability to provide tests for a far smaller number of people.

Gavin Williamson, the education secretary, pledged last week that testing would be available in schools so that pupils could return safely. But schools of any size are receiving just 10 test kits each, and are being told to use them only in “exceptional circumstances” and where the pupils could not otherwise access tests at home.

Last night one Whitehall source said that the guidance would become even more stringent next week, while tests would be made available to teachers and not pupils.

For those who can get hold of tests, there is no guarantee of rapid results — or of any results at all. Leaked figures show that three-quarters of all tests miss government targets, taking longer than 24 hours from booking to result. One in four take longer than 48 hours.

Documents also show that voiding — the disposal of used tests due to human or technical error — has shot up. Randox, which won a £133m testing contract unopposed at the start of the outbreak, disposed of 12,401 used swabs in a single day on September 2. The company, which is based in Co Antrim, Northern Ireland, has voided more than 35,000 used test kits since the start of August.

Civil servants and laboratories have pointed the finger at each other for the chaos. Internal reports state that tests are mostly voided because of “swab leaks” and “damaged tubes” during transit, or human error, such as people sending urine rather than saliva.

But officials have cast doubt on the feedback coming from some labs, saying that they are freezing or throwing away tests after an arbitrary period.

It was claimed last night that Randox had blamed the high void rates on staff going on holiday. The company has not denied charging the taxpayer for voided results, but disputed the claim that it blamed employees taking leave.

Last week Randox placed job advertisements in an attempt to increase the workforce at its Covid laboratories. One ad read: “No previous experience required.” The adverts said: “It is NOT essential to have a science background.”

Staff have claimed that they are working 12-hour shifts at close to minimum wage to clear backlogs.

The foreign companies that are processing British tests include Eurofins, which is based in Luxembourg and has labs in Germany, and Immensa, based in L’Aquila, central Italy.

A source last night said that thousands of used tests in Germany could be “voided” because they were transported at the wrong temperature. Officials have also been told that processing tests from Britain is “not a priority” at foreign laboratories.

Jon Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, said: “People ill or with a sick child desperate for a test will be astonished that tests are piling up, left unprocessed, or even thrown away, because of errors in transportation and swabbing, while at the same time we are testing less than capacity. This really is ministerial incompetence at a whole new level.”

Last night Randox said it did not comment on voided tests or rates, but followed “accepted timelines for the validity of a sample, which ensure tests are accurate”. Failure to do so, the company added, would “jeopardise the accuracy and reliability of NHS Test and Trace”.

The Department of Health said: “Test and trace is working and our capacity is the highest it has ever been, but we are seeing a significant demand, including from people who do not have symptoms and are not otherwise eligible.”

 

Coronavirus cases in care homes spiral again

The coronavirus is spreading through care homes again, according to leaked documents that show the government is failing to protect the most vulnerable from the spiralling number of cases.

Gabriel Pogrund, Tom Calver and Rosamund Urwin www.thetimes.co.uk

A Department of Health report marked “official sensitive” and circulated on Friday stated that the rate of the coronavirus recorded through satellite tests — almost all of which take place in care homes — had quadrupled since the start of the month. It now stands at an estimated 1,100 new cases every day.

Matt Hancock, the health secretary, took an emergency update on Wednesday saying that outbreaks had been detected in 43 care homes after months of calm.

On Friday night he wrote to care home leaders to confirm that the virus had reappeared: “The infections are mainly affecting the workforce but clearly there is a risk the virus will spread to residents or to other parts of the care sector.

“Unfortunately, in some care homes, with recent outbreaks, this does appear to have occurred, with residents also becoming infected.”

A memo sent to the health secretary’s team lists care homes in Bristol, Nottinghamshire, Wiltshire and Wolverhampton as among the worst hit.

At the start of the pandemic the decision to move hospital patients into care homes, often without testing, contributed to 20,000 Covid-related deaths.

To prevent another outbreak, the government promised weekly testing for staff and monthly tests for care home residents in July. It reached the target only last week.

The majority (52%) of Covid-19 tests carried out by care homes take more than 72 hours to be processed.

In his message to care homes, Hancock ended with a warning about the potential dangers as winter approaches: “This winter will place unique pressures on the health and care system. Covid-19 will be circulating with seasonal flu and other viruses and transmission may increase.”

On the same day, scientists at Imperial College London warned that the R infection rate had reached 1.7 — meaning that cases were doubling each week.

