Standard

Posted by

Posted on

24 May 2018

Posted under

Rural communications, Rural communities

Truth in Broadband advertising

“From today, new advertising rules will force internet service providers (ISPs) to be more upfront about exactly how fast your connection should be. Previously, broadband providers could entice people with tantalisingly fast “up to” speeds so long as they were available to at least ten per cent of customers at any time of day. The new average speeds must be available to at least 50 per cent of customers at peak times – i.e. when you’re actually at home trying to stream Netflix in 4K or make a Skype call that doesn’t drop out every two minutes.

Take Sky Broadband as an example. It’s already adhering by the new Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) rules and as a consequence its 17Mbps service is now billed as 11Mbps. Add in the usual caveats of poor Wi-Fi signal, bad wiring and other interference and that number will fall further still. But honesty doesn’t address the underlying issue: the UK’s broadband infrastructure remains a cheap, outdated mess.

Think you’ve signed up to fibre broadband? Think again. Unless you’ve got fibre to the home, then your connection is actually a mix of fibre and copper – fibre all the way to the nearest roadside cabinet and copper up to your front door or building. So while everyone will now have to be (more) honest about speeds, they can still be economical with the truth when it comes to exactly how your home is hooked up.

And that makes a big difference. The UK’s fibre to the home infrastructure is so poor it’s out-performed by almost every other country in Europe (Latvia, with 50.6 per cent fibre coverage, ranks first in terms of market penetration). The number of fibre subscribers in Europe increased by 20.4 per cent to 51.6 million in 2017. Of the major European countries, Spain (17.5 million) and France (14.9 million) are the major success stories.

Across Europe, the number of fibre to the home and fibre to the building subscribers reached 51.6 million. In total, more than 148 million homes now have the ability to access such connections.

Part of that is down to the realities of bricks and mortar. Fibre to the home is easier to install in big apartment blocks, which are more commonplace on the continent than in the UK. The makeup of who runs and owns the infrastructure also plays a part. In the UK, that’s (mostly) Opeanreach, which until recently wasn’t keen on sharing. Recent regulatory changes mean it now has to let providers other than BT use its underground ducts and overhead poles to install their infrastructure. …”

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/uk-broadband-speeds-fibre-to-the-home

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

24 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Health and Social Care (local), Lib Dem (local), NHS (local)

Comments

1 Comment

NHS and taxes: pay once, pay twice, pay three times

Once: original taxes
Twice: new additional tax
Thrice: means-tested assistance with care needs:

“Taxes are going to have to rise to pay for the NHS if the UK is to avoid “a decade of misery” in which the old, sick and vulnerable are let down, say experts.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies and Health Foundation said the NHS would need an extra 4% a year – or £2,000 per UK household – for the next 15 years. …”

Most interesting of all is this table:

The Lib Dems didn’t do themselves any favours in coalition did they!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44230033

And here’s Owl thinking we paid once!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Hugo Swire

Comments

1 Comment

Sidmouth Herald: only Swire “good news” covered

Lots of column inches from Sidmouth Herald about Swire meeting with Chamber of Commerce,though to be fair the news is only good in the sense that they met!

Strangely, no coverage of Owl’s story about Swire’s business link with Lord Barker who in turn is linked to Trump, Russian oligarchs and Putin and who (Barker) appears to be in the bad books of MI 5 according to the Sunday Times!

Be careful lest you be judged by the friends you keep

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 May 2018

Posted under

Democracy, Independent Councillors

So you want to be a (female) councillor? Fawcett Society meeting in Exeter

To register go to Eventbrite: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/exploring-your-political-pathway-workshop-panel-discussion-tickets-45097615181

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, East Devon Alliance, Independent Councillors, Neighbourhood Plans, Villages BUAB, Woodbury

East Devon’s Villages Plan is agreed by the planning inspector (with implications for business parks)

Press Release including comments from East Devon Alliance Independent Councillor Geoff Jung:

“I am delighted that, after a number of years of hard work and following extensive public engagement, the Planning Inspector has found our Villages Plan to be sound. The Plan is a key document that once adopted will sit alongside the Local Plan and help promote the right types of development in the right places for our rural villages and communities while protecting our outstanding countryside assets and environment.”

