“Councillors allow buildings to go ahead because they are dazzled by attractive computer-generated images created by developers, a heritage charity has warned.

The images look like photographs and are used to seduce planning committees into giving developments the green light, Marcus Binney of Save Britain’s Heritage said.

He said that in most cases, planning officers use developers’ own imagery with no input from opponents to the plans.

“They lavish large amounts of money on producing these images, and they’re very persuasive.

“People have got to be suspicious of images of people drinking espressos under nice awnings,” he said.

Previously planners often used hand-drawn artists’ impressions to show what the development would look like when completed, but CGI images are increasingly used.

Campaigners highlighted tricks such as using images which show the development in summer to make it look more attractive.

Mr Binney highlighted one image, of Paddington’s £775 million ‘Cube’ development, which received assent from Westminster City Council last week.
The computer-generated image shows sunlight streaming through the building – in areas which Mr Binney says will be not be transparent, because of lifts and a fire escape. Other promotional images show the building looking more opaque.

The development, designed by Italian architect Renzo Piano, is controversial. Campaigners say that the 72-metre high building is out of step with the rest of the area.

Westminster City Council’s cabinet member for planning and public realm, Cllr Daniel Astaire, said: “Council planning decisions are judged on each development’s individual merits, taking account of all the benefits a proposal brings to the city, its people and economy.

“We do not grant permission based on computer generated concepts.”
Pictures tend to show buildings in summer, opponents said.

Henrietta Billings, director of Save Britain’s Heritage, pointed to two other examples where CGI images had been used in promotional material for new buildings which were then criticised for being unattractive.

The Saffron Tower, in Croydon, and Lincoln Plaza, on the Isle of Dogs, east London, were both shortlisted for the Carbuncle Cup, an award for the UK’s ugliest building, last year.

Both had been promoted with attractive-looking CGI images.
Neutral images, known as “verified views”, are occasionally requested, especially where there is a public enquiry about the plans.

These are commissioned to an independent artist and represent an unbiased representation of what a proposed development will look like.

London-based architect Barbara Weiss said that her firm has begun using 3D imagery instead of static shots to make the images more representative.
“The 3D model is much more reliable. The problem with the CGI images is that they are taken from a fixed point, and if you step five metres away, you get a completely different view,” she said.”

http://newscdn.newsrep.net/h5/nrshare.html?r=3&lan=en_GB&pid=14&id=Lda64f89bDg_uk&app_lan=&mcc=234&declared_lan=en_GB&pubaccount=ocms_0&referrer=200620&showall=1&mcc=234

Clinton Devon Estates offers to “fix broken housing market”

Owl says: the winning formula: promises, promises, promises, pseudo-eco words, pseudo-eco words, pseudo-eco-words spin, spin, spin, build, build, build. And when a “consultation” gives you the wrong answer – ignore it. Well, it does seem to be working so far

Even if you have to take half a “hospital hub” garden (the excuse there? Because it is “no longer being used for its original purpose”! Proof that hubs aren’t hospitals when it comes to land grabbing!

Elderly and vulnerable rural people to travel further for prescriptions

“Nearly 300,000 people, many of whom are elderly and live in rural areas, will have to travel five miles more to collect their medicines because of a Government subsidy cut.

The study by the House of Commons library laid bare how much further the ill and sick will have to travel for medicines if pharmacies close because of a cut in a vital subsidy.

The news comes as campaigners will today [tues] start a four day challenge in the High Court against the cuts.

Last Autumn ministers announced that the subsidy for pharmacies in rural and deprived areas will be cut by £208million in the 2017/18 financial year.
Campaigners said that up to 3,000 pharmacies in England are threatened with closure by the cuts.

The Commons library said that overall 1.3million people – one in 43 of the population of England – will have to travel further to get their medicines.
And it said that an extra 70,000 will have to travel more than five miles to get to their nearest pharmacy.

The worst place affected is an extra nine mile journey for people trying to get medicines in Appleby-in-Westmoreland in Cumbria.

