Claire Wright’s analyses of the fallacies and influences behind the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP) 

 Proposals for thousands of houses in East Devon, as part of new plan to 2040

Claire claire-wright.org

[Owl simply gives a taster to encourage readers to go to her blog. At last we are getting some transparency]

Clair: “A plan to build thousands of new houses across East Devon was unveiled last week, with proposals for specific areas in the county.

I have since spent time talking with strategic planning officers to try and understand the detail of the national policy driving this.

Strategic planning is technical and complicated and takes some learning. I was heavily involved in strategic planning while a councillor on East Devon District Council between 2011 and 2015, so I felt compelled to examine this new plan and its proposals.

I will endeavour to explain my findings below!”

This she does under the following headings. Owl’s view is that her “explanations” highlight the absurdity behind most of the policies and government diktats that will lead to a massive increase in house building in East Devon.

Government housing policy

Affordability uplift

Affordable/social housing element within GESP

Developers fund the Conservative Party

The employment land con

Police investigation into planning in East Devon, in 2013

Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Who leads this work?

Green proposals

 

GESP timetable and supporting papers can be found here

https://www.gesp.org.uk/consultation-phases/stage-two-policy-and-options/

 

Until Covid-19 uncertainty melts away there’s little chance of full economic recovery

“Shoppers were allowed to return to the high street in June as stores began to reopen in England and Northern Ireland, but figures show that few chose to do so. Retail footfall collapsed by 65% compared with the same month last year, according to research by data company Springboard.”

Larry Elliott www.theguardian.com 

Health considerations were all that mattered in the early stages of the Covid-19 pandemic. Governments ordered businesses to shut even though they knew activity would fall sharply as a consequence. There was a clear message to the public: stay at home and save lives.

The lockdowns had the desired effect. The number of new cases soon peaked; after a lag, so did the number of deaths. There was a clear pattern. Countries that took the toughest action brought the infection rate down more quickly than those that delayed or imposed less draconian restrictions.

The cost of quarantining economies was enormous. Britain saw output shrink by a quarter in March and April. The International Monetary Fund said 2020 would experience a global recession worse than anything seen since the Great Depression.

So, as the number of Covid-19 cases came down, the focus of governments started to change. They started to fret about the long-term consequences of a protracted lockdown on jobs, poverty and wellbeing, and began easing the restrictions.

This has been done in a phased way. In England, for example, businesses such as garden centres were allowed to open in May, non-essential shops welcomed back customers from 15 June, and it was possible to get a drink in a pub or stay the night in a hotel from 4 July. Gyms, swimming pools and spas were told last week that they could soon reopen.

The government messaging has changed. Instead of the dire warnings about the risk of catching the virus, the line now is that it is safe to go out and have a good time provided precautions are taken. Hence the appearance of the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, as an unmasked waiter at a branch of the restaurant chain Wagamama last week.

It is taking time for the new message to get through. The British Retail Consortium said shopper numbers in the second half of June were more than 50% down on the same period a year earlier despite English non-essential stores being allowed. Pubs and restaurants traded at half their pre-crisis levels in the first weekend of post-lockdown trading in England.

That’s not surprising. The economist Maynard Keynes said one reason for the severity of the Great Depression was the lack of “animal spirits” among entrepreneurs, who were paralysed by uncertainty over their future prospects and therefore reluctant to invest, no matter how low interest rates went. The solution, Keynes said, was for the government to step in and fill the gap left by the private sector, because state investment in public works would boost activity and help revive animal spirits.

Keynes’s analysis explains what is currently happening in the UK and in other western economies, except this time the real drag on activity comes not from a reluctance of businesses to invest (although that is a concern) but of the unwillingness of consumers to spend.

On the face of it, this is curious. Interest rates have never been lower. Incomes have been protected by furloughs and other wage subsidy schemes. Governments have taken a step-by-step approach to restarting their economies, always insisting that what they are proposing is based on scientific evidence.

Yet a return to the pre-crisis level of activity is being hampered by high levels of perfectly understandable uncertainty. People were told this was the most serious pandemic since Spanish flu at the end of the first world war. They were told not to be complacent when infection rates went down because there was a high risk of a second wave. They were told to wear face masks on public transport and to keep their distance in all social situations. When they go for a haircut or a drink in the pub, the barber and the bar staff are wearing masks.

What does that mean? It means life has not remotely returned to normal and nobody knows for sure when it will. Uncertainty prevails, and until that uncertainty melts away there is little chance of a full economic recovery.

Take Australia, a country that acted swiftly at the first signs of the crisis and has a death toll barely into three figures. With a record like that, it might be thought that consumers in New South Wales and Queensland would be relaxed about the lockdown imposed on Melbourne last week after an increase in the number of cases. Yet restaurant bookings in states other than Victoria have suffered even though the number of newly confirmed Covid-19 cases has remained low. The message to consumers in Sydney and Brisbane is that if it can happen in Melbourne it can happen here, so why take a chance.

There are things governments can do to affect consumer psychology and Rishi Sunak tried some of them in his mini budget last week. A temporary cut in VAT for hospitality and tourism is designed to get people back into the habit of eating out and staying the night in B&Bs. Similar thinking lies behind the £10 off “eat out to help out” vouchers for meals in August. The idea is that if people do it once or twice they will realise it is safe and so become less cautious.

It is not that simple, though. Some consumers are not going to fancy dining in an environment that they fear will have all the ambience of an operating theatre, while giving discounts to people who would have eaten out anyway is a waste of money.

Phase 1 of the economic response to Covid-19 was lockdown. Phase 2 was a gradual reopening that kindled hopes of a quick bounce back. Phase 3 is the critical one that will determine whether or not those hopes are realised. The evidence so far suggests it will be a long haul.

Water bosses showered with big payouts

Only months after the privatised water sector was vigorously lobbying against Labour’s general election pledge to bring the industry back into public ownership, this summer’s annual filings show record amounts paid to private sector bosses.

Robert Lea, Industrial Editor www.thetimes.co.uk 
Multimillion pound payoffs and golden hellos at Thames Water and record pay for bosses across the water industry have been variously condemned as eyewatering, obscene and a national scandal.

Only months after the privatised water sector was vigorously lobbying against Labour’s general election pledge to bring the industry back into public ownership, this summer’s annual filings show record amounts paid to private sector bosses.

Last week it emerged that Steve Robertson, 62, the former boss of Thames Water who left the company last year, received a £2.8 million pay-off. It included a £2 million ex-gratia payment because he had not received any bonuses during his three-year tenure due to the company’s chronic failures on leaks.

That news follows revelations in The Times of the bonanza promised to his successor, the most generous package ever offered in the sector. Sarah Bentley, 48, who was poached from Severn Trent, has been hired on the promise of a £12 million three-year deal including a £3 million “golden hello” in compensation for loss of bonuses at her former employer.

Liv Garfield, 44, the chief executive of Severn Trent, was paid £2.7 million last year, a rise of 10 per cent, including £1.8 million in bonuses.

Steve Mogford, 64, chief executive of United Utilities, the north west England supplier, was paid £2.5 million, a rise of 5 per cent, of which nearly £1.6 million were bonuses Chris Loughlin, 67, the chief executive of the South West Water group Pennon, had a pay rise of 60 per cent, taking his earnings to £2.1 million, of which £1.4 million was in bonuses.

The bumper payouts coincided with a scathing report by the Commons public accounts committee, which said that the private sector’s stewardship of the nation’s water supplies and the rate of leakage — 3 billion litres a day or 20 per cent of the country’s daily usage — had left the UK within 20 years of running out of water.

Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, previously said that water bosses’ high pay was helping to make the argument for nationalisation.

Rachel Fletcher, the chief executive of Ofwat, the regulator, has said that pay levels have “damaged customer trust”.

Luke Pollard, the shadow environment secretary, said last night: “When millions of litres of water are being lost in leaks every week, water company bosses should not be pocketing huge bonuses and inflated pay.

“Over lockdown, more people spent time at their homes so water bosses know people will be paying more in [metered] water bills. Bumper bonuses are a national scandal when so many households are struggling to afford rising bills.”

Mike Keil, policy head at the Consumer Council for Water, said: “Customers will find some of these eye-watering payments hard to swallow especially where executives appear to be rewarded for poor performance.”

Severn Trent argued that on a wide definition, 67 per cent of Ms Garfield’s bonus was related to customer services. United Utilities said that less than 50 per cent of Mr Mogford’s bonus was customer service-related. Pennon said that less than 10 per cent of Mr Loughlin’s bonus was based on customer service measures.

Government urged to recognise the Great South West

Is this formal recognition that the Local Enterprise Partnerships idea has failed?

The questions Owl has are these: How is “The Great South West” and its Chairman Steve Hindley accountable to us, the people who live here? Who gets to choose the “Great Leader” of the “Great South West”? How is what they do, and plan to do, on our behalves scrutinised?

Without satisfactory answers to these questions wouldn’t we be in danger of jumping out of the frying pan into the fire?

As owl has said before (eg here and here) these initiatives always seem to involve the same business men (not women) with a background in property or construction, who hop from one quango to another, without achieving any positive change for the region.

Owl is surprised that so many are prepared to jump so unquestioningly on this band wagon.

The government is being urged to move swiftly to recognise the four counties of the far South West as a region in their own right.