Developers will be able to refer to Villages Plan when considering building in larger East Devon villages, the town of Colyton and Greendale and Hill Barton business parks.

Planning Inspector Beverley Doward’s report on the East Devon Villages Plan has been received by East Devon District Council and the inspector concludes it is sound, subject to her earlier submitted “main modifications”.

The East Devon Villages Plan sets out planning policy that will help determine planning applications in the larger villages of East Devon (and the town of Colyton), as well as at Greendale and Hill Barton business parks. The primary role of the Villages Plan is to set boundaries (known as built-up area boundaries and employment areas) around villages and the two business parks, which will help determine where new development can be built.

Outside these boundaries opportunities for development will be far more restricted, which will effectively control the outward expansion of villages and the two Business Parks into the surrounding countryside. The Villages Plan will sit alongside the adopted East Devon Local Plan and together they will guide and manage development across the whole district.

East Devon’s Strategic Planning Committee will consider the report on 26 June 2018. The committees new Chairman Cllr Paul Diviani says:

It is expected that the Villages Plan will go before the Full Council on 25 July 2018 for adoption.

Welcome News to the Communities of Farringdon and Woodbury Salterton
The adoption of the Villages plan is a welcome additional Planning Document to the two rural communities of Woodbury Salterton and Farringdon, which are close to Greendale and Hill Barton Business Parks. These very large Industrial parks have seen continued growth for many years and dwarfed their rural communities.

The Inspector in her report states that:

“By virtue of the definition set out in Strategy 7 of the EDLP, the business parks lie within the countryside where development will only be permitted where it is in accordance with a specific Local or Neighbourhood Plan policy that explicitly permits such development.”

Further in her report the Inspector notes that:

“Greendale Business Park and Hill Barton Business Park have clearly made an important contribution to the supply of employment land within the district and provide valuable employment opportunities.”

“There is nothing in the evidence that has been submitted to the examination of this Plan that leads me to conclude that there is currently a need to provide for future employment development in locations other than those which have been tested and found sound through the examination of the EDLP. (East Devon Local Plan)”

“The inclusion within the EDVP of a policy providing for future growth at Greendale Business Park and Hill Barton Business Park, whilst considered as a ‘reasonable alternative’ in the SA, is not supported by it and instead the option of not providing for further expansion of the business parks is identified as the preferred option.”

“I am satisfied that the approach not to provide for the further expansion of Greendale Business Park and Hill Barton Business Park in the EDVP beyond that which is already authorised is justified and consistent with the development strategy of the EDLP.”

“To conclude on this issue therefore, subject to MM08, MM09, MM10 and MM11 the approach adopted in the EDVP to Greendale Business Park and Hill Barton Business Park is justified and consistent with the development strategy of the EDLP and is capable of effective implementation.”

East Devon District Councillor Cllr Geoff Jung for Raleigh Ward which includes the village of Woodbury Salterton says:

“I welcome this long-awaited Village Plan and the inclusion of the Employment Areas for the Business Parks of Hill Barton and Greendale.

The Planning Inspector Beverley Doward’s comments and recommendation for the business parks demonstrates that further expansion of either the Business Parks beyond the present approved boundaries will not be considered appropriate.”

“This Plan will provide clarity and certainty required for both communities of Farringdon and Woodbury Salterton and the owners of the Business Parks.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 May 2018

Posted under

Hugo Swire

Comments

1 Comment

Be careful lest you be judged by the friends you keep

East Devon Watch yesterday:

“Lord Barker appears to have a very strong connection to our East Devon MP Hugo Swire with another energy company in which he and Hugo Swire appear to be the only two directors – a company which does not appear to be on Swire’s current Register of Interests, though he is shown as an active director.

Lord Barker and Hugo Swire are named as directors of: Eaglesham Investments.
Lord Barker in his register of interests describes the company as:

“developer of clean energy projects overseas, focussed on emerging economies)”

Times today:

“Only two big western economies allow the large-scale ownership of assets such as land and mansions to be anonymous. One is the United States. The other is Britain, and it is an open secret in Moscow which of the two is a soft touch for oligarchs wishing to invest not only anonymously but without much risk of scrutiny.