It said that 920,419 people will have to walk between one and 2.5 miles farther to a pharmacy if their local outlet shut.” …”

http://newscdn.newsrep.net/h5/nrshare.html?r=3&lan=en_GB&pid=14&id=GLa66740fhm_uk&app_lan=&mcc=234&declared_lan=en_GB&pubaccount=ocms_0&referrer=200620&showall=1&mcc=234

Please register to vote – your vote really counts

“East Devon District Council is reminding voters that they need to register by the deadline of Thursday 13 April, otherwise they won’t be able to take part in the elections on May 4.

Mark Williams, electoral registration officer for East Devon said: “Time is running out to make sure you can take part in elections this May, so I’d encourage everyone in East Devon to take action now if they’re not already registered to vote.

“It’s quick and easy to register, but after the deadline of April 13, it will be too late.”

The appeal comes as the Electoral Commission launches a national campaign to encourage as many people as possible to register ahead of elections happening this year.

To register to vote, visit http://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/call_for_east_devon_residents_to_register_to_vote_1_4941619

What happens when you have a multi-tasking absent MP

Relax, Mr Swire – it’s your pal not you – yet! But it does make us think …

“MP George Osborne has refused to meet with a group of local constituents as he is too busy writing his book.

Wilmslow resident Stuart Regard recently contacted the Tatton MP to request a meeting to discuss the future of Britain after Brexit.

Mr Redgard, along with some other local residents is a member of the campaign group 38 Degrees, whose 300 members have drawn up a document entitled ‘The People Powered Vision for Brexit’.

He wrote to George Osborne on 20th February saying “We’ve voted on our main hopes and concerns for when we leave the EU casting over ten million votes between us. We would really welcome the opportunity to discuss this document with you and get your opinion on the views of hundreds of thousands of people.”

38 Degrees members across the UK have been meeting their MPs to discuss the ‘People Powered Vision for Brexit’. We understand Liam Fox, Jeremy Hunt and Philip Hammond are among the MPs who have read and discussed the document with their own constituents.

Mr Redgard continued “We are happy to meet with you at a regular surgery appointment, but would also welcome having a longer meeting with you if you’re able to accommodate this. Ideally there will be between four and five of us in attendance with an even split of Leave and Remain voters.”

Zoë Lord, from George Osborne’s office, responded on 7th March saying “Thank you for contacting Mr Osborne. Sadly, his diary is very committed as he is writing his book to a deadline. Unfortunately, we cannot arrange a time for you to meet just now.”

Mr Regard commented “I think this just represents his severe under performance in representing his constituents.” …”

http://www.alderleyedge.com/news/article/15405/george-osborne-too-busy-writing-his-book-to-meet-with-constituents

and here is how he explains himself to his hapless constituents:

“After all that you have read over the recent days about my new role as editor of the Evening Standard, I want to talk directly to you, my constituents.

It is the greatest honour to be your Member of Parliament, elected by you to represent our community here in Cheshire and take part in the national debate about the great issues Britain faces.

For sixteen years I have done that – thanks to your growing support at each election – and with your help we have achieved some major successes. We’ve stopped the closure of the A&E Department at Macclesfield District Hospital, not once but twice. We’ve got the Alderley Edge bypass built, after people had been trying for 70 years. We’ve improved the direct train services, got great new facilities for our academy schools, and brought new businesses and new jobs to the area. Throughout that time I’ve been able to help countless local people privately with their individual problems in the surgeries I’ve held and the efforts of my hard-working team in the office.

For almost all of those sixteen years, I have also held prominent positions in the public life of the country. For five years I was Shadow Chancellor. For these last six years I was Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was a real privilege to hold one of the great offices of state but it is also one of the most demanding jobs in the country – working dawn to dusk, and on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Throughout that time I was there for you as your local MP.