Veteran Devon MP Sir Gary Streeter has written to the Prime Minister, with the backing for MPs from across Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, Devon, Somerset and Dorset.

His letter is prompted by the news that the Government intends to delay any decision until after the forthcoming White Paper on Devolution.

Leaders of the Great South West campaign met the Prime Minister in Downing Street in November last year. They explained the background to their campaign to win recognition for the four counties as a bloc.

Sir Gary said the campaign was supported by the three local enterprise partnerships, all local authorities and all MPs in the region.

“Since 2016, an alliance of all stakeholders behind this project has been painstakingly put in place.” Sir Gary said. This included the Western Morning News, one of our sister print titles.

His letter to the Prime Minister, copied to the Chancellor, the Communities Secretary and the Chief Whip, asks for recognition of the Great South West region now and not after the White Paper on devolution has run its course. Sir Gary said that could result in a delay of up to 18 months.

All the MPs from across the region have given their support, though Sir Gary did not ask Ministers or shadow Ministers to endorse the letter.

“We feel we have waited long enough,” Sir Gary said. “We need this now so we can speak coherently to the Government, and the Government can speak to us.

“I think our region is going to be one of the hardest hit economically by the pandemic, and it will be significant to have a framework for the Government to talk to.

“It has taken a long time to put together this alliance of LEPs, local authorities and business communities. We need to see some success for this campaign to ensure that we keep the alliance together.”

The past couple of years has seen the rise of regional blocs such as the Northern Powerhouse and the Midlands Engine.

“The Government very much likes strategic collaboration and devolution,” Sir Gary said. “We are pushing at an open door.”

In his letter, Sir Gary said the Great South West campaign had put together a “compelling prospectus for growth” in its Securing our Future document. That was launched and submitted before the last election.

“It strongly supports the government’s levelling up agenda by delivering a massive £45 billion boost to the regional economy and creating 190,000 new jobs by 2035,” Sir Gary writes.

“We were pleased to learn that at the Downing Street meeting in November you gave your whole-hearted support to this project.”

He said that Steve Hindley, chair of the Great South West steering group, wrote recently to the Communities Secretary to reiterate the urgency of granting the regional recognition and seedcorn funding needed, “not least to help us recover from the impact of Covid-19”.

He added: “It was a huge disappointment for us to learn last week that the government is not proposing to grant us recognition at this time, but intends to delay any decision until after the forthcoming White Paper on Devolution has been issued and consulted upon, which could easily result in a delay of possibly a year or more.

“There is a strong feeling in our region that other regional groupings have been recognised and supported and that once again, the South West is being short-changed.

“We are writing to draw to your personal attention to the strength of feeling across the region about this matter, and to urge government to release the full potential of the Great South West and the many benefits to our constituents by granting recognition immediately – even if this has to be fine-tuned once the White Paper and subsequent legislation has taken place.”

Tory party split on need for face masks in shops as pressure mounts for clarity

Another example of Government indecisiveness as Boris Johnson dithers over face masks. Michael Gove demonstrates his libertarian tendencies by saying that wearing them should not be compulsory, but then claims good manners means masks should be worn.

We have been here before when Boris Johnson dithered over introducing lockdown. Dithering costs lives. – Owl

Boris Johnson is under mounting pressure to force people to wear face coverings in shops.

He has resisted calls so far despite admitting the evidence for such a move was growing.

Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove said it should be voluntary, while trying to guilt-trip people into wearing them in shops.

Sources think a switch in the rules could be announced this week.

It comes as the UK’s Covid-19 death toll rose yesterday by 21 to 44,819.

Labour has called on Mr Johnson to make face coverings compulsory in shops in England – as they are on public transport.

Shadow Cabinet Office Minister Rachel Reeves told the BBC: “I think that would be a sensible way forward. People are increasingly wearing them but greater clarity from Government about that would be helpful.

“People want to do the right thing but they want to know what the right thing is.

“I think it would inspire greater confidence and might encourage more people to go out and spend money if they see more people wearing face masks in shops.”

Mr Gove stopped short of saying they should be compulsory, but claimed good manners meant masks should be worn.

He said: “I would encourage people to wear face masks when they’re inside in an environment where they’re likely to be mixing with others and where the ventilation may not be as good as it might.

“I think that it is basic good manners, courtesy, consideration to wear a face mask if you are, for example, in a shop.”

He added: “The Government at all times does look at the evidence about what the best way to control the disease is… My view is it’s always better to trust people’s common sense.”

Paddy Lillis, chief of shop workers’ union Usdaw, said: “It should never fall on shop workers to enforce the wearing of face coverings. They are dealing with more abuse than normal and this could be another flashpoint.”

Beauty salons and spas are among the places that can reopen from today.

Face masks are due to become mandatory at almost all times in public in the Balearic Islands from today, with fines of about £90.

Elsewhere in Spain, British tourists are also likely to have to adhere to similar tougher restrictions in Andalucia this week.

Meanwhile, Mr Gove echoed the PM’s call for people to return to work if they can. He said it was crucial to “fire up the economic engines”.

TUC chief Frances O’Grady said: “The worry is the Government is being driven by, ‘How do we get people using restaurants and bars?’. For that we need people currently working at home to get back into town centres.

“The more you relax lockdown, the tougher you have to be on public transport to make sure we don’t end up going back to square one with local outbreaks that get out of control.”

A list of 20 hot spot areas has been drawn up by the Government amid fears they will be forced back into lockdown like Leicester.

Two – Ashford and Folkestone – are in Kent, but the rest are in the North and the Midlands. Kirklees and Bradford in West Yorkshire have been targeted for “enhanced support”. Blackburn, Rochdale, Oldham, Rotherham and Barnsley are also of “concern”.

Meanwhile, Home Secretary Priti Patel fears authorities may have avoided tackling illegal sweatshops in Britain’s fast-fashion industry over worries they would be accused of racism.

There are suspicions virus cases in Leicester were fuelled by exploited staff in the city’s textile factories working when ill.

English councils poised to make cuts amid loss of commercial income

“English local councils are set to shed thousands of jobs and cut services as they count the cost of lost income from multibillion-pound holdings in office blocks, retail parks, airports and cinemas, all badly hit by the coronavirus pandemic…

…Conservative-led councils in south-east England are among the most exposed, accounting for more than half of the commercial property acquired between 2016 and 2019.”

Caelainn Barr www.theguardian.com 

The commercial investments, many acquired in a £7.6bn property spending spree in England over the past four years, were part of councils’ effort to find alternative incomes and protect local services that faced cuts or closure during a decade of deep austerity cuts.

But with Covid-19 lockdown measures closing shops, workplaces and cinemas and leaving some airports deserted, councils’ rents and other revenues have been affected, with two authorities – Manchester city council and Luton council – losing £100m in airport dividends alone.

A Guardian analysis of council finances using data from the Institute for Fiscal Studies indicates more than 30 local authorities receive at least a quarter of their annual income, which they spend on services, from commercial investments.

On Monday a group of MPs will warn that some authorities have taken on “extreme” levels of debt to finance their commercial property spree, risking cuts to services and a big bill for local taxpayers. Members of the public accounts committee (PAC) are criticisal of the government for failing to rein in a handful of councils that have each borrowed more than £1bn to build up their property portfolio.

English councils estimate they will lose £624m in commercial investment income this year as a direct result of the Covid-19 crisis. The government is refusing to offer financial support to cover the shortfall, putting pressure on highly exposed councils to balance their budgets through reserves or service and job cuts.

MPs said the government had been “blind to the level of exposure of the local government sector” to commercial investments, risking a repeat of the Icelandic banks scandal in 2008 when 108 councils from England, Scotland and Wales lost hundreds of millions of pounds in deposits when Iceland’s banking system collapsed.

Meg Hillier, the chair of the PAC, said ministers should bear some of the blame for councils’ reliance on rents from offices and shops. “The [Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)] did not even bother to keep track of the underlying numbers or likely risk but at the end of the day, central government will have to step in if a council fails,” she said.

The most notorious of the property speculators is tiny Spelthorne district council in Surrey, which has built up a £1bn portfolio in four years, snapping up assets such as BP’s head offices at Sunbury-on-Thames for £380m.

Conservative-led councils in south-east England are among the most exposed, accounting for more than half of the commercial property acquired between 2016 and 2019.

Other council investments include petrol stations, supermarkets and, from Ashford borough council in Kent, a cinema complex. Thurrock council in Essex has invested more than £700m, borrowed from other councils, in renewable energy projects.

Aside from borrowing to fund commercial property speculation, councils have put energy and resources into developing assets such as airports to offset the cuts to budgets. In many cases they proved lucrative for both the council and local area, creating thousands of jobs, until the pandemic hit.

Luton borough council, which is reliant on itsincome from London Luton airport to fund just under a quarter of the town’s essential services, is to hold an emergency meeting on Tuesday to approve a £17m cuts plan, including the loss of 365 jobs – more than one in 10 of the council’s roster.

“We were hoping we were coming out of years of austerity when Covid-19 struck,” said Hazel Simmons, the leader of Luton council. The pandemic has wiped out the airport’s passenger and freight traffic, eliminating £30m in dividends due to the council, as the airport’s owner, over the next two years.

The council describes the airport as a “financial lifeline” after its grant funding shrank from £130m to £10m. Over the same period, its annual income from the airport rose from £7.6m to £33m. Under current proposals, any loss of this income will not be covered by central government. Without it, said Simmons, “we would have had to make the cuts we are forced to do now a few years ago, and probably more.”