For most of the post-Cold War period London has been a bolthole for Kremlin-connected fortunes. Its property market, schools, banks, legal firms and football clubs have been a magnet for Russian billionaires who in turn have enriched an entire class of grateful City professionals. …”

Sunday Times yesterday:

“MI6 is known to have been enraged when the firm [EN+ Group] was able to use the London Stock Exchange last year to raise an estimated £1bn. The company, chaired by Lord Barker, a former Tory energy minister, has been linked to the Russian military, including the production of a Buk missile that Dutch investigators said downed flight MH17 over Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people.”

CNN today:

Lord Barker is co-operating with a former senior campaign and transition aide to President Donald Trump [Bryan Lanza] recently inked a deal to help a Russian oligarch’s conglomerate shed sanctions the Trump administration slapped on them last month. …

… “The source familiar with the transaction noted Lanza and the Mercury team’s first phone call with [Lord] Barker shortly before the Treasury Department granted Deripaska’s companies, including EN+ Group, an additional month to get in compliance with sanctions. The source said Lanza and other Mercury lobbyists presented the extension to the administration officials as a “win for the president” because it would ultimately force a Russian oligarch to cede control of major companies.

Barker declined to comment. A [US] Treasury Department spokesman declined comment. …”

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/12/politics/washington-lobbying-trump-era/index.html

Financial Times today:

“… EN+ is chaired by Greg Barker, a former Conservative energy minister and a one-time employee of Chelsea FC owner Roman Abramovich. Lord Barker has been scrambling to secure a rescue plan for the company that aims to sever Mr Deripaska’s control and free it from sanctions.

However, the MPs’ report is likely to herald greater scrutiny of western companies that benefit from money-laundering, potentially including estate agents and schools. …”

https://www.ft.com/content/5f26f8bc-5c3d-11e8-9334-2218e7146b04

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

20 May 2018

Posted under

Hugo Swire

Comments

8 Comments

Swire and Lord Barker (linked to Russian military and oligarchs) appear to be in business together (a business apparently not on his register of interests)?

In the story published by below from today’s Sunday Times about Russian oligarchs and dirty money are the following paragraphs:

“… Tugendhat is particularly concerned about lax controls fostering Russian influence including the London flotation of EN+, an energy company controlled by Oleg Deripaska, one of Russia’s wealthiest men who is closely linked to Putin.

MI6 is known to have been enraged when the firm was able to use the London Stock Exchange last year to raise an estimated £1bn. The company, chaired by Lord Barker, a former Tory energy minister, has been linked to the Russian military, including the production of a Buk missile that Dutch investigators said downed flight MH17 over Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people.

The float was waved through by regulators despite EN+ being part-owned by VTB, a Russian state-owned bank subject to EU and US sanctions. The bank lent the firm £697m to help fund the flotation.”…

Lord Barker appears to have a very strong connection to our East Devon MP Hugo Swire with another energy company in which he and Hugo Swire appear to be the only two directors – a company which does not appear to be on Swire’s current Register of Interests, though he is shown as an active director.

Lord Barker and Hugo Swire are named as directors of:

Eaglesham Investments
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10520733

where Lord Barker and Swire are the only two directors.

The company was incorporated in 2016.

Lord Barker in his register of interests describes the company as:

“developer of clean energy projects overseas, focussed on emerging economies)”

https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-barker-of-battle/1389/register-of-interests

Swire’s register of interests is here:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem/180514/swire_hugo.htm

in which Eaglesham Investments does not appear to be listed.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

20 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Economy, Sleaze

“Oligarchs’ ‘influence and dirty money threaten UK’”

“A rising Tory MP warns that government inaction on laundering is a gift to Putin and has let rich Russians think they own Britain.

The Tory chairman of the foreign affairs select committee has launched a withering attack on the government’s failure to tackle the effect of Russia’s “dirty money” on Britain, ahead of the publication of a damning report this week.

Tom Tugendhat, one of the Conservative Party’s brightest hopes, criticised the UK’s “lethargic response” to Russian money-laundering and organised crime that has been enabled by London’s financial and property markets.

The MP said the government had failed to deal with oligarchs who cleaned their illicit wealth by buying townhouses in Belgravia and Mayfair, while also allowing Russian companies to raise money in London despite being under sanctions.