Now I have left Downing Street I want to continue to take part in the debate about the future direction of our country. No longer being Chancellor gives me time to do that in other ways – yes, in the Chamber of the House of Commons; but also as the editor of a major newspaper, the Evening Standard. There is a long tradition of politics and journalism mixing. One of the greatest newspaper editors ever, CP Scott, combined editing the Manchester Guardian with being an MP. In our age, politicians from Iain Macleod and Richard Crossman to, of course, Boris Johnson have combined the role of editor and Member of Parliament.

Meanwhile the hard work in the constituency continues unaffected. Take this week alone. I’ve been helping the schools in Cheshire get a fairer deal out of the proposed new funding formula. I’ll be helping to officially open the new A556 link road – badly needed for decades, yet only delivered now because of my campaign and our collective hard work. I’ll be at the opening of another new business here, speaking at a fundraising dinner for a great local charity and holding my regular constituency surgery. It is all in a week’s work as your MP.

I will also be in Manchester to promote our efforts to build the Northern Powerhouse – a concept I launched two years ago and which it is one of my jobs now to promote through the new partnership we have created. Nothing has greater potential to improve the opportunities for the future in this area than that Northern Powerhouse

I believe this diversity of experience makes our Parliament stronger. I hope you agree and I look forward to continuing to hear what you have to say and to work with you on the problems we face and the great future we can all build.

Best wishes, George.”

http://www.alderleyedge.com/news/article/15407/osborne-issues-statement-to-constituents-following-his-appointment-as-evening-standard-editor

What’s happening to the Seaton Premier Inn?

Premier Inns pride themselves at getting their hotels built within a year or 18 months of receiving planning permission. That permission has already been in place in Seaton for 18 months in Seaton with no sign of building work.

Are councillors worried? Is anyone worried? Is anyone doing anything?

Honiton/Ottery/Seaton: Red Lines around community hospitals on 1 April

“HEALTH campaigners say “you can’t fool us” as they prepare for a dramatic Devon-wide demonstration on April 1 against plans to reorganise health services in Devon. Save Our Hospital Services activists plan to form a red line of people around hospitals in Ilfracombe, Bideford, South Molton, Barnstaple, Exeter Honiton, Ottery St Mary, Seaton and Torbay.

Demonstrators are opposing the Devon Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP), a plan to reduce the area’s NHS deficit, which will be more than £550m by 2020/21. In North Devon for example the Northern Devon Healthcare Trust is using a consultation to decide on the future of acute health services at North Devon District Hospital. …”

Red Lines at hospitals across Devon on April 1:

Honiton – Activists will assemble at St Paul’s on the High Street before marching to the hospital, EX14 1EY, at 11am.

Ottery St Mary – Activists will gather outside the Ottery St Mary Hospital, EX11 8ER, at 2pm.

Seaton – Demonstrators will gather outside Seaton Hospital at 10am.

http://www.devonlive.com/protesters-to-put-red-lines-around-hospitals-across-devon/story-30217902-detail/story.html

Closing community hospitals – local GP speaks truth to power

“Dr Jon Orrell, A LOCAL GP has warned residents to not be “fooled by the warm words” in the Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group’s (CCG) current consultation.

Dr Jon Orrell attended a meeting in Bridport last week along with Wendy Savage – a gynaecologist and campaigner of women’s rights in childbirth and fertility – and Claudia Sorin of Save SCBU, Maternity and Kingfisher at Dorset County Hospital.

Dr Orrell discussed the CCG, of which he was previously a member, and said the group don’t take their views from the public.

He said: “The CCG is the local organisation which has been tasked in making all these cuts palatable and trying to sell them. You will be told it is clinically driven, you will be told that it is an improvement and there is no alternative.

“The CCG is headed by local doctors, however it is compulsory, I can’t carry on being a GP practising in Dorset unless I am a member of the CCG.

“It is very much hierarchical… we don’t take our views from the public, it is top down and a culture of agreement – I have experienced this first hand.”

He also warned residents to look deeper in the Clinical Services Review document and to be careful when filling it out.

He added: “Throughout the document you will see ‘care in the community’ popping up and ‘care closer to home’ as if that is necessarily a good thing. It is all playing with words in my opinion.