The council’s proposed £17m cuts to local services over the next few months will affect day centres for older and disabled people, parenting support, neighbourhood enforcement teams and school improvement. “It’s the worst time of my whole tenure,” said Simmons, a councillor since 1991. “We don’t want to do any of those things.”

Luton, which has the second highest reliance on commercial income of any English council, has approached the government for help, pointing out the strategic importance of the airport, but has so far had no response.

Manchester city council, together with nine neighbouring councils in the region, owns 65% of the holding company which operates Manchester, Stansted and East Midlands airports. This year the city council – paid a year in arrears – received an airports dividend of £70m; next April this will be zero.

Spelthorne council told MPs it had launched its property investments to reverse the effects of a decade of cuts. Without its commercial income stream, it said, the government would have to “take over the running of councils directly as they cannot survive without adequate funding”.

Spelthorne rejected concerns it was over-exposed, saying it had received 90% of tenants’ rents for the March quarter and built up substantial reserves. “We believe the council’s ability to withstand the current Covid-19 storm will prove to be the strongest possible demonstration of the council’s robust approach to risk mitigation,” a spokesperson said.

Richard Watts, the chair of the Local Government Association’s resources board, said the government should compensate councils for lost income from commercial investments. “Councils have faced a choice of either accepting funding reductions and cutting services or making investments to try and protect them. As the committee rightly highlights, this was an approach that was encouraged by government,” he said.

The government said it shared concerns about highly exposed councils. “Councils are responsible for managing their finances and must properly consider the risks and opportunities when they make commercial decisions,” an MHCLG spokesperson said.

However, the PAC is scathing of the ministry’s failure to monitor the surge in cheap borrowing by councils from the Public Works Loan Board, a government-backed funding source, or the risks this entails for local services, a problem it first signalled in a 2016 report.

The MHCLG’s promise to tighten up the guidance to prevent councils taking huge, borderline legal risks on commercial investments was not reassuring, the PAC report says. “Ultimately these proposals are four years late and many billions of pounds in borrowing and potentially risky investments too late.”

Cross-party group of MPs to lead first UK coronavirus inquiry

The only UK inquiry to date into the handling of the coronavirus crisis will take its first evidence from bereaved relatives on Monday, amid growing calls for a full independent investigation.

Families of those who have died will give their submissions in writing, via video call, or will arrange to do so in person to the new all-party parliamentary group (APPG) for coronavirus, led by a cross-party group of MPs.

It is so far the only independent inquiry into the pandemic taking place in the UK. The politicians involved hope their findings will be used to inform the government’s response before a potential second peak of the illness this winter.

The Liberal Democrat MP and APPG chair, Layla Moran, said: “From the neglect of care homes to the lack of an effective testing regime, each day brings more evidence of mistakes in the handling of this pandemic, and there is every indication that we will see a potential second spike this winter.

“The country and the NHS cannot afford for these errors to be repeated. There is no time to waste when it comes to learning the lessons from the UK response to the pandemic.”

Calls for a full judge-led public inquiry into the UK’s handling of coronavirus have been building over the last few months, from health professionals, bereaved families, policy experts, frontline NHS staff and MPs.

The APPG’s inquiry, which will be completed by the end of the summer, is an initial focal point where the MPs say they can build up evidence.

The Conservative MP and group vice-chair, Dan Poulter, said: “It is important that we learn lessons about what things we can do better ahead of the difficult winter months that lie ahead.

“This winter, we are likely to face a second wave of coronavirus coupled with seasonal flu virus and it is vital that our health and care system is fully prepared for what is likely to come.”

Labour’s Clive Lewis, Plaid Cymru’s Liz Saville-Roberts and the SNP’s Philippa Whitford are also on the committee, along with the Green party life peer Jenny Jones.

To give evidence, people can go to the March for Change website where the coronavirus inquiry will be opened for frontline workers and relatives to make submissions via a dedicated portal, anonymously if they wish. Professionals and trade bodies can submit evidence via email and it will be published.

Polling this month by YouGov commissioned by March for Change found that 57% of British people feel there should an independent public inquiry into how the UK government has handled the pandemic.

Ms Fay Harris joins Dr Cathy Gardner’s Judicial Review

Owl reveals the story behind the story!

Yesterday Owl noticed a short article in the Sunday Times (paywall) saying that Ms Fay Harris was applying to join Cathy Gardner’s legal action against health secretary Matt Hancock.

Ms Fay Harris’ father, Don, who died on May 1, was one of up to 24 residents of Marlfield care home who died, from various causes, after a Covid-19 outbreak in the 73-bed home in Alton, Hampshire. 

Owl thought the article lacked detail on the progress of Cathy Gardener’s case and has been doing some checking.

Owl understands that the the bare facts about Fay Harris joining the action are correct but the Times were given an exclusive detailed  briefing which they chose not to draw on – too critical of the Government? (The Telegraph broke the original story but only online – it was subsequently published by Sky News and the Guardian).

The key point in the brief is the open publication of the whole legal grounds – all the arguments Cathy Gardner’s legal team  are making and all the evidence. There are some real gems in the 90+ pages!

The legal action is being crowdfunded and has an even higher “stretched” target.

The briefing from Dr Cathy Gardner ran as follows:

Full claim filed; Boris Johnson’s misleading statements

Last Friday, 3 July, my lawyers filed my full legal claim in this case. Since then the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has continued to make misleading statements about the Government’s actions in respect of care homes during the pandemic. In response to the Government’s continued refusal to face up to and acknowledge its gross mishandling of this crisis, I have decided to publish my claim in full. It can be viewed  using the link here.  [Click on the word ‘here’ and it will take you to the document in a new tab]

The claim itself is legally complex. But one thing it does do is set out the facts on how the Government failed care home residents and workers. In doing so, it throws into sharp relief how Boris Johnson’s recent statements on the Government’s handling of the pandemic have been misleading. I would like to take some of Boris Johnson’s recent statements and see how they stack up against the account given in my claim.

Misleading statement #1: “We discovered too many care homes didn’t really follow the procedures in the way that they could have”  https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/07/care-home-chief-denounces-clumsy-and-cowardly-boris-johnson-comments

One thing that’s become apparent recently is that the Government has been trying to shift the blame for the pandemic in care homes onto care homes themselves, and by implication those living and working in them. That strategy is clear from Boris Johnson’s statement, the other day, that care homes “didn’t really follow the procedures”. Yet as my lawyers explain in my claim:

(1) Care homes were being told specifically, until mid-March, that there was “no need to do anything differently”: see paragraphs 53 and 54 of my claim. So until mid-March, at least, there weren’t any procedures for care homes to follow, because Boris Johnson’s government was telling them to carry on with business as usual.

(2) Care homes were forced, throughout March and for much of April, to take in patients who had just been discharged from hospital and who had not been tested for Covid-19: see paragraphs 70 – 78 of my claim. There are even stories of hospitals, in following the Government’s instruction to discharge as many patients as possible, trying to trick care homes into taking them: see paragraphs 92 and 94 of my claim.

(3)  On 2 April the Government published guidance saying among other things that “care home staff who come into contact with a COVID-19 patient while not wearing PPE can remain at work”: see paragraphs 84 – 87 of my claim. This guidance was immediately questioned by industry bodies as being unsafe, which it clearly was: see paragraph 87 of my claim. So it appears that it was the Government, not care homes, who did not know what it was doing.

 

Misleading statement #2: “nobody knew early on” about asymptomatic transmission  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-care-home-deaths-coronavirus-apology-a9607691.html

Another tack the Government has adopted, to shift the blame, is to argue that it simply didn’t know, when formulating its policies on care homes, that Covid-19 could be transmitted asymptomatically.

But this, too, is wrong. As my claim makes clear, the Government’s own advisory group warned as early as January 2020 that the virus could be transmitted by asymptomatic patients: see paragraph 40 of my claim. This fact was made clear to the Government on numerous other occasions early in the pandemic: see paragraphs 44, 45, 69 and 73 of my claim for what the Government knew about asymptomatic transmission as early as February and March. Not only that, asymptomatic transmission of viruses is well known and should have been accounted for.

 

The Government’s consistent failure to tell the truth 

Boris Johnson’s recent statements follow this Government’s consistent efforts to mislead the public over how it has handled the pandemic. In earlier false claims, the Government alleged that “right from the start” of the pandemic it had “thrown a protective ring” around care homes, and that it had brought in the lockdown in care homes ahead of the general lockdown. Both of these statements, too, appear to be untrue: see paragraphs 118, 145-146, 150 and 220-221 of my claim.

In the face of a Government determined to lie and obfuscate rather than face up to its failings, I will continue to fight for justice for my father and the thousands like him who have died, unnecessarily, in care homes in the course of this pandemic. I will continue to update this page as the case develops. Thank you to all who have donated or been following the case so far, and please do continue to spread the word.

 

Rockfish owner calls for help to ease rural ‘debt mountain’

Rural firms ‘need help to ease debt mountain’ and stave off further job losses

Would this be: “Nationalising the Hospitality Industry”? Was this idea on the Heinz 57+1 list? Is this an appeal over the heads of Team Devon and HotSW? – Owl

Harriet Dennys www.dailymail.co.uk 

Rural firms need Government help to deal with their coronavirus ‘debt mountain’ to prevent further job losses, Devon restaurateur and campaigner Mitch Tonks has warned.