Writing on The Sunday Times website, Tugendhat said the regime of President Vladimir Putin had been emboldened: “Our lethargic response . . . is taken as proof that we don’t dare stop them. This is no longer just a financial problem,” he writes. “Over the years Moscow has turned from being a corrupt state to an exporter of instability. London’s markets are enabling the Kremlin’s efforts.”

Tugendhat spoke out ahead of an excoriating select committee report tomorrow entitled Moscow’s Gold: Russian Corruption in the UK. The findings will embarrass Theresa May’s government, which has professed to take a tough line with Moscow over the poisoning of the Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Salisbury.

However, the MP for Tonbridge and Malling points out that Gazprom, the Russian gas giant, was able to “trade bonds in London days after the attempted murders”.

He said there was a link between “oligarchs’ wealth and the power of the Kremlin” and highlighted evidence to his committee that some rich Russians now believe “they own Britain”. “Russian corruption and influence has become a matter of national security,” he writes.

Tugendhat is particularly concerned about lax controls fostering Russian influence including the London flotation of EN+, an energy company controlled by Oleg Deripaska, one of Russia’s wealthiest men who is closely linked to Putin.

MI6 is known to have been enraged when the firm was able to use the London Stock Exchange last year to raise an estimated £1bn. The company, chaired by Lord Barker, a former Tory energy minister, has been linked to the Russian military, including the production of a Buk missile that Dutch investigators said downed flight MH17 over Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people.

The float was waved through by regulators despite EN+ being part-owned by VTB, a Russian state-owned bank subject to EU and US sanctions. The bank lent the firm £697m to help fund the flotation.

Deripaska was himself hit by tough US sanctions imposed after the Skripal poisoning. Last week, he stepped down from the EN+ board in an attempt to free it from sanctions.

“Oligarchs, who depend on Putin no matter how rich they are, have been encouraged to invest in everything from real estate to pharmaceuticals, providing Russia with leverage,” writes Tugendhat.

“It isn’t just about theft through tax evasion but enabling entire nations to be robbed of their democratic rights.”

Garry Kasparov, the Putin critic and former world chess champion, said the flow of corrupt money from Russia into the West was part of a “subtle” Kremlin strategy to “launder and spread influence”. Kasparov, who stood for the presidency in his homeland in 2007, also criticised Europe for failing to wean itself off Russian oil and gas reserves following the war in Ukraine in 2014. He said this had handed Putin leverage over the EU.

“Much of Europe still depending on Russian energy over four years after Putin invaded a European country is damning, as is the willingness of many in Europe to continue with pipeline plans that would only increase Putin’s leverage and cash flow,” Kasparov said. “It’s a war, and your enemy cannot be your partner at the same time if you want to win.”

Source “The Sunday Times” (pay wall)

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Economy, Spin

When is a not worker a worker?

“A friend of mine has lost his job at RBS a month or so back. Has to sign on every other week, but is not unemployed as long as he proves that he is looking for work. He has to ‘work’ 16 hrs a week looking for work to get his NI paid. But he’s not unemployed; he’s just not working.”

Comment at:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/may/18/ikea-halts-new-preston-store-as-uk-profits-fall

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 May 2018

Posted under

Hugo Swire

Julian Assange (Wikileaks) and Swire: “Not my stone, not my shoe”

In a story about how the Ecuadorian embassy turned from offering Julian Assange (of Wikileaks notoriety) asylum to spying on him, using a flat close to the embassy set up for the task there is an interesting passing reference to our MP:

“… Every month, the security company sent a confidential list of Assange’s visitors to the Ecuadorian president. There were additional “extraordinary” reports. Sometimes, the company included stills from secret video footage of interesting guests, plus profiles and analysis. They also reported when a packet of sweets was lobbed on to the balcony, seemingly a present for Assange.