“If you rename ‘care in the community’ to ‘neglect and anonymity’ you have got it closer to the truth.

“Looking after people properly costs a lot of money and you need more doctors, nurses and healthcare assistants to do it.

“Care in the community would be great if you did it to the same high standards and done properly as in hospitals, but they don’t and it is just a couple of hours a day, half-an-hour, and is not necessarily a nurse, it could be a healthcare assistant who is not trained – it is not the same.

“If you look at the document it all looks very bright and smiley – everyone is happy by this change. However, you get down to the detail and small print and you find the truth emerging – this isn’t improvement, this isn’t making things better, this is Dorset’s share of £22billion worth of national savings.

“Be careful with the consultation, it looks like they are putting [forward] something good, if you tick ‘yes’ to any of the boxes you are voting to close local services without realising it, you will close community hospitals and GP surgeries.

“The final word of warning – don’t be fooled by the warm words, the motherhood and apple pie in the document; look a bit deeper.

“Absolutely fill it in and get your family and friends to fill it in as our NHS depends on this.”

Wendy Savage spoke to the audience about threats to the NHS nationally, including Sustainability and Transformation Plans (STPs) which outline how NHS trusts will make savings, and urged residents to talk to their local MPs and councillors about protecting the future of health care.

She said: “The latest threat are these STPs, or what we call slash, trash and privatise. Slash the funding, trash the local services and privatise.

“We have got to make sure parliamentary candidates as well as sitting MPs know that not supporting the NHS is the kiss of death.”

Claudia Sorin highlighted some of the concerns that members of the Save SCBU, Maternity and Kingfisher ward at Dorset County Hospital have and how safety could be compromised if services were moved to the east of the county.

She said: “Various families with seriously ill children or children with disabilities will have their provision at home in the community.

“When I spoke to one of the CCG members who is in charge of children services and maternity, she said ‘yes, that is the case’ – they will be given a package of money and they will be given that funding and they will organise it themselves in their own homes.

“That is the integrated community model; closing down beds in hospitals, closing down the children’s ward and maternity unit and that will be a midwife led unit only.

“Some of the mums on the campaign have open access to the children’s ward.

“That takes pressure off the emergency services, takes the pressure off the GPs because they can go straight to the Kingfisher Ward where the staff there know their child and can quickly give them the vital treatment that they need. This is something that is going to be lost if Kingfisher closes.

“The parents of these children have spoken to consultants there, the nursing staff, and all of them, on the whole, think that it would not be safe for a lot of the treatments that their children are coming in to the hospital for to have at home.

“The idea that maternity services and the children’s ward should be over in the east of the county, consultants at DCH are saying that would be complete madness.

“So this is the message we are getting from DCH – it would compromise safety to have those services over on the east of the county.”

A spokesperson for Dorset CCG said: “The proposals that have been developed by local clinicians and are subject to public consultation have been well documented over the last few months.

“We want to be absolutely clear that no decisions have been made, nor will they be until after the public consultation has ended and the feedback analysed.

“We invite anyone who attended either the drop-in event in January or the recent meeting in Bridport to get in touch if they would like more information or clarification before they complete their questionnaire.

“It is important that you don’t miss out on your opportunity to have a say and you complete the questionnaire by February 28th.

“Whether you agree with the proposals or not or you maybe have an idea of how things could be done differently – if you don’t tell us what you think, we won’t have heard your point of view.”

https://www.viewnews.co.uk/gp-warning-ccg-consultation/

MPs and the stinky swamp some of them inhabit

“Is politics a service, a duty, a means to represent the needs and aspirations of the people, or is it a launchpad for lucrative jobs in the private sector? George Osborne was terribly amused in the House of Commons yesterday: all this fuss over a trifling issue like the corruption of British democracy! Can’t we see he’s doing us a favour, having to suffer the indignity of being paid hundreds of thousands of pounds for multiple jobs rather than representing his constituents, all to make sure our “parliament is enhanced”, as he puts it? The sacrifice Osborne has made for all of us, having to be paid a juicy salary to further blur the distinction between media and political power, to make sure parliament is enriched by yet more MPs failing to devote themselves to the people who elected them.