Tonks, who owns the Rockfish chain of seafood restaurants on the South Coast, said the VAT cut and dining discount announced last week would help hospitality firms but many will still struggle to repay loans taken on to survive the crisis.

He said the Government must allow pubs and restaurants to make repayments linked to profits, with lower payments in the winter when tourist trade slumps.

Tonks also suggested the Government could become a shareholder in regional hospitality firms by buying some of their debt.

He said: ‘Our business will take five years to pay off its coronavirus loan but if our loan was converted to equity, this would help us grow.’ Tonks and other regional business owners recently had a call with Boris Johnson, whose response he described as ‘supportive’.

He added: ‘It would be wise for the Government to consider the next challenge which is the debt mountain we’ve taken on to survive.’

National Parks help improve young people’s health and life chances

Leader Cllr Paul Arnott in his acceptance speech mentioned the need for EDDC to consider the relationship with the potential National Park with Dorset. He did this whilst announcing the new Climate Action portfolio with its portfolio holder Cllr Marianne Rixon and her assistant portfolio holder Cllr Denise Bickley. But National Parks are about more than this as the latest Newsletter from the Dorset National Park team explains.

Oh – Owl should add that this becomes more compelling if you start to contemplate what the GESP might do to our quality of lives.

National Parks help improve young people’s health and life chances

There is compelling evidence of a growing disconnect between people and the natural environment, and yet now, more than ever before, our natural landscapes provide a vital resource in supporting the health and wellbeing of all young people” says Trevor Beattie, Chief Executive, South Downs National Park.

A discussion paper from the Dorset National Park team shows how National Parks help young people connect with nature and so support their mental and physical health, and how they help improve fitness, educational experience and life chances. It offers ideas and examples of what can be achieved.

The discussion paper notes how a new Dorset National Park partnership at the heart of Southern England could be part of a positive and restorative vision for the future of this area with its outstanding environment and range of recreational opportunities. This would chime with the Government’s manifesto commitment to create new National Parks. A Dorset National Park, as a key partner for councils, communities, the health sector and others, would build on the experiences and successes achieved by other National Parks and support a thriving, healthy, greener future for everyone including Dorset’s communities, economy and environment.

 Dame Fiona Reynolds says: “This report is packed full of evidence about what can be done, is being done and could be done so much more widely and systematically if we really cared about young people’s lives.  Let’s seize the moment to put nature, and access to it, at the heart of our plans for the future.”

Julian Glover says: “Walking long-distance routes with friends and family was one of the highlights of my childhood. I can still remember how steep the path along the Jurassic coast seemed when I was about 10.  I want everyone to get the chance to gain from experiences like that which is why we made it a central part of the recent Landscapes Review which I led. This excellent report underlines just how much it matters.”

We look forward to the Government signalling its intention to create a Dorset National Park. First proposed by John Dower in 1945 as part of a post-war vision for the nation, this could now be part of a national drive to secure a healthy, successful and sustainable future.

We hope you enjoy this paper with its inspiring and positive examples of National Parks’ work with young people.

For more information and to be kept in touch, visit www.dorsetnationalpark.com.

Contact us at: info@dorsetnationalpark.com

 

Is your closed cash machine ever going to come back?

Cash use in some parts of Britain has fallen 90 per cent as ATMs were switched off or ran out of money and consumers rejected notes and coins over fears that they could carry Covid-19. Data compiled by The Sunday Times shows that 7,200 cash machines were shut down in April and May, with 5,040 still out of action, raising fears that many may never reopen.

Kenza Bryan and Tom Calver www.thetimes.co.uk 

Dozens of communities were left without a cash machine within three miles. Many ATMs were turned off as they ran out of money and others were closed because the premises they were in was forced to shut under the rules of lockdown. About one in eight of the terminals in Britain’s network of 60,000 machines was shut at the peak of lockdown, according to the network operator Link.

An estimated 2,280 bank and building society branches — about one in eight — also closed, although many are now open again. Senior banking executives are discussing the widespread closure of branches, according to our sources.

Sunday Times Money understands that the situation has become so critical that the Treasury is preparing legislation that would force banks to provide all customers with free-to-use ATMs within a reasonable distance from their homes.

Cash withdrawals in May fell by half compared with the same month last year, Link data shows, after reaching a record low of £945 million in the last week of March, the first time withdrawals fell below £1 billion since 2005.

Some of the most deprived regions in the country had the smallest declines in cash withdrawals, including constituencies such as Birmingham Hodge Hill and Liverpool Walton. The drop was most pronounced in city centres — central Glasgow fell 80 per cent, and the figure hit 89 per cent in Westminster and the City of London.

Some ATMs were closed because operators were unable to get access to the safe behind machines located on the wall of shops or petrol stations that had to shut.

Those in locations such as cinemas, theme parks, bingo halls and holiday parks are still unavailable and cannot be accessed by security vans for refills. In many cases the switch to contactless card payments means that usage is expected to fall to the point where the machines will become unsustainable.

In pubs, garden centres and convenience stores that have reopened, hundreds of ATMs lie empty because they rely on the premises’ owners to fill them. Normally retailers would use money from their tills to keep the machine stocked up, but thanks to a surge in digital and card payments rather than cash, they do not have enough.

Even as the hospitality sector reopened in England last week, consumers took out a third less cash than usual, with £1.6 billion withdrawn compared with £2.4 billion this time last year.

Natalie Ceeney, who led a government-commissioned review into access to cash in 2018, said that she is regularly contacted by communities where the loss of a free ATM has caused serious hardship. She said: “Before lockdown our cash infrastructure was already on a knife edge. We know that the places most dependent on cash are the most rural and poorest communities across the UK.

“The loss of thousands of cash machines during the past three months shows just how urgently we need action from the government and banks.

“Quite simply, digital payments don’t yet work for everyone, and maintaining the UK’s cash infrastructure is essential to stop millions being left behind.”

Between July and December last year 1,670 cash machines closed permanently. The town of Bungay in Norfolk lost its last bank branch when Lloyds closed two years ago and the council hashad to install a cash machine at the town hall.

The town’s recently elected mayor, Bob Prior, 71, said that he rarely uses cash, but the high proportion of elderly residents in the village rely on it. Market stalls that visit the town every Thursday find that the mobile and internet signal is too poor to make their portable contactless machines work and still do much of their transactions in cash.

Towns such as Durness in Scotland, Tywyn in Wales, and Deal and Margate in Kent have also had to fight to keep a cash machine.

John Howells, the chief executive of Link, said: “Link is expecting some ATMs not to reopen, mainly where the locations that they are in do not reopen, or where machines next to others are removed to maintain social distancing.

“In all cases the public can be reassured that Link will take action to maintain overall coverage and that all high streets large and small will continue to have free access to cash.”

The Treasury said: “We know that many individuals and businesses still rely on cash, which is why we’re co-ordinating work across government, regulators and industry, so we can protect access for everyone who needs it, and have committed to bring forward legislation. Part of this work includes investing over £2 billion in the Post Office since 2010, giving people across the country local access to everyday banking services.”

Revealed: 20 areas of England at most risk of coronavirus resurgence

The government has drawn up a list of 20 councils facing the worst coronavirus outbreaks in England, with Bradford, Sheffield and Kirklees identified as areas needing “enhanced support”, according to a classified document leaked to the Observer and the Guardian.

Juliette Garside www.theguardian.com

As evidence mounts that the relaxation of lockdown rules is leading to a resurgence of Covid-19 in some of England’s most deprived and ethnically mixed areas, officials have ordered the army to deploy extra mobile testing units, which will be sent into a series of hotspots around the country from this weekend.

Public Health England (PHE), the country’s lead infection control agency, briefed local government health chiefs last week that ministers were considering publishing a ranking of the 10 councils most affected by new outbreaks, which could be released within days. Councils fear the data will be used to enforce more local lockdowns of the kind imposed in Leicester, where all but essential shops must stay shut, schoolchildren have been sent home, and pubs and restaurants remain closed.

The top 10 ranking is likely to be based on a document circulated to local health chiefs on Thursday, headed “official sensitive”. The chart, compiled by PHE and reproduced here, ranks the 20 councils with the highest proportion of positive cases. Leicester remains at its head, with 5.7% of individuals who underwent a test found to have the virus. Kirklees, in West Yorkshire, was not far behind, with a 5% rate. Bradford, and Blackburn with Darwen in Lancashire, were the next highest.

Titled “local authority areas of interest”, the table is based on testing between 21 June and 4 July. It identifies six areas of “concern”. More serious cases are labelled as needing “enhanced support”, with three councils in this category. One – Leicester – is listed as requiring “intervention”.

The document states “these areas are currently under investigation by the local public health protection teams”. “Testing access is being increased in areas including Bradford”, it says, and the areas listed are “associated with workplace outbreaks which have contributed to the increase in infection rates”.

Last month, 164 workers at a meat factory in Kirklees tested positive, and at the beginning of July, a bed factory in Batley, which is administered by Kirklees Council, was closed after eight workers were found to have the virus.The communities most affected have several factors in common: poverty, poor health and a high proportion of non-white residents.

The top 10 is likely to change daily, although some areas will remain severely affected for weeks, health directors believe.