It is these visitor logs that will interest [Robert] Mueller [investigating connections between Trump, Assange and Russia]. He is reportedly close to indicting Russian hackers allegedly behind the raid on the Democrats’ electronic servers and seems to view WikiLeaks as an integral part of the Kremlin’s multifaceted espionage operation. The FBI has interviewed at least one source close to Operation Guest, it is understood.The external surveillance team wrote up descriptions of these encounters. They were sent back to Senain and Correa, sources say. The then Ecuadorian foreign minister, Ricardo Patiño, visited Assange in London, talking with him into the early hours, and criticised Britain for failing to find a solution to the standoff. The UK was unmoved.

Asked what the government planned to do about Assange, the then foreign minister, Hugo Swire, said: “Not my stone, not my shoe.” …”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/15/julian-assange-ecuador-london-embassy-how-he-became-unwelcome-guest

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, DCC, EDDC, Greater Exeter, Unitisation

Is one Devon unitary council being created by stealth?

DCC Leader John Hart said on Spotlight this evening, that the reason Devon isn’t going for unitisation is that the government usually insists on 0.5m population for a unitary council and so Devon would need 2 unitary councils and, whichever way you cut it, that would result in one rich council and one poor council. (Presumably he means a north/south divide or east/west).

(No worries, Mr Hart, ALL councilswill be very poor, very soon!)

BUT WAIT! Isn’t “Greater Exeter” coming in close to 500,000 population?

Exeter – approx 120,000
Mid Devon – approx 80,000
Teignbridge – approx 125,000
East Devon – approx 140,000

YES – it is big enough to be unitary and is developing an over-arching “Strategic Plan”.

Are we getting a “Greater Exeter” unitary council by stealth?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, DCC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Somerset, Unitisation

Comments

1 Comment

[Somerset] “Tory council at risk of bankruptcy calls for funding system fix”

Owl says: “Hissing” in the wind! Our unelected and unaccountable Local Enterprise Partnership now controls the vast amount of money in both counties!

“A Tory-controlled local authority has called on ministers to fix a “broken” system of council funding after it emerged its deteriorating finances mean it is at serious risk of going bust.

Somerset county council has been told that large overspends on children’s social services, coupled with reduced government funding and the erosion of its reserves, have left its finances “in a very challenging position”.

A formal peer review says any failure to meet its ambitious financial savings targets for the current year would leave the council at risk of being unable to set a balanced budget within months – in effect leaving it at risk of insolvency.

The county, which has already announced unpopular plans to close two-thirds of its Sure Start children’s centres, more than half of its libraries and make big reductions to its learning disability services, must now find further cuts.

There has been heightened concern over the sustainability of local authority finances since Northamptonshire county council declared effective bankruptcy in February. It was subsequently taken over by government commissioners.

A spokesperson for Somerset county council said: “There are clearly pressures on our budgets, as there is on local authority budgets up and down the country as government funding falls and demand grows.

“The recent peer review report found many positives and areas of success. It also concluded that we understand the financial challenges we face and that we can meet them.

“We believe the system by which local government is funded is broken and call on the government to address this as a priority as part of its fair funding review [of local government finance].”

Somerset says it is confident that it will not follow Northamptonshire into insolvency. Despite serious challenges – including a target of £17m in cuts for children’s social care this year – it says it is committed to meeting savings targets.

But the review makes it clear that the county has struggled to deliver planned savings for two years, and has been reliant on reserves to patch up its budgets. “For the last two years only 65% of agreed savings have been delivered and whilst there may be specific reasons for this, this level of delivery is simply unsustainable in the future.”

Somerset, which has an annual budget of around £316m, has made around £130m of savings since 2010. It believes the forthcoming green paper into social care funding and the fair funding review hold the key to its survival.

The National Audit Office warned this year that several councils were using up “rainy day” reserves to prop up services. It estimated up to 15 councils are at risk of going bust when their reserves are exhausted.

Jane Lock, the leader of Somerset’s opposition Liberal Democrat group, blamed the council’s predicament on its decision to freeze council tax for six years after 2010, despite swingeing national cuts in funding, and at a time when austerity measures were increasing demand on services.

She said: “The reason Somerset has got to here is quite simply the political ideology that they would refuse to put up council tax. That’s left a £26m hole in the budget.”

Simon Edwards, the director of the County Councils Network, said: “County authorities face a toxic cocktail of having rising demand for services, being the lowest funded upper-tier councils, and the impact of having the sharpest reductions in government funding by the end of the decade.”