There isn’t a sick bag big enough. It turns out he didn’t bother waiting for the advisory committee on business appointments to decide whether there is a conflict of interest first. Either they rule that there is an obvious conflict of interest in a serving senior Tory politician editing a daily newspaper, or the rules are a farce. Regardless, there are a number of lessons here. One is that some politicians think they are simply too brilliant to be reduced to the mere level of giving a voice to those they exist to serve, exploiting the prominence that comes with constituents selecting them as their representative and then making a packet out of it. Another was David Miliband, who made hundreds of thousands of pounds for speeches and corporate advisory roles when he returned to the backbenches: at least he had the dignity to eventually resign from his seat.

Then there is the revolving door of British politics. Public office gives you lots of marketable advantages: prominence, connections, knowledge of the inside workings of government. These can then be exploited by major corporations, wealthy individuals and media oligarchs to gain even more power over our corrupted democracy. Health ministers whose job it is to defend our sacred NHS end up working for private health firms who benefit from its privatisation; defence ministers end up working for arms firms bidding for government contracts. Our now foreign secretary was paid a quarter of a million pounds – described by Boris Johnson as “chicken feed” – for writing columns rather than, say, serving Londoners (although he did give up his regular column after becoming foreign secretary).”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/21/george-osborne-story-britain-ruled-never-ending-dinner-party

Independent councillor points out flaws in new EDDC housing company project

Owl says: One flaw NOT pointed out is how useless EDDC is at running large projects. Knowle relocation – bungled; Exmouth regeneration – bungled; Section 106 payments – bungled and all handled with secrecy and minimal information to the public and non-Cabinet councillors, including those in their own party.

If they can’t control these projects what hope do we have of them controlling bigger ones? And as for which developers they will choose …

“A housing company that could allow council bosses to better respond to market pressures has received early support – but a Sidmouth councillor argues there are ‘huge risks’ to taxpayers that need to be tightly controlled.

Agenda papers say an East Devon District Council-owned (EDDC) company, free from red tape, could play a key role in increasing supply of homes and meeting demand when private developers fall short.

However, Councillor Cathy Gardner raised concerns that it is not a ‘local’ housing company and will in fact be able to develop anywhere in the country.

She said: “EDDC has been good at looking after its council houses, but this isn’t about developing council houses. They may decide they want to build elsewhere in the country where they can make more profit. That might be all right if it was limited to building ‘affordable’ housing here, but that’s not written into the terms.

“It needs to answer so many questions – is the company being set up to meet housing needs in East Devon or is it more about profit, because it can take that money into its general funds? Where is the money coming from to set it up? EDDC may have fantastically good intentions, but the devil is in the details.”

Cllr Gardner also voiced concerns about the ‘huge risk’ in speculating on the property market and said it is dependent on house prices remaining high.

Cabinet members backed the creation of East Devon Homes last week and officers will now prepare an initial business plan, identify the first projects and report back to the council.

If approved, the company will be financed by EDDC and any profits would come back to the authority. It could sell land to the company at market value – or potentially gift it – and then borrow money to finance projects.

The report says the company, run by a board of directors, will be able to operate on commercial terms, free of the ‘continual interference’ from central government.

Supporting the proposals, Councillor Jill Elson, EDDC’s portfolio holder for homes and communities, said: “This presents a wonderful opportunity for the council to play a more active part in the local housing market.

“We have researched the proposal carefully and fully, looked at the risks and rewards, and decided that the local housing company model is a suitable model for the council to deliver its housing ambitions.