“Those on the list are going to be characterised by higher deprivation, higher black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities and denser housing,” said a public health director briefed on the plans.

“Some are going to be in the list for the whole period of the pandemic. The drivers are structural and demographic, so the pattern of spread will reflect the inequalities that already existed. Some of the most strapped-for-cash councils are going to be dealing with some of the worst outbreaks.”

Areas with large south Asian populations, particularly where several generations may share a home and live in crowded conditions, are among those emerging as particularly at risk.

Bradford has the highest proportion of people of Pakistani origin in England.

The council has today deployed testing units, staffed by the armed forces, to its Bowling and Keighley districts. Residents will be able to be tested without an appointment. Similar units will be deployed in Blackburn and Sheffield.

“Bradford has a higher infection rate than most but it’s coming down due to action we’ve taken,” said council leader Susan Hinchcliffe. “We welcome the dialogue with government. We’re already doing more testing than any other authority in the region, but want to do more.”

Bradford has asked for its own mobile testing units, more environmental health officers, support to pay full wages to low-paid workers having to self-isolate, and funding to develop its own local test-and-trace system.

Officials have not yet outlined what metrics will be used to impose further lockdowns, but it is understood a system based on the German model is under discussion. This would involve a threshold of 50 weekly positive tests per 100,000 of the population in any given council. Once that is breached, special measures could be triggered.

Data made public on Thursday shows Leicester is currently on 116 new cases per 100,000 of population per week, down from 140 two weeks ago.

Rochdale is in second place, with nearly 33 cases, down from over 50 three weeks ago. Kirklees is also suffering high rates, as are Bradford, Blackburn with Darwen, Rotherham and Bedford.

The health secretary, Matt Hancock, announced the UK’s first local lockdown on 29 June as Leicester reported 944 new cases in a fortnight. Non-essential shops and schools were shut, and pubs and restaurants were unable to reopen. Legislation to enforce the restrictions was pushed through parliament.

Desperate to avoid Leicester’s fate, councils are lobbying for a “graded response”, the local public health director said, with a rolling back of some elements of lockdown, such as larger gatherings, rather than closure of whole sectors. “What we want to avoid is the secretary of state making clumsy, unhelpful interventions, so we are getting ahead of the curve, understanding what our problem is and acting to address it. But we are hampered by slow reporting of data and absence of data,” they added.

Councils have only just begun to receive a breakdown of new cases by postcode, and this is arriving weekly. Health chiefs say they need the information daily if they are to spot outbreaks in time to stop them spreading.

The plans to publish a top 10 were discussed on a regional call with Public Health England, two public health directors confirmed. “They seem to be intent on putting it into the public domain,” said one of those on the call. “We have expressed some concerns over how they do it, as the data does need to be interpreted. Nonetheless, I welcome transparency.”

The classified list of 20 at-risk councils uses six metrics including number of cases per 100,000 of population per week and per day, percentage of individuals testing positive as a proportion of all tests, and “exceedances”. This is where councils are issued with a red light because they consistently have more positive cases than forecast by a government algorithm. A slightly lower number of exceedances leads to an amber light.

The chart also shows the number of community outbreaks per council over the last week. Outbreaks are classed as two or more positive tests in a single setting, such as a workplace, school or prison.

The Department of Health and Social Care said it did not have a set trigger, but would use a range of data to decide where and how to act, stating: “We have been transparent about our response to coronavirus and are always looking to improve the data we publish, including the way we update testing statistics.

“The list of the 10 local authorities with the highest weekly incidence of coronavirus is already publicly available in PHE’s weekly surveillance report.

“All councils in England now have the ability to access testing data, right down to an individual and postcode level. If councils feel they require more assistance with data, of course, PHE is able to help them.”

Kirklees and Sheffield councils were approached for comment.

Boris Johnson is wrong to blame the housing crisis on overregulation

The government’s promise to ‘build build build’ shows a frightening misunderstanding of planning and infrastructure.

Finn Williams is co-founder of the Public Practice, a non-profit social enterprise building the public sector’s capacity for proactive planning. David Chipperfield is founder and design principal of David Chipperfield Architects www.theguardian.com 


Much of this week has been spent discussing Rishi Sunak’s summer statement and attempts to revive the economy amid the pandemic. But in a month of big government plans, the pronouncement that may well leave a more permanent mark on the post-Covid-19-landscape was Boris Johnson’s promise to “build build build”.

The prime minister’s supposed “new deal” to build our way out of a dire economic situation has been widely dismissed as an empty statement that depends mostly on the repackaging of existing funding with few tangible changes. But for those of us concerned with the built environment – whether in the public or private sector – the speech has huge implications precisely because of what the government is opting not to do. The ideological ambitions to deregulate, reduce control and to willingly weaken environmental standards are frightening and deepen the misunderstanding of the real issues of planning and infrastructure in our country.

We have a housing crisis. This crisis is not because we have an over-regulated planning system but because we have a disenfranchised and dismantled one (funding for running this system has been cut by 42% over 10 years). The rhetoric of “Project Speed”, of “scything through red tape” and poking fun at “newt counting” takes us back to an unfounded and outmoded attitude that planning is the problem. After decades of experience building in cities around the world, it is evident that the opposite is true: planning is the central part of the solution and we need more of it. We’ve also seen evidence through Public Practice that if you celebrate planning, and give authorities the remit and resources to be creative and ambitious, you will have a genuine route to rebuilding the UK’s infrastructure.

Infrastructure does not simply mean technical engineering projects – it also encompasses the basic human right to good housing, which, when planned with skill and to encourage a sense of community, forms the foundations of a civil society.

Focusing on quantity, the prime minister asks why the UK is so slow at building homes? As the government’s own Letwin review of build-out rates identified in 2018, we are too dependent on too few house-builders, all delivering the same kind of homes. We need to diversify this process by funding small builders, community-led housing, housing associations and most critically of all, council housing. Over the past 10 years the planning system approved more than 2.5m homes, but only 1.5m of these have been built. Developers complain of delays in the planning system, but there are more than a million homes with permission that we’re waiting on those same developers to complete.

As far as investment in the built environment and infrastructure is concerned, speed and quantity have to be aligned with quality. Diluting standards will result in lower quality and lower costs for developers but not lower prices, in a housing market where supply continues to trail far behind demand. Deregulation does not guarantee more homes. After three years of unpicking the trail of deregulation that led to the Grenfell Tower fire, and three months of seeing the impacts of existing housing inequalities deepened by the lockdown, it’s shocking that the government is not only loosening planning rules, but continuing to allow homes to be built outside the planning system.

Permitted development rights were first expanded to allow the conversion of offices to homes without planning permission in 2013. Since then, only 30% of the homes built this way have met national space requirements. The government’s 2019 Building Better, Building Beautiful commission came to the conclusion that “beauty should be an essential condition for the grant of planning permission”. None of these homes meet that standard – but then, none of them needed to be granted planning permission either.

Last year the government promised to carry out a review of the quality of homes created through permitted development. Yet before the review has seen the light of day, permitted development rights have been extended further. Most ironically, this building process makes no contributions to local infrastructure, affordable housing or planning fees – all serving to create an infrastructure deficit. Thus the only tangible proposal in Johnson’s great infrastructure speech this week actively reduces our infrastructure capacity.

The government has also opted not to be ambitious about raising environmental standards broadly enough to really confront the challenges of a climate crisis in part caused by the construction industry – such as the problem of embodied carbon in building materials. Nor has the government made any clear attempts to encourage biodiversity, just as many people have gained a renewed appreciation for nature in their living surroundings – even for newts.

The final, most significant aspect of Johnson’s speech was another absence. He promised “the most radical changes to our planning system since the second world war” without explaining what they would be. A planning policy statement is expected this month, and is anticipated to include proposals for zoning, development corporations and a “fast track for beauty”. There is an opportunity to put public planning back on the front foot, but only if it is not undermined by deregulation.

We need changes that could help communities to engage with planning earlier; where they can influence the big decisions instead of being presented with fait-accomplis. We need reforms that empower planners to be proactive and creative, to demand quality and shape development before the market forms its own expectations and fixes its own price. We need to give the public sector the structures and strength to get back into building good homes at scale.

But none of this will happen if planning continues to be vilified as a tick-box process, if local authorities aren’t given the resources to plan proactively, and if the government sees its role as simply getting out of the way.

 

CPRE- Responding to the ‘new deal’, we call for greater green ambition and share our vision

‘With road building at its heart, the PM’s “new deal” makes a mockery of the government’s so-called green recovery. At this historic moment, the government must show real ambition and build back better, not worse, and in doing so balance our health and wellbeing, nature and countryside and the economic recovery.’

Responding to the ‘new deal’, we call for greater green ambition and share our vision – CPRE, the countryside charity

1st July 2020 www.cpre.org.uk 

CPRE today sets out our vision to regenerate the countryside and ourselves – and says the government’s plans make a mockery of its ‘so-called green recovery’.

The PM’s ‘new deal’ speech came just a day before CPRE, the countryside charity, launches our own detailed ‘manifesto’ for a green recovery that can support the regeneration of the economy, our wellbeing and the environment. This vision urges the government to use this post-coronavirus moment as an opportunity for real change, laying out recommendations for ways to stimulate the economy while making life greener and more resilient for the countryside and its communities.