Last week care homes in Newcastle, Gateshead and Sunderland shut their doors to visitors because of early signs that the virus was returning.

Jon Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, said: “Failures over tracing and isolation now mean infections are rising. Failure to protect care homes early on meant many lost their lives. It would be unforgivable if the same mistakes were made again.”

A health department source said: “We have been doing everything we can to ensure care home residents and staff are protected, including testing all residents and staff; provided 200 million items of protective equipment, ring-fenced £600m to prevent infections in care homes and made a further £3.7bn available to councils to address pandemic pressures.”

 

The Observer view on Boris Johnson’s lamentable summer 

Corruption and incompetence now define Number 10

Observer editorial www.theguardian.com

Boris Johnson has succeeded in achieving something no other sitting prime minister has done to date: he has made himself the target of excoriating criticism from not one or two, but three former leaders of his party, two of them also former prime ministers. It is an extraordinary indictment of his incompetence and his failure to take the business of governing this country seriously.

What prompted this was the unprecedented admission by one of his ministers that the government planned to break international law. In a Commons debate about the government’s internal market bill, the Northern Ireland secretary, Brandon Lewis, confirmed that in giving ministers the power to unilaterally overturn parts of the EU withdrawal agreement, the bill contravenes international law. In order to get there, the attorney general, Suella Braverman, had to, incredibly, assert in her legal advice that international law is trumped by parliamentary sovereignty, in contravention of the Vienna convention, and that the bill does not flout the ministerial code that places a duty on them to comply with the law.

This was an incendiary interjection during a critical week in the Brexit negotiations. If it was intended as a threat to bring the EU closer to the UK positions on the level playing field and fishing rights, it has backfired: the EU has threatened legal action if the government does not alter the bill by the end of the month. The UK’s threat to break a treaty it has already signed has further undermined trust and reduces the chance of the bare-bones free trade agreement that the government aspires to.

The real intention was, presumably, to signal to voters that the blame lies with the EU if no deal is reached, with all of the consequences that would have for an economy that has just suffered its biggest ever contraction as a result of coronavirus. It raises the question of whether there is any principle that Johnson would not trample over if it suits his political agenda.

In threatening to rip up the Good Friday agreement, which guarantees that there will be no border on the island of Ireland, even if that means introducing customs checks and, potentially, tariffs in the Irish Sea in the absence of a free trade deal, the government has further underlined its casual indifference to the Northern Ireland peace process. Any government that prioritised the longevity of the Good Friday agreement would have pursued a Brexit that kept the UK aligned with the single market and customs union; instead, Johnson has shown he is willing to play petty politics with a peace agreement that ended a conflict that cost thousands of lives.

The consequences will be felt not just in our relationship with the EU but in our relationship with the United States: Democratic lawmakers have already said that there will be no trade deal with the UK if Brexit undermines the Irish peace process. There are also broader repercussions for Britain’s international standing. So much of our criticism of dictatorships and rogue states around the world is founded upon their disregard for the rule of law, from China to Russia to Iran. How can Britain claim to speak with any authority when this charlatan is our prime minister?

Time and again, Johnson has shown that he is willing to take unconscionable risks in his political games, regardless of the consequences. It is a Vote Leave approach to governing that prizes populist slogans over real change, soundbites that poll well over any attempt to govern with competence. We have seen the costs in the government’s mishandling of this pandemic; a number of unforced errors have contributed to Britain’s terrible excess death rate.

And now, as a former chief scientific adviser warns that the UK is on “the edge of losing control” of the virus, there are alarming signs that the government has not used the summer hiatus to get a grip. The test-and-trace system, absolutely key to minimising a second wave of infection, is seriously underperforming. In many areas of the country, it is proving impossible to book a coronavirus test. The government is failing to enable people who have symptoms to stay at home by increasing statutory sick pay from its pitiful level of £96 a week; little surprise then that rates of compliance with the guidelines around self-isolation are far too low when many parents simply cannot afford to take a hit of hundreds of pounds if a family member develops a cough or a temperature.

Instead of addressing these serious failings, the government has tried to distract from them with a pie-in-the-sky £100bn “moonshot” pledge to carry out up to 10m instant Covid-19 tests a day next year. Instead of making it financially possible to comply with its guidance, the government has sought to shift the blame for rising infection rates to the public, despite the mixed messages it sent suggesting that the worst of the virus was over. Instead of preparing for a second wave, it spent the summer picking fights: stirring up strife with anti-racist protesters and the teachers’ unions, and sacking civil servants while insulating ministers from the consequences of huge errors such as the A-level grades scandal.