He added: “With demand continuing to rise amid funding reductions, the reality is that councils of all sizes and colours will face similar situations in the future, unless a sustainable solution is found by government.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/18/tory-council-at-risk-of-bankruptcy-slams-broken-funding-system

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Housing (local), Planning System, Spin

Government non-expert “independent” expert refuses to ban combustible cladding used in Grenfell Tower

“Dame Judith Hackitt proved yesterday that appointing ‘independent’ experts is no guarantee that difficult policy areas can be somehow magically be set free from politics. She started off badly yesterday and it was downhill all the way afterwards. On the Today programme she struggled to explain why her review had failed to recommend an outright ban on combustible cladding. That was followed by an almost comical U-turn, saying that perhaps she should have recommended a ban. Then Housing Secretary James Brokenshire announced he would consult on a ban. It was not a coincidence that the panicked responses came after David Lammy, who has a moral authority ministers cannot ignore these days, declared the review a ‘whitewash’.

But things looked even worse later, when she told reporters “I am not an expert on Grenfell” and “has not looked into the details” of the fire that killed 71 people. With a Whitehallese worthy of Sir Humphrey Appleby, she declared her review was instead “triggered by the discovery that there were many other buildings that were not safe”. That’s true, but to say also that “my review was not triggered by the tragedy at Grenfell” was just plain daft.

On Question Time last night housing minister Dominic Raab said: “I’m sorry it’s taken so long” [to respond to Grenfell]. Meanwhile, a new report says four million homes are needed to solve the UK’s ‘epic’ housing crisis. Brokenshire needs to get a handle on his new brief rather quickly.”

Source: Huffington Post

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Conflict of interest, Corruption, Privatisation

Public perceptions of Carillion collapse

” The parliamentary select committee report pulls no punches in blaming the greed of the Carillion executives, who gouged out millions from the business up to the moment of collapse, with £1.5bn owed to creditors and £0.5bn to the pension fund (Carillion fall blamed on hubris and greed, 16 May). The wider issue, for all financial institutions, is the greed of the “big four” auditors, paid £72m, who colluded with the directors, gave no warnings and signed clean certificates. Surely the executives and auditors should pay all the creditors in full. At what point does the “cosy relationship” become a criminal fraudulent conspiracy? As Polly Toynbee argues, the people want their money back from the fat cats, not slippery apologies. Are the supine regulators part of the conspiracy or will they bring charges?
Noel Hodson
Tax Reconciliations, Oxford

• We in the west criticise Putin’s Russia as a “kleptocracy”, but the damning report into the collapse of Carillion shows that something similar exists in too many of the boardrooms of British companies. Time and again we read reports of chief executives and their boardroom cronies, to quote Frank Field, “stuffing their mouths with gold”, while their companies go to rack and ruin with thousands thrown out of work and pension schemes impoverished. There is a word for people who appropriate other people’s money: “thief”. If boardroom larcenists can steer clear of the law and go unpunished, it is surely time that the law was changed.
Ron Mitchell
Coventry

• A simple solution is to ban the auditors of all public companies from undertaking any consultancy or other non-audit work. We need specialist audit firms and totally separate consultancy organisations so that audit opinions are not influenced by potential consultancy fees.
Jim Michie
Chester

The government’s culpability and responsibility for the collapse of Carillion and its consequences is broader and deeper than your article and the select committee’s report suggest: the government’s insistence that its estate be constructed and managed through prime contract procurement strategies increases the risk of prime contractor default and its disastrous consequences, as well as increasing the cost of everything it purchases. There was a time when local builders or suppliers would deal direct with their local government client: now we must go through a pyramid of consultancies, all adding 20% and “retaining” 10%.
Michael Heaton
Warminster, Wiltshire

• If a benefits claimant makes a fraudulent claim they may end up in court for their abuse of public funds. When I read about the way in which public money has been handled by Carillion, I find myself wondering when we can expect the court appearances of the directors and their accountants.
Stephen Decker
Chelmsford, Essex”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/may/17/carillion-and-britains-modern-kleptocracy

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Feniton/ Talaton, Independent Councillors, Neighbourhood Plans

Feniton shows Honiton how to conduct a Neighbourhood Plan consultation

After the total fiasco of Honiton finding itself unable to organise a Neighbourhood Plan:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/05/15/unbelievable-creation-of-honitons-neighbourhood-plan-could-be-shelved-until-2020/

comes this press release from Feniton’s Independent Councillor Susie Bond:

“And it’s great news!
The polls in the Feniton Neighbourhood Plan referendum closed at 10 p.m. this evening and counting started very soon afterwards.