Amongst other key proposals, Regenerate our countryside, regenerate ourselves: A manifesto for a resilient countryside after coronavirus emphasises that our Green Belts, the countryside next door for 30 million people, and other countryside around large towns and cities, should see funding significantly increased to make sure they’re used better for people and to help mitigate climate breakdown. It also presses for the support of greener farming techniques that could make our food supply more resilient.

The recommendations in the CPRE manifesto, with their emphasis on sustainable, community-led development and progress, are starkly at odds with Boris Johnson’s proposed approach. Tom Fyans, our campaigns and policy director, said:

‘With road building at its heart, the PM’s “new deal” makes a mockery of the government’s so-called green recovery. At this historic moment, the government must show real ambition and build back better, not worse, and in doing so balance our health and wellbeing, nature and countryside and the economic recovery.’

A greener future – for everyone

The CPRE’s manifesto for a regenerated countryside, future and population is being launched with a virtual debate. Leading countryside and political voices including Philip Dunne MP, chair of the Environmental Audit Committee, Mike Amesbury MP, shadow minister for housing and planning and Caroline Lucas MP, former leader of the Green Party, are speaking at the event.

The manifesto calls for steps towards a resilient countryside with thriving rural communities. But, given the regenerative power of green spaces that became so clear during lockdown, we’re stressing the need for the countryside to be open to everyone, whether visiting, living or working there. This is especially pertinent in the light of the deep inequalities around access to the countryside that coronavirus highlighted.

‘… given the regenerative power of green spaces that became so clear during lockdown, we’re especially calling for the countryside to be open to everyone, whether visiting, living or working there.’

Natural England’s figures show that children from Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds are 20% less likely than white children to visit the countryside. That’s why our manifesto includes a call for every child to be guaranteed a night in nature in a National Park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, as recommended in last year’s Landscapes Review by Julian Glover OBE.

Rhiane Fatinikun, founder of Black Girls Hike and a panellist at the launch, spoke to this element of our work. She said:

‘Representing people of all backgrounds in the countryside really matters … For too long I didn’t even think about connecting with nature, as if the countryside wasn’t for me.

‘Black Girls Hike was set up to change this. Creating a safe space with people who share your experiences, is refreshing but also essential for our wellbeing. We’ll continue breaking down the barriers to nature and the countryside in the hope that more black girls and people of all backgrounds follow us into the great outdoors.’

A ‘once in a generation opportunity’

At the event, CPRE president Emma Bridgewater summarised what we feel this historic moment can offer, and what we want to see for a green and inclusive future:

‘We’re calling on the government to seize this once in a generation opportunity to put the countryside and access to green spaces at the heart of the recovery. That means putting the Green Belt ahead of developers’ profit margins, guaranteeing children’s education includes quality time in nature and breaking down the barriers to the countryside for groups previously excluded.

‘But we also need to make sure rural communities don’t bear the brunt of the economic fallout by supporting the rural economy and investing in rural social housing. Only then can the government claim to be learning the lessons of lockdown and building back better.’

What a resurgence of Covid-19 around the world tells us about the risk of a second wave

Several countries around the world are already seeing a resurgence of cases, some more severe than the first.

But are they second waves, spikes or simply a continuation of the first wave? And what do they tell us about the likelihood of a second wave hitting the UK this winter?

By Anne Gulland and Paul Nuki, Global Health Security Editor, London www.telegraph.co.uk 

When the Spanish flu pandemic hit the world after the First World War it came in three waves, with the second being the most deadly.

And this is not an oddity. Of the last 10 big respiratory disease outbreaks, five have had significant subsequent waves, and four came after a summer trough.

“Influenza pandemics tend to come in three waves; a spring wave, followed by a severe winter wave and another spring wave,” says Prof Francois Balloux, an epidemiologist and director of the UCL Genetics Institute in London.

Sars-Cov-2 is not an influenza virus but a coronavirus. Nevertheless, it is droplet spread and Prof Balloux is not optimistic for the coming winter.

“To me, the most likely scenario for the Covid-19 epidemic is that there will be a winter wave in the northern hemisphere, which I expect could be worse than the spring/summer waves we’ve [already] experienced”.

Several countries around the world are already seeing a resurgence of cases, some more severe than the first.

But are they second waves, spikes or simply a continuation of the first wave? And what do they tell us about the likelihood of a second wave hitting the UK this winter?

United States – a failure of political leadership

The curve of the US outbreak has been described as a ski slope, with the number of new cases first climbing before plateauing and then steeply rising again.

On Wednesday the number of cases passed the three million mark, confirming the assessment by the leader of the country’s coronavirus taskforce, Dr Anthony Fauci, that the US remains “knee deep in the first wave”.

It is hard to see the US epidemic as caused by anything other than poor leadership. The US is one of the world’s richest nations with a highly developed public health infrastructure but it was slow to react initially and then too quick to open up.

Confused messaging from the White House has left some of the 328 million population terrified and others wondering if the virus really exists at all. Violence and protest caused by the killing of George Floyd will not have helped.

As the chart shows, the latest surge in cases is being led by fast-growing outbreaks across the sun-belt states, stretching from Florida to California.

The outbreaks are thought to have been led by younger cohorts, via parties, bars and restaurants. Poor and black and minority ethnic populations have been hardest hit and are grossly over-represented in hospital admissions, which have been rising sharply for over a week.

Experts say the delay between new cases and deaths will be greater than at the start of the pandemic because mass testing now means younger age groups are being detected earlier.

Nevertheless, Covid deaths – while still falling for the country as a whole – are now rising again in Florida, Arizona, Tennessee, Texas, South Carolina and Nevada.

Having failed to control the first wave of the virus, the US is likely to be in a poor position going into winter.

“Respiratory pathogens tend to be highly seasonal with a peak in winter,” says Prof Balloux, echoing the warnings of the chief medical officer for England, Prof Chris Whitty.

“Transmission is facilitated by low temperature/humidity, and maybe less UV light. Crowding indoors likely plays a role. Worse general health of the population might also play a role,” he says.

Australia – the first true winter wave?

The city of Melbourne has now gone into a fresh six-week lockdown after a spike of coronavirus cases, with a further 191 infections reported on Tuesday.

Australia had been hailed as a global success story in suppressing the spread of Covid-19 and even at the height of the initial outbreak it only reported a little over 600 cases a day.

The virus did not take hold at first because of quick shutdown measures, including border closures and the mandatory quarantining of travellers. By the end of May the country was reporting just a handful of new infections every day.

However, since the end of June the number of cases has started to rise in Melbourne, in the southern state of Victoria where it is now winter. As the chart shows, the area is now suffering a peak that is worse than its first.

Professor Raina MacIntyre, an expert in influenza and emerging infectious diseases at the University of South New Wales, said the situation was more serious than in late March.

“It is possible there has been seeding of infection to other states, and silent epidemic growth which has not yet been detected. I would not be surprised to see epidemics detected in New South Wales and other states within the next few weeks,” she said.

Prof Balloux said rising case numbers in Victoria provided “putative evidence” for a seasonal influence on the virus. The “apparent ‘winter wave’” would be in line with the “dynamic for seasonal influenza and other respiratory pathogens in the southern hemisphere”, he added.

Israel – the danger of opening up too early

On Sunday Israel’s head of public health, Dr Siegal Sadetzki, said the country was experiencing a second wave of Covid-19 after more than 977 cases were registered.

On Tuesday she resigned and was scathing of the government’s response, saying it had opened up too early, against her advice.

“The achievements in dealing with the first wave [of infections] were cancelled out by the broad and swift opening of the economy,” said Dr Sadetzki shortly after announcing her resignation.

Israel responded rapidly and successfully to control the virus in March, quickly flattening the initial peak with a country-wide lockdown. But its lifting of restrictions in May was equally rapid, some would say crude. At the beginning of June, the Israeli government put the “emergency brake” on the re-opening measures after schools appeared to spark a rise in cases. But it was too late and now the country has been forced back to square one.

Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is known as a man of action but not patience – and perhaps that is part of the problem.

“The pandemic is spreading; it is as clear as the sun,” Mr Netanyahu said on Monday. The country, he added, was “at the height of a new corona offensive”.

Iran – poor adherence to social distancing

Iran was one of the first countries outside Asia to be hit hard by the coronavirus and in total has had more than 240,000 cases and 11,000 deaths – although many believe this is an underestimate.

The virus peaked at the end of March when there were just over 3,000 cases a day but then began to fall to under 1,000 by the end of April.

In late April the country began a phased easing of lockdown and by the end of May the country was back to normal, with Iranians packing into shops, restaurants and onto public transport.

This reopening coincided with an increase in the number of cases, which peaked in early June, fell but then started to rise again.

On Tuesday a health ministry spokeswoman, Sima Sadat Lari, blamed the resurgence on people not sticking to social distancing and gathering in large numbers at weddings and other ceremonies.

On Sunday the country belatedly introduced mandatory mask-wearing but there are fears it may be too little too late.

Saudi Arabia – migrant workers, poor living conditions

The oil-rich Middle Eastern country is experiencing a second peak, with the number of cases climbing steadily up until mid May when they appeared to top-out at just over 2,800 a day.

They then fell before starting to rise again and peaking at 4,700 in mid June, although they have hovered around the 3,000 to 4,000 mark since then.

It’s unclear what is behind the country’s unusual epidemic curve. The authorities instituted a strict lockdown but the virus spread throughout the dormitories housing the country’s many migrant workers, who, according to Amnesty International live in crowded and unsanitary conditions.