This is the government we have as Britain heads into a dangerous autumn, on the cusp of a second pandemic wave and at the most crucial stage of Brexit talks yet. Just as we have rarely been more in need of sober and competent stewardship, we have a prime minister who regards politics as a game and who views fomenting culture wars as fruitful political strategy. His government’s response – to the avoidable loss of life, or the blighting of a whole generation’s life chances, or the threatened breakup of the union – is lamentable.

 

Exasperated parents in England say test and trace still a ‘shambles’

Never mind just wait for the next moonshot.

Remember you can find advice on how to get a test in Devon here. – Owl

Aaron Walawalkar www.theguardian.com 

Exasperated parents in England have complained of a test-and-trace system still in “shambles”, with some struggling to book appointments for their children who have developed symptoms since returning to school.

One Brighton primary school teacher, who did not wish to be named, told the Guardian she had tried to book a test for her three-year-old daughter since Friday morning, but the only option offered was in Aberdeen – more than 600 miles away.

It comes after the health secretary, Matt Hancock, pledged on Monday that no one should have to travel more than 75 miles each way to get a test. The head of NHS test and trace subsequently issued an apology to people in England who have either been unable to secure a test or have been told to travel hundreds of miles.

Jack Cousens, a Basingstoke councillor, chronicled the difficulties he faced in trying to secure a test for his six-year-old son over the course of 12 hours on Friday.

In five separate attempts, he was told “there are no tests available right now,” and to check again later.

“It would be laughable if it weren’t so shambolic,” he said. “The PM and health secretary need to take responsibility here, own the problem and find a way to fix it.”

On his sixth attempt he succeeded in booking the last available slot at a Salisbury testing centre a “short-ish jaunt away”.

But author Clare Josa, from Salisbury, told the Guardian on Thursday that she was advised to travel to a test centre 140 miles away when trying to book an appointment for her husband.

“I’ve tried every hour (waking hours) since Monday lunchtime and there are zero postal tests available and, all but one time, there haven’t been any test centre tests either,” she said.

“My husband is too ill to drive and I don’t want to spend six hours in a car with him if he might be contagious. The Salisbury test centre is two miles from our home and friends who have driven past it say it looks empty.”

She added that her eight-year-old son had been sent home from school on Monday due to a cough and cold. The school nurse agreed to use one of the schools “precious” 10 Covid tests on him – which was sent to the lab the following morning – but by Thursday she had still not received any result.

Chris Kimberly, from Milton Keynes, tweeted about a similar experience. He said he had been trying to get a test for his son, who has developed a persistent cough since returning to school last week, for hours. “This is a shambles he said,” he said.

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “NHS test and trace is working and our capacity is the highest it has ever been but we are seeing a significant demand for tests including from people who do not have symptoms and are not otherwise eligible.

“New booking slots and home-testing kits are made available daily for those who need them and we are targeting testing capacity at the areas that need it most, including those where there is an outbreak, and prioritising at-risk groups.

“Our laboratories are processing more than a million tests a week and we recently announced new facilities and technology to process results even faster. If you do not have symptoms and are not eligible to get a test you can continue to protect yourself if you wash your hands, wear a face covering and follow social distancing rules.”

 

Cornwall, Devon and Dorset could get combined authority with extra powers from Westminster

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government is set to publish a White Paper with South West set to be latest region to receive new powers

[Are we about to see “The Great South West” combined authority replacing our counties with the elimination of our distinct regional cultures? And who might we expect to be its Mayor? The man with the Midas touch? Is this another of un-elected Dominic Cummings’ “Moonshot” ideas? – Owl]

By David Parsley inews.co.uk 

Boris Johnson’s plans to ‘level-up’ the nation could lead to a new single authority for the South West of England with policy making powers in areas such as education, health, energy infrastructure and transport.

The Government’s White Paper on Devolution and Local Recovery, which is due to be published within weeks, will make reference to “regional partnerships” and herald the creation of formally recognised regional partnerships supported by the Government investment.

The Great South West group, an economic alliance that claims to have the support of the Prime Minister, believes the region should be given the same status as the Northern Powerhouse.