The choice was a simple Yes/No answer to the following question:

Do you want East Devon District Council to use the neighbourhood plan for Feniton to help it decide planning applications in the neighbourhood area?

· The number of people eligible to vote was 1538
· Turnout was 32.05%
· Those voting Yes = 462
· Those voting No = 30

Without wishing to sound like I’m giving a speech at the Oscars, there are many people who should be thanked, not least officers at East Devon District Council who guided the team throughout, but also the NP steering group and particularly those who stuck with the process right to the bitter end.

It was the vision of the Parish Council Chairman, Martyn Smith, that set us on this rather lengthy road and I’m sure we all felt from time to time as though the process was interminable.

But we made it … and the Neighbourhood Plan will now pass into planning policy …

Well done Feniton”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, EDDC, Ian Thomas

New EDDC Leader a ‘solution finder’ says another obsequious Tory Councillor

Owl says: Ah, Mark Williamson – how little you understand about your own council! What it REALLY needs is a leader who makes sure the problems don’t occur in the first place! Not one who has to get into the deep holes that have already been dug for him by his own party!

“East Devon District Council’s new leader has been described as a “solution finder” by a fellow councillor.

Councillor Ian Thomas was unanimously elected to become the new leader of the council at the annual council meeting last night.

The Conservative, who has represented Trinity Ward since 2009 and is a director of the Exeter Science Park Company, replaces Councillor Paul Diviani, who announced that he would be stepping down from his post earlier this year.

We all know that the next ten years will be the most difficult and challenging for local government, and we need someone with financial acumen and creativity to lead us, and in his business career, he has demonstrated that each day. He is a solution finder, and that is exactly what we need now and for the forthcoming year.”
Councillor Mark Williamson”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-44037998

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Integrated Care Systems, NHS (local), Privatisation

“NHS England and Capita misunderstood the risks in outsourcing primary care support services …” says hard-hitting report

“Summary:

NHS England and Capita misunderstood the risks in outsourcing primary care support services resulting in services to 39,000 GPs, dentists, opticians and pharmacists that were a long way below an acceptable standard. Capita’s performance against the contract has improved but widespread failures are still being experienced by primary care practitioners, says today’s report by the National Audit Office (NAO).

In August 2015, NHS England entered into a seven-year, £330 million contract with Capita to deliver primary care support services. NHS England aimed to reduce its costs by 35% from the first year of the contract and provide a high-quality and standardised service. Capita expected to make a loss of £64 million in the first two years of the contract, which it planned to recoup in later years.

NHS England’s decision to contract with Capita both to run existing services but also simultaneously to transform those services, was high risk. Capita was incentivised through the contract to close existing services to minimise its losses but the interaction between running, closing and transforming services was more complex than Capita or NHS England had anticipated.

Performance issues emerged in 2016 shortly after Capita started closing primary care support offices and making other changes to the service. Capita acknowledges that it made performance issues worse by continuing to close support offices in summer 2016 even though it was aware the customer service centre was struggling to meet demand at that time. NHS England was contractually unable to stop Capita’s aggressive office closure programme, even though it was having a harmful impact on service delivery.

Failure to deliver key aspects of the end-to-end service, delivered by Capita and other organisations, impacted primary care services and, potentially, put patients at risk of serious harm. For example, 87 women were notified incorrectly that they were no longer part of the cervical screening programme; processing issues led to an estimated 1,000 GPs, dentists and opticians being delayed from working with patients and some of these practitioners lost earnings. No actual harm to patients has been identified.

Users continue to experience poor delivery with seven severe service failures in February 2018. A number of organisations have contributed to underperformance as Capita relies on other organisations to provide some services.