“We are seeing high levels of demand for housing in the area and see this as a way of increasing supply consistent with the Government’s growth agenda.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/eddc_housing_company_could_develop_anywhere_in_country_warns_sidmouth_councillor_1_4935216

Views wanted on East Devon street trading

Owl says: make no mistake this is simply an EDDC cash cow. Instead of having a few regulated streets where outdoor trading can take place with a licence, this extends to ALL streets – bringing in more income for the council but potentially setting permanent traders with increased overheads (including business rates) against temporary traders without them.

No problem in vibrant, thriving towns but a big problem elsewhere. Except Sidmouth where local traders were so vehemently against it, the plan was dropped for that town only.

“District bosses are consulting on their latest plans for new street trading rules.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) is proposing to designate the whole of the district as a consent street, meaning street traders would have to apply to the council for a licence to trade.

However, following its initial consultation, EDDC now plans to exclude Sidmouth.

To take part in the consultation, visit http://www.eastdevon.gov.uk/streettrading, or to obtain a paper copy call 01395 517569. The closing date for responses is April 26.”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/views_wanted_on_east_devon_street_trading_rules_1_4935920

Plans for apartments at Sidmouth hotel ‘misleading’

“Town councillors fear they supported plans for eight apartments at a Sidmouth hotel on the basis of ‘inadequate and misleading’ information – after claims the properties could be sold into private ownership.

Permission for the apartments was granted in 2011 – when it was the Westcliff Hotel – after an application from hotel owner Nicolas James Group Ltd.

The new plans are in the name 
of Nicolas Roach, the company’s executive chairman.

Mr Page said: “The application implies it is all part of the Harbour Hotel, but it was submitted not by the hotel, but by Nicolas Roach.

“The proceeds will flow not to the hotel to support its viability, but to Mr Roach’s own pockets.

“What’s to stop further flats on the site when the Harbour Hotel directors decide it’s failed as a hotel? It’s prime land for residential development.”

Mr Page said the architecture was ‘banal and unworthy of the site’ and raised concerns that the apartment block has been moved three to five metres towards Peak Hill Road from its approved position, adding: “I think the application is unacceptable, whichever way you look at it.” …”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/plans_for_apartments_at_sidmouth_hotel_misleading_claim_1_4935203

Building new roads makes traffic worse, say campaigners and don ‘t boost economy”

“New roads in England not only fail to ease congestion and benefit local economies but worsen traffic, countryside campaigners warn.

Road-building also “obliterates” rural views and harms nature, the Campaign to Protect Rural England says.

Its study of 86 road schemes completed between 2002 and 2012 says the majority damaged the surrounding environment.

But Sir John Armitt, of the National Infrastructure Commission, said it was essential to increase road capacity.

The government will spend £1.2bn on building and maintaining roads in the next year, which it says will cut congestion and improve journey times while boosting businesses and jobs.

‘Depressing cycle’

Ralph Smyth, head of infrastructure at the CPRE, said road-building projects led to a “depressing, self-perpetuating cycle of more and more roads”.
Roads were not delivering the congestion relief promised, he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “They improve it for the first year or so, then traffic rapidly increases.”

The CPRE’s research drew on official evaluations of 86 road schemes, which Highways England carries out for road projects costing more than £10m.

It said 69 of these road schemes had had an “adverse impact” on the landscape, including obliterating views and destroying ancient woodland and mature hedgerows.

And each road project it looked at, excepting one, saw traffic grow “significantly faster” than other regional roads.

In addition, the CPRE examined 25 road schemes which the government promised would boost the local economy.

The CPRE said that in 15 of these cases there was only “thin and circumstantial to non-existent” evidence that this had happened. …”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39328643

EDDC Manstone Depot relocation cost so far: £70,000 – £106,000

Freedom of Information Question:
“Could you provide me with the full and exact costings for this planning application; the building costs of the new offices; and where the finance for this project is coming from

Answer:
Full and exact costings are not yet known. We have a working estimate which indicates that the cost of this element of the project is likely to be between £71,750 and £106,750 but, as we will soon be securing bids for this work, we are not prepared to disclose our budget estimate breakdown as this will seriously weaken our contract negotiating position and our ability to achieve best value for the work needed. We are withholding this information under Reg 12(5)(e) of the Environmental Information Regulations. We believe that the overall budgetary cost being in the public domain allows for the public interest in this matter to be adequately served.