A spokesman for the group said: “Our aims include securing commitment from Government to recognise the economic potential of the area as part of its levelling up agenda, and to provide strategic backing and investment to fulfil our aims.”

At the heart of the Great South West’s proposals is £45bn of investment to create the cleanest economy in England, and the first to be net zero carbon.

Matt Barton, head of strategy at Cornwall Council, said: “The hope is that the Great South West will be one of the first to benefit given it has already submitted an ambitious prospectus ambition to Government.”

Plans not going far enough for some

However, the plan to hand powers from Westminster to the South West is unlikely to go far enough for some campaigners, including Sir Gary Streeter, the Conservative MP for South West Devon.

Sir Gary said: “The Great South West project is an attempt to inject some much-needed coherence into this region’s dialogue with government. Unfortunately, the government is now introducing a White Paper on devolution which may delay our recognition as a coherent region.”

A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, said the White Paper was imminent.

She said: “We have set out a clear commitment to level up all areas of the country by empowering our regions through devolving money, resources and control away from Westminster.

“We are considering a range of options and will set out our detailed plans in the White Paper that will be published this Autumn.”

Labour MP opposes plans

However, Ben Bradshaw, the Labour MP for Exeter, is against any move that led to counties losing their own individual identities.

“This is a ridiculous proposal from Boris Johnson – tearing up decades, if not centuries of people in England identifying with their county and in the case of historic cities like Exeter and Plymouth, with their city,” said Mr Bradshaw.

“What we need in the South West are local councils that are empowered and have the funds to deliver on behalf of their local communities and a coherent regional body like Labour’s Regional Development Authorities, which the Tories abolished, which can provide strategic leadership on economic development priorities across the South West and other regions as a whole.”

 

Sidmouth campaigner welcomes county council’s anti-racism proposals

Helen Matthew described the news as ‘absolutely brilliant’.

 

This week councillors supported a motion put forward by Ottery representative Claire Wright, inspired by the Black Lives Matter movement.

The motion said councillors should be encouraged to ‘promote and celebrate the role and work in Devon by BAME people, past and present’.

It also supports changes to the way history is taught to children, saying that schools should be encouraged to ‘reflect on how they challenge historic and persisting racist ideas’.

The council is being recommended to write to the Education Secretary urging him to contact schools and ask them to ‘ensure that the school environment and curriculum delivery allows all students to see themselves reflected and included’.

Mrs Matthew said the issue of school education is particularly important.

She said: “At primary school level, it should be brought into the curriculum, the transatlantic slave trade and colonialism, so when children are out and about in everyday life and they see racism or prejudice, they understand where it stems from.

“I think they really need to understand where it all comes from, because if it’s not taught they’ll never really grasp what racism is.

“I think what’s happening with Devon County Council and this going forward is absolutely brilliant, it makes my heart warm, it really makes me feel progress is happening, and it’s a good feeling.”

Cllr Wright drew up her motion after working with students at The Kings School in Ottery St Mary, including especially young BAME people.

Her proposals went before Devon County Council’s Cabinet on Wednesday, September 9, and will now be discussed by the full council on Thursday, October 1.

Cllr Alistair Dewhirst said that he was looking forward to the motion being adopted at the full council meeting, and Cllr Rob Hannaford said: “We do need to come to terms with the legacy of empire and slavery and it does need to be taught in schools.”

Update Winslade Park Planning Proposals – Clyst St Mary

From a correspondent:

Update to the meeting between Burrington Estates and The Parish Council – 9/9/20

A number of the Save Clyst St Mary team attended the meeting that took place in the village hall on Wednesday night. Burrington Estates gave a short presentation on their revised scheme, with a question and answer session at the end. We remain extremely concerned by a number of the answers given and the fact that there remains nothing written down in the planning application regarding a number of the contentious items. The planning application is at an outline stage and although there are some excellent facilities shown, it must be remembered that this is an indicative proposal. This potentially could result in many significant changes before the final application is given approval. This planning application has many elements to it and there are some good proposals in the application. Thank you for all the objections so far, for those households that still want to object please can I remind you that the closing date for objection to the revised scheme is 16th September. I have attached a copy of our template objection letter. As I previously said I am happy to take paper copies to East Devon (please post through our door 11 Clyst Valley Rd) or they can be emailed directly to planningwest@eastdevon.gov.uk 

Below are listed some of our concerns and the responses given by Burrington Estates on Wednesday evening:-

  1.       Although these amendments are an improvement on the original application – do you understand why local public trust was lost, when major changes were made to the proposals after the Public Consultation and this has proved damaging to the relationship between the parties and generated 155 initial objections?  However, there is support for sustainable employment numbers, for the renovation of the historic buildings, the introduction of cafes, bars, retail outlets and services, the reinstatement of the outdoor and indoor sports, leisure and fitness facilities and the swimming pool for use by the community.