The authorities insist it will continue with this month’s Haj – the annual pilgrimage to Mecca undertaken by millions every year – although in a much reduced version.

Japan – cluster busting

Japan – a country of around 125 million people – appeared to have escaped the worst of the pandemic and as of July 6 it had registered just under 20,000 cases and 977 deaths.

However, a spike in infections in Tokyo over the weekend – not enough to be described as a second wave – has sparked concern. Authorities reported more than 100 new cases on three consecutive days.

The spike is linked to the city’s entertainment districts, whose bars and clubs have been packed. Some 70 per cent of the new diagnoses are among people in their 20s and 30s.

The national government insists that it is not planning to reintroduce a state of emergency for the capital, with the previous restrictions on bars, restaurants, sporting venues and other places where large groups of people gather lifted after a month on May 25.

For the moment, it looks like Japan is simply fighting new clusters – in much the same way as we are in the UK. And it will be interesting to see if the packed bars and pubs seen in the UK last weekend will lead to a similar spike in cases.

How successful Japan’s cluster busting is will almost certainly determine our success in battling a second wave should it come.

Romania – health or the economy?

Like much of Europe Romania was hit hard by the pandemic in March and April when a strict lockdown was imposed on the country.

Cases fell and in May the government introduced a softer state of alert which is set to run until the middle of this month.

However, at the beginning of June the number of daily infections began to rise again and on Wednesday it recorded the highest number of new cases during the pandemic – 555.

President Klaus Iohannis said if the numbers continue to rise he may be forced to put the country back under lockdown but is wary of hurting the economy – a dilemma that many countries, including the UK, may face in the coming months.

What happens when the Rich take over a small West Country Town

The rise in house prices, estimated by the high-street estate agent Hunter French to have increased by a third in five years, has also angered local people who cannot afford housing.

 “It’s all fancy restaurants we can’t afford and every other house is on Airbnb for silly money.”

 

‘This isn’t really Somerset’: how the rich took over Bruton

“This isn’t really Somerset,” Jock Mendoza-Wilson says as he looks through an estate agents window on the High Street of the small town of Bruton, a few miles away from the site of Glastonbury festival in Somerset. “This is a microcosm of the poshest parts of London transported to one of the most beautiful parts of the country.”

The town, which dates to at least the Domesday Book of 1086, is back in focus this week as George Osborne, the former chancellor and editor-in-chief of the Evening Standard, has become the latest celebrity to move in, buying a five-bedroom Grade II-listed Georgian pile for £1.6m.

“Even before ‘gorgeous George’ decided to pop down, rich people from London have built a microclimate down here, and caused a real spike in prices,” says Mendoza-Wilson as he reels off the names of the other well-known figures who have also made the move west.

Sir Cameron Mackintosh, the musical theatre producer behind Cats, Les Misérables and The Phantom of the Opera, lives in Grade I-listed former Augustinian prioryfrom the 13th century on the outskirts. The fashion designers Stella McCartney, Alice Temperley and Phoebe Philo live in the town or nearby, as does the war photographer Don McCullin, and the filmmaker Sam Taylor-Johnson with her actor husband, Aaron.

The actor Rhys Ifans lives in the centre of the town near Caroline Corr, of the Corrs, and Dominic Greensmith of the rock band Reef.

The influx has led the town, which boasts two private secondary schools and a state boarding secondary school, to be labelled the “next Chipping Norton” and British Vogue called it “the new Notting Hill”.

Iwan Wirth and Manuela Hauser, the founders of global art gallery network Hauser & Wirth who are regularly described as “the most powerful couple in the art world”, moved to Bruton in 2007, selling their former home in Holland Park, west London, to the Beckhams for £30m.

The couple now own a farm, vineyard and hotel in Bruton, and in 2014 they opened a branch of the Hauser & Wirth gallery in converted barns overlooking the town. The gallery’s restaurant was so busy for lunch this week that those turned away from its patio tables were asked to wait 45 minutes for £18 steak salads and £15 miso roast carrots to eat takeaway in the car park. Many obliged.

Mendoza-Wilson, the director of investor relations for System Capital Management, a huge conglomerate owned by Ukraine’s richest man, Rinat Akhmetov, says famous and creative people have attracted each other to the town and created a “real buzz and energy about the place” that has pulled in the wealthy and driven up his house price “massively”.

Mendoza-Wilson’s boss has not bought into Bruton yet, but he could afford to buy the whole town. Akhmetov, whose fortune is estimated at £5.2bn, recently bought a €200m (£180m) villa in Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat on the Côte d’Azur to add to his portfolio, which includes a £137m flat in London’s One Hyde Park and the Ukrainian football club FC Shakhtar Donetsk.

Another billionaire, however, has bought into Bruton. In 2013 the South African internet mogul Koos Bekker and his wife, Karen Roos, a former editor of Elle Decoration South Africa, bought the Grade II*-listed Hadspen House, the seat of the Hobhouse family since the late 18th century.

The £12m house, which was said to have also been eyed by Johnny Depp, has been transformed into a £475-a-night country hotel and spa. Those with a smaller budget can pay £20 for a ticket to tour the gardens, which are being returned to their Edwardian glory by a team of 18 full-time gardeners. (If you like apples, it might be worth it as there are 267 varieties of apple tree.) There are also three restaurants, taking the number catering for a town with a population of less than 3,000 to six.

The latest restaurant to open on the High Street is Osip, run by Merlin Labron-Johnson, who at 24 became the youngest chef to win a Michelin star at his former London restaurant Portland in 2015.

Labron-Johnson, who has just arrived back in Bruton from his girlfriend’s house in London as he prepares to reopen Osip, says he was on the lookout for a new project outside London but had not considered Bruton until his financial adviser suggested it.

He moved last year and Osip, which he describes as “a tiny farm-to-table restaurant” with no menu, opened in November. Food is grown on the restaurant’s allotment, bought from local farmers or foraged from neighbours’ gardens in return for free meals. (The strawberries are from Mendoza-Wilson’s vegetable patch). Dinner costs £65 per person.

“I came to visit, and I fell in love,” Labron-Johnson says. “This is home now. I was slightly nervous that the locals would say: ‘Oh God, not another person from London doing a fancy restaurant’, but people have been really welcoming.”

While those who have also relocated from London have been welcoming, families who have lived in Bruton for generations complain that the “influx of those people from London” has pushed out cheaper restaurants and shops to make space to cater for the wealthy.

The rise in house prices, estimated by the high-street estate agent Hunter French to have increased by a third in five years, has also angered local people who cannot afford housing.

“Bruton is not for locals any more,” says Deborah Eaton, who is taking her grandson Jack and dog Chaos for a walk along the River Brue. “It’s all fancy restaurants we can’t afford and every other house is on Airbnb for silly money.

“It has completely changed – you used to walk from one end of the town to the other and it was nothing but shops. Now the Londoners are buying up all the shops and turning them into houses. My son can’t get anywhere to live. He’s in a tiny rental. The prices have got ridiculous.”

England faces “serious risk of running out of water within 20 years” – News from Parliament

www.parliament.uk 

COMMONS

10 July 2020

In a report published today, Thursday 9 July 2020, the Public Accounts Committee says all the bodies responsible for the UK’s water supply – Defra, Ofwat and the Environment Agency – have “taken their eye off the ball” and must take urgent action now to ensure a reliable water supply in the years ahead. It concludes that the Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (Defra) has shown a lack of leadership in getting to grips with all of the issues threatening our water supply.

There is a serious risk that some parts of England will run out of water within the next 20 years. Over 3 billion litres, a fifth of the volume used, is lost to leakage every day: a situation the Committee describes as “wholly unacceptable”.

The report says Government has failed to be clear with water companies, privatised in 1989, on how they should balance investment in infrastructure with reducing customer bills, and says “ponderous” water companies have made “no progress” in reducing leakage over the last 20 years.

The committee calls for Defra to produce annual performance league tables for water companies; step up on promoting water efficiency and deliver an effective campaign for water saving.

Industry action has failed, says the committee and government needs to step in and substantially step up efforts to coordinate increased awareness of the need to save water.

Chair’s comments

Meg Hillier MP, Chair of the Committee, said:

“It is very hard to imagine, in this country, turning the tap and not having enough clean, drinkable water come out – but that is exactly what we now face. Continued inaction by the water industry means we continue to lose one fifth of our daily supply to leaks.

“Empty words on climate commitments and unfunded public information campaigns will get us where we’ve got the last 20 years: nowhere. Defra has failed to lead and water companies have failed to act: we look now to the Department to step up, make up for lost time and see we get action before it’s too late.”

Further information

Image: Unsplash

More news on: Parliament, government and politicsParliamentHouse of Commons newsCommons newsCommittee news

What might Boris Johnson’s restructuring plan mean for the NHS?

A planned restructuring of NHS England could have a significant impact on its architecture, its relationship with government, which NHS bodies are responsible for which issues, and the role – and future – of its chief executive, Sir Simon Stevens.

Denis Campbell www.theguardian.com 

Foundation trust hospitals

In 2002, Tony Blair instigated the creation of foundation trust hospitals in England, sparking a row with his party. The plan was to liberate the best hospitals from central government control and encourage them to compete with each other to provide better care. There are 217 NHS trusts in England, of which 150 are foundation trusts.