This is an existing costed element of the relocation project and £100,000 is included within the overall re-location budget for this project and was in the budget when considered by the Council back in March 2015.”

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/freedom-of-information/freedom-of-information-published-requests/

Rural health concerns

“The government must improve the way it collates information on the health of people who live in rural areas, according to the Local Government Association and Public Health England.

One sixth of areas with the worst health and deprivation levels are located in the countryside, says the organisations said in a joint study released over the weekend.

Izzi Seccombe, chair of the LGA’s community wellbeing board, said: “We often think of rural areas as picture-postcard scenes of rolling green fields and farming land, yet this idyllic image is masking pockets of deprivation and poor health.

“Although many rural areas are affluent, this is not the case for everywhere.”

The report points out 55% of rural households compared to 97% of urban ones are within 8km of a hospital. Eighty per cent of rural residents live within 4km of a GP surgery compared to 98% of the urban population, Health in rural areas highlights.

Rural areas have on average 23.5% of their population over 65 compared with 16.3% of urban areas aged over 65.

“Rural communities are increasingly older, and older people often experience worse health and have greater need of health and care services,” said Seccombe.

“We are also concerned that the make do attitude and reluctance to make a fuss of some older rural residents means they may not seek out health care or treatment when they need it.”

This stores up worse problems later on, she explained, when they will need more serious and emergency care.

Councils could better plan how to provide services and meet the needs of people in rural areas if the government collated better information on health of people in these areas, the LGA and Public Health England believe.

Duncan Selbie, chief executive of Public Health England, said: “Local authorities are already finding new and imaginative ways of reaching out to people in remote communities who so often go unnoticed.

“This report offers a number of great examples that other areas can use to ensure they do not miss out on the opportunity for better health and wellbeing.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/03/lga-and-public-health-england-highlight-rural-health-concerns

Now home care is in crisis

Owl says: if you believe that final paragraph you will believe anything and, if you are old or otherwise vulnerable should not complain when you get no help! Though some, of course, will be rich enough to buy their way out of trouble – but it was ever thus.

“Home care contracts are being ripped up across half the country as companies say they are no longer paid enough by councils to look after the elderly.

Dozens of care providers are going bust and a quarter are at risk of insolvency as local authorities force down what they pay for carers to go into the homes of the elderly and provide essential help, research has found.

Hundreds of thousands of older people are already going without help with everyday tasks such as washing and dressing as councils cut back and there are fears that the problem will worsen if companies collapse.
The elderly care system was promised an emergency injection of £2 billion over three years in the budget, but councils say a long-term solution to keep pace with an ageing population is needed if the money is not simply to delay disaster.

Freedom of information requests by the BBC Panorama programme found that 95 of 197 councils which replied had seen home care contracts cancelled.
Mears, one of the largest home care companies, handed back a contract with Liverpool city council in the summer, saying they could not cover costs at the £13.10 an hour they were being paid. “That was a terrible thing to do for both service users and for care staff. We absolutely did not take that [decision] lightly, but frankly what choice did we have?” Alan Long, from the company, told the programme.

Colin Angel, of the United Kingdom Homecare Association, an industry body, said: “We have some really desperate providers who really do not know whether they’re going to be able to continue in business beyond the next year. That means they’re really having to make some hard commercial decisions, whether they might need to cease trading or indeed just hand back work to local councils.”

Analysis for Panorama by the consultancy Opus Restructuring found that a quarter of Britain’s 2,500 home care companies were at risk of insolvency, and 69 had shut down in the past three months.

A Department of Health spokeswoman said: “Older and vulnerable people must get compassionate care, which is why we have provided councils with £9.25 billion of dedicated funding, including an extra £1 billion in 2017-18 to provide immediate relief. We will bring forward proposals later this year to ensure a more financially sustainable social care system.”