The developers acknowledged that they submitted a very different application to the one shown at the Public Consultation in the village hall.

  1.       As professional planners you are aware that national planning laws are endorsed in Local Development Plans with the purpose of governing what is appropriate and what is inappropriate development.

So  why have you ignored planning policies in the East Devon Local Plan, the Neighbourhood Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework by proposing 54 homes on green fields in Zone A that are  specifically protected in the Local Plan; by replacing 14 supportable traditional dwellings (shown at the Public Consultation) with an incongruous, towering 40-apartment block structure in Zone D; by exclusively planning  for only employment uses when Strategy 26B  allocates  conversion primarily for housing and  by developing in  flood risk areas – all of which have now culminated  in the creation of an immensely large development which will pressurise existing oversubscribed infrastructure (particularly highways) and is contrary to countless policies in the Local Plans for the protection of communities? 

Burrington Estates are claiming that the site remains not viable to refurbish without development on the green fields. We asked if it’s not viable, why have they started work on the site and what happens if approval isn’t given the go ahead?  Burringtons claim that they are taking a commercial risk.

  1.       Can you understand the concerns within the community that the original Transport and Economic Impact Assessments contained major flaws that were highlighted by experts commissioned by the Parish Council, so there is continuing scepticism concerning the validity of economic data and statements that suggest that the entire development will not be financially viable without the housing in Zones A and D?  Burringtons purchased this complicated site with a full awareness of the planning history and environmental limitations and it is unacceptable to declare viability issues at this stage.

Burringtons are claiming that they have now met and satisfied the consultees’ concerns but we still have apprehension that their figures and data regarding traffic simply don’t stack up.

  1.       In the light of decisions made by the new  East Devon District Council regime, where they opted to withdraw from the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan, raising concerns about sizeable developments detrimentally affecting the characteristics of  rural districts without supporting infrastructure guarantees – surely sustainable development,  providing  quality rather than quantity would be more appropriate instead of submitting  incongruous proposals which equate to requesting planners to ignore statutory planning policy and promote excessive development in a small, rural village community?

The developers stated they build quality housing

  1.       Is it acceptable to build in flood risk areas without substantial flood relief measures being in place? Burringtons appear to accept that flooding will occur at times  in the new sizeable Zone J parking areas – but where are 395 vehicles going to park when Zone J is under water – existing approach roads and residential area?

We remain extremely sceptical that areas that were designated flood zones on the site will still be flooding. The developers stated they have a very sophisticated flood plan and in the event that the car parks were going to flood, areas of them would be closed off prior to the flooding.

  1.       Highways England had concerns regarding traffic from a potential workforce of between 2,500 and 3,000 (figures quoted by Burringtons at the Public Consultation). However, your amendments now appear to predict 1,381 jobs and 1,068 full -time equivalent workspaces with an emphasis that these could be higher depending on the final mix of uses on the site. Can you explain this disparity in predicted employment numbers? Do you agree that clarity is essential in predicting the expected significant increases in traffic, which will unquestionably overwhelm the capacity of the local highway network at peak times in an area that already suffers with major gridlock?

The developers agreed that the figures stated are a starting point and they might rise but could also be significantly less. (This was after they stated that a large proportion of the buildings have already been pre-let). However, yesterday Highways England reiterated their continuing concerns on significant increases in traffic.

  1.       Strategy 26B  for Winslade Park allocates housing  and a small amount of  office employment use  (only 0.7 hectares) on the brownfield areas and although other uses are supported for the provision of health services, crèches, nurseries, sports, leisure, restaurants and cafes – it must be stressed that B8 (storage and distribution) is totally inappropriate on this site.

It was acknowledged that the site was to be used only for health services, crèches, nurseries, sports, leisure, restaurants and cafes

Burrington’s left the meeting and The Parish Council (PC) debated their presentation. The PC agreed to employ their professional planning consultant to submit a response to the amendments. The PC objected to the design proposals for a block of 40 apartments in Zone D but agreed that if there was proof that the whole scheme was not financially viable without the development on the green fields in Zone A, the PC would not object to the housing development on the green fields.