NHS England has made savings, in line with expectations, of £60 million in the first two years of the contract, as the financial risk of increased costs sits with Capita who have made a £125 million loss over this period. To date, NHS England has deducted £5.3 million from payments to Capita as penalties for poor performance but it expects it may have to pay up to £3 million in compensation to primary care providers.

NHS England has not yet secured all the benefits it wanted to achieve as Capita’s transformation programme was halted while it focused on operational issues. NHS England remain concerned about three of the services – the national performers lists, payments to opticians and GP payments and pensions but recognises that some of the issues with them pre-date the contract with Capita.

Two and a half years into the contract basic principles are still not agreed, which limits NHS England’s ability to hold Capita to account. NHS England and Capita have still not agreed how to calculate 11 performance measures, and how these data should be used to calculate payments owed to Capita for delivering the services.

The NAO recommends that NHS England should determine whether all current services within the contract are best delivered through that contract or be should taken in-house by NHS England.

“Neither NHS England nor Capita fully understood the complexity and variation of the services being outsourced. As a result, both parties misjudged the scale and nature of the risk in outsourcing these services. “While NHS England has achieved financial savings and some services have now improved, value for money is about more than just cost reduction. It is deeply unsatisfactory that, two and a half years into the contract, NHS England and Capita have not yet reached the level of partnership working required to make a contract like this work effectively.”

Amyas Morse, the head of the NAO, 17 May 2018″

https://www.nao.org.uk/press-release/nhs-englands-management-of-the-primary-care-support-services-contract-with-capita/

Full report here:

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Exmouth, Health and Social Care (local), Integrated Care Systems, NHS (local)

“Inpatients at Exmouth Hospital to be temporarily relocated during fire safety improvement project”

Owl adds: Did you know there were closed wards at Exmouth Hospital?

“News Release 16 May 2018

Inpatients at Exmouth Hospital are being temporarily relocated to another ward on the site while building owner NHS Property Services invests in fire safety improvements.

Beds on Doris Heard Ward are being moved to the vacant Geoffrey Willoughby Ward while a £50,000 project to safely remove asbestos and improve fire resistance takes place. A deep clean and air testing will also take place.

The works, carried out by Integral, will be undertaken from 21 May with the ward planned to be fully reopened during the week commencing 11 June 2018.
Due to the constraints of Geoffrey Willoughby Ward, the number of available beds will be temporarily reduced from 16 to 12 during this period.

Rosemary Kearney, Senior Facilities Management Business Manager for NHS Property Services (NHSPS) in the South West, said: “We’re working closely with our partners at the hospital to ensure services can, as far as possible, continue as normal.

“We’re sorry for any inconvenience but this is an essential project that will ultimately improve the fabric of Exmouth Hospital for patients for years to come.”

Donna Robson, Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust’s Matron at Exmouth Hospital, added: “Maintaining continuity of care for patients is our top priority. We’ve been working with NHSPS to ensure that any disruption is kept to a minimum during these necessary maintenance works. We’d like to thank our patients and visitors for their understanding during this time.”

All other services at the hospital are unaffected and patients should continue to attend their appointments as normal.

The need for the work was identified as part of a survey undertaken by NHSPS.”

The press release also includes background information for editors on NHSPS. This is not usually published with the press release but is information in the public domain, so Owl reproduces it here:

“NHS Property Services brings property and facilities management expertise to thousands of sites across the NHS estate.

At a time of major change and increasing demand for the NHS, NHS Property Services is reducing costs, creating a more fit for purpose estate and generating vital funds that are being reinvested to support improvements in frontline patient care.

The company’s portfolio consists of 3,500 properties – worth over £3 billion – which represents around 10 percent of the entire NHS estate. The vast majority of our sites are used for clinical, local healthcare and fall into one of three categories:

Health centres and GP surgeries; Hospitals/hospital- related properties; or Offices.

The company has a major role as both landlord and service provider for its NHS customers. Services fall into four main business areas:

1. Strategic estates planning – supporting our customers to deliver healthcare premises that meet future needs for patient services

2. Asset management – proactive asset management to create value and reduce overall costs of property

3. Construction project management – managing the development of new buildings and refurbishment of existing buildings, along with investment in our estate

4. Facilities management services – including health and safety, maintenance, electrical services, cleaning and catering.”