They were handed unprecedented freedom to set their own financial plans and decide clinical priorities. For example, while they can incur a deficit, non-foundation NHS trusts have to break even. They also have different governance arrangements.

Abolishing foundation trust status could hand the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) the sort of controlit has over non-foundation trusts, allowing the health secretary to be more directive and interventionist over how hospitals spend their money and the action they take to tackle waiting lists, for example.

Integrated Care Systems

Since Stevens became chief executive of NHS England in 2014, he has sought to unwind the fragmentation of the service’s set-up that was a legacy of the coalition’s Health and Social Care Act 2012. He set up 44 sustainability and transformation partnerships (STPs), one for each area of England. They are voluntary, informal groupings of different NHS trusts – those providing acute, community, mental health, specialist and ambulance services – and sometimes local councils too.

Eighteen of these STPs have metamorphosed into integrated care systems (ICSs), and the plan is for the remainder to follow suit. ICS members collaborate closely but the bodies currently have no legal standing. However, under plans being studied by Boris Johnson’s new health and social care taskforce, all ICSs could become legal entities. They may be given the responsibility and budgets – possibly running into billions of pounds – for tackling workforce, financial and waiting time problems across their region, rather than individual trusts each doing their own thing.

However, this would disrupt the existing NHS financial and accountability regimes because, as one senior NHS official said, “they would be powerful new beasts in the NHS jungle that everyone else would have to work out their relationship with”. There would be new power flows between the ICSs and national NHS leaders and they would drive forward the integration of health services, and potentially health and social care, that ministers, Labour, NHS bosses and patient groups all want to see.

Payment by Results

Currently, NHS-funded healthcare providers in England receive much of their income under a system called Payment by Results. Providers receive a standard payment under the NHS “tariff system”, which is a set of fixed prices that it will pay for treatment, such as a visit to A&E or a surgical procedure.

There is concern that Payment by Results encourages hospitals to treat patients who may benefit from another form of care, such as physiotherapy rather than a knee replacement, and runs counter to working together in the patient’s interest.

The new taskforce is considering replacing it with a system under which care providers, or groups of care providers, would be paid for entire courses of care rather than individual episodes. While this would not affect district general hospitals’ income significantly, it may be harder to apply to specialist hospitals such as London’s Royal Marsden cancer hospital, which take patients from far outside their areas, and ambulance trusts, which operate across STP/ICS boundaries.

National NHS organisations

There is frustration in Downing Street, the DHSC and the Treasury that some NHS bodies have not performed well during the Covid-19 crisis and need reform. It is an open secret in Whitehall that Public Health England, an executive agency of the DHSC and thus already under its direct control, will not survive in its present form as ministers blame it for the poor implementation of coronavirus testing and tracing. There is also frustration that Health Education England, an arm’s-length body, has not done enough to tackle NHS staffing problems that have left it short of about 100,000 personnel. However, it is not clear what new arrangements would replace the current setup.

Simon Stevens

In his six years as NHS England’s chief executive, Stevens has exploited the operational independence of the role thanks to the last Conservative shakeup of the NHS in 2012. Previously, he won plaudits for telling MPs publicly that Theresa May was “stretching” the truth when talking about how much money her government was giving the NHS. He has used his position to push ministers to take action on obesity, the gambling industry and – last Sunday on the BBC – social care. However, some ministers and aides in Downing Street resent Stevens’ past tendency to speak out, what they see as his “invisibility” during the coronavirus crisis, the independence he enjoys and what they portray as his lack of accountability for rising waiting times and hospitals ending up in the red. If the proposals that emerge from the taskforce limit his power, Stevens may choose to consider his future.

Boris Johnson plans radical shake-up of NHS in bid to regain more direct control

The prime minister has set up a taskforce to devise plans for how ministers can regain much of the direct control over the NHS they lost in 2012 under a controversial shake-up masterminded by Andrew Lansley, the then coalition government health secretary.

Any radical overhaul of the NHS is also fraught with dangers….

Denis Campbell www.theguardian.com 

Boris Johnson is planning a radical and politically risky reorganisation of the NHS amid government frustration at the health service’s chief executive, Simon Stevens, the Guardian has learned.

The prime minister has set up a taskforce to devise plans for how ministers can regain much of the direct control over the NHS they lost in 2012 under a controversial shake-up masterminded by Andrew Lansley, the then coalition government health secretary.

The prime minister’s health and social care taskforce – made up of senior civil servants and advisers from Downing Street, the Treasury and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) – is drawing up proposals that would restrict NHS England’s operational independence and the freedom Stevens has to run the service.

In the summer, the taskforce will present Johnson with a set of detailed options to achieve those goals, and that will be followed by a parliamentary bill to enact the proposals, it is understood.

“The options put forward to the prime minister will be about how the government can curb the powers of NHS England and increase the health secretary’s ‘powers of direction’ over it, so that he doesn’t have to try to persuade Simon Stevens to do something,” said a source with knowledge of the plans. “[The health secretary] Matt Hancock is frustrated [by] how limited his powers are and wants to get some of that back.”

The proposed NHS overhaul comes amid plans for other significant reforms, including to the universities system and the military.

The coronavirus crisis and an 80-seat majority have made Johnson determined to act. There is ministerial frustration at the role some health agencies have played during the pandemic, notably Public Health England (PHE), and a desire to make permanent some recent changes in NHS working, such as different NHS bodies working closely together, and the huge increase in patients seeing their GP or hospital specialist by video or telephone.

Ministers are also keen to “clip Simon Stevens’ wings”, sources said. There is a widely held view in the government that he enjoys too much independence, and frustration that his arms-length relationship with the DHSC means that Hancock has to ask rather than order him to act. The Treasury in particular is irritated that NHS treatment waiting times continue to worsen, and many hospitals remain unable to balance their budgets, despite the service receiving record funding.

Dominic Cummings, Johnson’s chief adviser, is not a member of the taskforce but William Warr, his health adviser, is. It is chaired by a senior mandarin from the DHSC. Its remit also includes delivery of the array of NHS promises the prime minister made during last year’s election campaign.

The taskforce’s creation last month follows tension between NHS England and the health department over issues that have caused Johnson’s administration persistent problems, including testing of patients and NHS staff, and shortages of personal protective equipment. Sources close to the health secretary say he believes that Stevens has been “invisible” and unhelpful during the pandemic and is not accountable enough for problems such as patients’ long waits for care.

Under one option being discussed, ministers would use new NHS legislation to abolish the foundation trust status introduced by Tony Blair in the early 2000s, under which many hospitals in England enjoy considerable autonomy from Whitehall, as part of a drive to give the DHSC more control over the day-to-day running of the health service.

The taskforce is also examining whether to turn integrated care systems, which are currently voluntary groupings of NHS organisations within an area of England, into legal entities with annual budgets of billions of pounds and responsibility for tackling staff shortages and ensuring that the finances of its care providers do not go into the red. That would add dozens of powerful new bodies into the NHS’s already-crowded organisational architecture and raise difficult questions about the powers and responsibilities of individual hospitals and NHS England leaders.

The prospect of a radical restructuring of the health service has prompted warnings from experts that renewed upheaval could damage the government and destabilise the NHS. Richard Murray, the chief executive of the King’s Fund thinktank, said problems created by the Health and Social Care Act 2012 should caution ministers against a major overhaul.

“Any large-scale reorganisation of the NHS comes at a high price as they distract and disrupt the service and risk paralysing the system. The last major reorganisation came in the 2012 Lansley reforms. These proved hugely controversial for the coalition government but perhaps worse, they have not stood the test of time,” said Murray.

“The changes we see in the NHS now – towards better integration and working across the health and care system – have come despite the 2012 act, not because of it. They stand as a warning against large-scale change that tips the entire NHS into reorganising the deckchairs.”

A shake-up could create problems for Johnson, who has made support for the NHS a key part of his programme for government, Murray added. “To date, many of the promises the government has made – more nurses, GPs and other staff, a new building campaign – do confront the real challenges facing the NHS. On the contrary, while there is a case for targeted changes to legislation, no one asked for large-scale reform.”

The Conservative MP Dr Dan Poulter, a health minister in the coalition, said the 2012 act caused more problems than it solved. “It has resulted in health ministers now wielding little real control over the functioning of the NHS, and the Covid pandemic has crystallised the failure of many of the health system’s arms-length bodies to properly coordinate a rapid national response at a time of great crisis.

“The current structures are not fit for purpose as they focus on competition and not enough on the integrated approach to health and social care that is so badly needed by patients. We need to return to a more streamlined command and control structure for the health system that is more in keeping with [Nye] Bevan’s original vision for the NHS.”

But, he added, “whilst it may be needed, a radical overhaul of the NHS is also fraught with dangers. A focus on structural reorganisation could well result in a worsening of operational performance in the short term and would be all the more challenging during the current pandemic.”

At the request of the then prime minister, Theresa May, NHS England last year brought forward proposals to modernise the way it works, which were due to form the basis of an NHS bill. However, Johnson wants to take a bolder approach to reform than that contemplated by his predecessor.

Downing Street declined to discuss the taskforce or its plans for NHS reform. A spokesperson said: “This is pure speculation. As has been the case throughout the pandemic, our focus is on protecting the public, controlling the spread of the virus, and saving lives.”

NHS England declined to comment.