 

However, having campaigned against inappropriate development and for the protection of these specific green fields for over 6 years – the Save Clyst St Mary Residents’ Association still objects to the development of housing on the green fields in Zone A because the proposals are against planning policy in the East Devon Local Plan and the local Neighbourhood Plan and we remain determined to represent the views of the 155 objectors in this community who did not support such development on green fields. We remain opposed to the amended Zone D height, massing and design of a 40 apartment block in this location and to proposals on flood risk areas and can only accept sustainable development of this site which will not detrimentally affect the highway network with increased traffic.

 

The Residents’ Association is a Member of The Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE Devon) and CPRE planning consultants are submitting another objection to these amendments to support our campaign. CPRE Devon continues to oppose the housing proposals on the green field land of Zone A which is outside the development allocation and in open countryside and contrary to the Development Plan Policy. They also oppose design, height and massing of the 40 apartment block in Zone D and highlight a failure to consider high quality design and place-making given the historic value of this site. They also favour the submission of an Environmental Impact Statement. They consider the proposals fail to demonstrate that the scheme will deliver a sustainable development and mutually supportive gains. The proposals focus on economic benefit and the quantum of development needed to deliver a viable scheme. CPRE Devon concludes that the proposals are not based on local need and do not respect the social and environmental aspirations and planning policy of the community and should therefore be refused. (A copy of their full objection will be available to view under Application 20/1001/MOUT on the EDDC planning website).

 

Why East Devon MPs voted against Labour bid to amend Fire Safety Bill to include Grenfell Inquiry proposals

Tory East Devon MPs have explained why they helped defeat a Labour bid to change the Fire Safety Bill and include proposals from the first phase of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.

Becca Gliddon eastdevonnews.co.uk 

An amendment to the legislation was rejected by 188 votes to 318 in the House of Commons on Monday (September 7).

The Fire Safety Bill – introduced to prevent tragedies like Grenfell Tower in which 72 people died in June 2017 – seeks to clarify who is responsible for fire safety in blocks of flats.

Labour wanted to amend the bill to ensure that recommendations from the first phase of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry were put in place.

The Government says it is committed to implementing the measures – but a consultation on the proposals is needed first.

East Devon MP Simon Jupp and Honiton and Tiverton representative Neil Parish both voted against the amendment.

Mr Jupp said: “I voted for the Fire Safety Bill to help ensure the tragedy of Grenfell isn’t ever repeated.

“I want all those affected to continue to receive the support they deserve and new laws put in place to improve fire safety.

“The inquiry’s report recommended seeking the views of those affected and the wider public on the specific proposals.

“Labour’s amendment would have cancelled out the ongoing consultation before it’s completed next month.

“The Government accepts the recommendations of the inquiry in full and I voted against a move which goes against the inquiry’s report and the process to introduce legislation to protect people’s lives.”

Mr Parish added: “The subject of the Labour amendment is the subject of an ongoing public consultation on fire safety that ends on 12 October.

“This consultation must take place, as changes under the Fire Safety Order must be consulted on.

“As such, the proposed amendment would not have sped up the process for the necessary changes to be made to legislation and under the defeated amendments, regulations would still have had to have been drafted anyway.

“Further, in some areas, not only is the consultation proposing to implement the recommendations as set out by the Inquiry, but to go further still.

“My ministerial colleagues have assured me that fire safety is an absolute priority and the Government will move quickly to act on the feedback from the consultation once it is concluded.”

Phase two of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry is under way.

Its phase one report, published in October 2019, found that the tower’s cladding did not comply with building regulations and had fuelled the rapid spread of the blaze.

Labour’s proposed amendment to the Fire Safety Bill required flat owners or building managers in England and Wales to:

  • Share information with their local fire service about the design of external walls and the materials used;
  • Carry out regular inspections of lifts and individual flat entrance doors;
  • Share evacuation and fire safety instructions with residents of the building.

Labour MP for Exeter Ben Bradshaw said: “The Government’s decision to vote against Labour’s amendment to the Fire Safety Bill is a shameful U-turn on their commitment to implement the recommendations of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.

“It is vital that the Government deliver on this promise so that a disaster like this is never allowed to happen again.”