Source: The Times (paywall)

“The cost of perverting elections will have to be raised to such a level that parties do not think it is a price worth paying to win”

“In poor democracies, votes are bought directly. In rich ones, money is spent to secure votes. Instead of being bribed, voters are subjected to a deluge of advertising, rounds of door-knocking and incessant social media messaging. Laws in richer democracies are meant to be tightly enforced. A check on UK election spending is that contributions have to be declared correctly. That is why the decision to fine the Conservative party a record £70,000 for “numerous failures” in accurately reporting campaign spend at the 2015 general election and three by elections in 2014 is so important. It is a wrong compounded by cover-up. The Tories “unreasonably” failed to cooperate with the Electoral Commission, which acted after a Channel 4 News report.

Foolishly, David Cameron displayed not a hint of contrition, claiming he had won “fairly and squarely”. He ran a shambolic operation. It’s too early to say whether a criminal offence has been committed. Any prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that this is dishonesty not just non-compliance. The cost of perverting elections will have to be raised so that parties do not think it is a price worth paying to win. Money buys access to shape policies. Without strict rules and harsh penalties, politicians will be tempted to win office by mortgaging the future to an investing elite.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/19/the-guardian-view-on-tory-election-spending-its-a-scandal?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Election purdah: expect LOTS of good news and promises next week!

Purdah for the local county council elections (and possibly a General Election if rumours are to be believed) will begin on Monday 27 March 2017. Be aware NO council (not just the county council) can ignore purdah.

You can find a useful guide here:

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/10180/6869714/L15-91+Unpacking+Purdah_04.pdf/c80978b9-dc0b-4eee-9f81-49bd47afeb2d

From this guide:

“This means that:

• In general you (this means councils and councillors) should not issue any publicity which seeks to influence voters (an exception being situations covered by legislation or regulations directing publication of information for explanatory purposes).
• Particular care should be taken during the pre-election period to abide by the Act.
• Consider suspending the hosting of third party material or closing public forums if these are likely to breach the codes of practice.
• Do not publish any publicity on controversial issues or report views on proposals in a way which identifies them with individual councillors or groups of councillors.
• Publicity relating to individuals involved directly in the election should not be published unless expressly authorised by statute.
• You are allowed to publish factual information which identifies the names, wards and parties of candidates at elections.

Although this new code supersedes the previous versions and may seem less specific, in practice your conduct should be similar to previous elections.
What this means in practice:

Publicity is deemed as “any communication, in whatever form, addressed to the public at large or to a section of the public.”

The first question to ask is ‘could a reasonable person conclude that you were spending public money to influence the outcome of the election?’ In other words it must pass the ‘is it reasonable’ test. When making your decision, you should consider the following:

You should not:
• produce publicity on matters which are politically controversial
• make references to individual politicians or groups in press releases
arrange proactive media or events involving candidates
• issue photographs which include candidates
• supply council photographs or other materials to councillors or political group staff unless you have verified that they will not be used for campaigning purposes
• continue hosting third party blogs or e-communications
• help with national political visits (as this would involve using public money to support a particular candidate or party). These should be organised by political parties with no cost or resource implications for the council.

You should also think carefully before you:
• Continue to run campaign material to support your own local campaigns. If the campaign is already running and is non-controversial (for example, on issues like recycling or foster care) and would be a waste of public money to cancel or postpone them, then continue. However, you should always think carefully if a campaign could be deemed likely to influence the outcome of the election and you should not use councillors in press releases and events in pre-election periods. In such cases you should stop or defer them. An example might be a campaign on an issue which has been subject of local political debate and/or disagreement.
• Launch any new consultations. Unless it is a statutory duty, don’t start any new consultations or publish report Findings from consultation exercises, which could be politically sensitive.

and

Council Notice Boards:

Councils are required to publicise details of the election and how to register to vote. Material relating to wider political issues should not be posted on of official notice boards which may be seen by members of the public. This includes publicity issued by, or on behalf of, a trade union.”