May’s right-hand man implicated in election expenses scandal?

This is the same scandal that our Police and Crime Commissioner, Alison Hernandez is involved in as an election agent in Torquay just prior to becoming PCC.

“Michael Crick over at Channel 4 news has kept on digging into the series of Conservative election expense scandals which have seen more of Theresa May’s MPs implicated than the size of her majority:

Theresa May’s Downing Street aide is in the spotlight amid questions over the Conservatives, campaign to stop Nigel Farage winning a seat in Parliament at the last election.

Channel 4 News, which has been investigating the party’s election spending since February, has obtained new evidence suggesting a “crack team” of Tories including Mr Timothy were involved in Craig Mackinlay’s local campaign from a hotel in Ramsgate.

Kent Police and the Electoral Commission are currently investigating whether the Conservative Party broke the law by failing to properly declare tens of thousands of pounds in hotel bills, including approximately £14,000 at the Royal Harbour Hotel in Ramsgate where Mr Timothy stayed.

Rather oddly, the Conservative Party’s explanation as given to Channel 4 is that Nick Timothy was working on the national campaign from the hotel in Ramsgate. Not working on it from his home, or from the Conservative Party’s national HQ where the national campaign was being run. But from a hotel in Ramsgate.

It’s the same explanation the Conservatives have given to the police (which ups the stakes about it being true rather):

“Any national Conservative Party staff based in the Royal Harbour Hotel were part of a national campaign team and were engaged in activities at the direction of Conservative Central Headquarters.”

Other Conservative staff has been further implicated too as Channel 4 further reports:

“The new evidence obtained by Channel 4 News also suggests that Conservative staff staying at the Royal Harbour Hotel were working on Craig Mackinlay’s local campaign.

The programme has obtained a large number of press releases sent out on behalf of Mr Mackinlay by the former Conservative Party Head of Press, Henry Macrory. Mr Macrory was part of the team who were guests at the Royal Harbour.

The press releases are branded “Craig Mackinlay – Conservative Candidate for South Thanet”. They contain Mr Mackinlay’s twitter handle and Facebook page. All say “For further information please call Henry Macrory”. The press releases were promoted by his local agent.

The programme has also obtained emails showing Mr Macrory acting as Mr Mackinlay’s press officer. In one email sent in March 2016, Mr Macrory told local journalists: “I will be helping out with Craig Mackinlay’s media during the election campaign.

“Please don’t hesitate to contact me if I can assist in any way. In the next few days or so I will start sending you a regular e-mail giving you an outline of what Craig will be up to during the week ahead.”

http://www.markpack.org.uk/146484/nick-timothy-election-expenses/

Cause or effect? Sudden interest in EDW nuclear safety post

This week’s most visited page by far is one originally posted on 21 October 2016 about nuclear plants being shut down in France for safety reasons:

5 French nuclear reactors closed and 7 others examined for safety reasons

Coincidentally, one of the films on TV this week was “The China Syndrome” – a fictional story about a radioactive leak in a US nuclear power plant and its subsequent cover-up and unhappy ending.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Syndrome#Plot

Coincidence?

Is a cost over-run of £1.1 million or £10 million more serious than a Section 106 loss of £250,000?

Owl asks because an elector successfully petitioned EDDC’s external auditor over Section 106 discrepancies. A sample found a wrongly-attributed bill of some £400,000 and an uncollected sum of around £250,000. As a result, the auditors have requested many changes in procedures:

Click to access item-12-management-of-s106-contributions-report.pdf

Now we hear at Cabinet this week that, in two years, development costs for Exmouth seafront have risen from £1.5 million to £3.2 million. Yet Cabinet apparently found this totally acceptable and, without detailed figures, nodded it through with no explanation of:

– what did the £1.5 million cover

and

– what does the extra £1.6 million cover.

Added to this, the projected cost of HQ relocation has risen from cost-neutral (zero due to sale of Knowle HQ for around £7 million) it is now said to be nearly £10 million – or at least that was figure a few months ago.

These are eye-watering numbers yet majority party councillors and auditors (internal and external) appear unconcerned.

Some scrutiny (internal and external) needed here, Owl thinks.

Two tier social care: rich and cared for or poor and neglected, says Conservative council leader

“A Conservative council leader says dozens of social care providers are cancelling contracts with local authorities and instead offering their services solely to wealthy private clients.

Izzi Seccombe, who is the Local Government Association’s spokesperson for social care, said the chancellor needed to take urgent action in the autumn statement to tackle a growing crisis in the sector.

She told the Guardian that a failure by Philip Hammond to plug a multibillion-pound financial black hole would result in elderly and disabled people no longer receiving help to get dressed, showered and fed.

“The challenge is we are underfunded and the concern is that if we cannot bridge those gaps with some funding through the autumn statement, we will not be able to address the needs of people who are vulnerable,” said Seccombe, the Tory leader of Warwickshire county council. She said people would instead have to turn to their GPs or local hospitals for help, resulting in a larger cost to the taxpayer in the long run.

Her comments come alongside a written warning to Hammond that councils across England and Wales are facing a £5.8bn funding gap by 2020. A document submitted by the LGA suggested there would be a serious squeeze on spending for social care, children’s services, homelessness, local parks and libraries. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/18/care-providers-shunning-local-authorities-tory-councillor-claims

Exmouth seafront cost increase – fantasy, incompetent, iconic or ironic!

“Calls have been made for the sacking of the ‘owner’ of the Exmouth Seafront Regeneration Project after costs spiralled from £1.5million to more than £3million.

However, East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) cabinet backed the plans with a majority vote, despite heavy criticism from some councillors.

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/seafront_plans_backed_despite_soaring_costs_1_4780508

Rob Longhurst (Ind), Ben Ingham (Ind) and Eileen Wragg (LD) spoke against, saying that it was incompetence.

Ian Chubb said it was worth paying and he was happy paying the extra costs. Unclear whether he meant worth paying despite the increases or worth paying despite the incompetence, but nice of him to offer to fund the increased costs personally.

Phil Twiss said they had to proceed because to stop would be to go backwards. Of course only true because they have destroyed existing attractions before getting the plans right and before knowing the real costs – so they can’t go back.

Philip Skinner got his words mixed up when he said the plans were iconic but clearly he meant ironic, and thought it was good for Exmouth because they all like doing watersports.

Tom Wright obviously thought the debate was about football not water-sports because he kept referring to the premier league, and said that Exmouth residents should be grateful for the cost increases.

Honestly, Trump or EDDC Tories – not sure which are the greater fantasists!!”

Poor commercial judgement and skills at local authorities worrying

Hot on the heels of news that EDDC’s development costs for Exmouth seafront have more than doubled from £1.5m to £3.2m comes this report:

“The increasing scale of commercial activity carried out by local authorities could put council finances at risk, and town halls might lack the necessary skills for such projects, the Public Accounts Committee has warned.

In a report examining the financial sustainability of local government, published today, MPs accused Whitehall of being complacent about the risk to local authority finances.

Today’s “Financial sustainability of local authorities” review highlighted that councils were increasingly undertaking commercial activity intended to generate revenue income from capital investment in properties and businesses in an effort to offset government cuts. This includes projects such as developing houses and commercial units for rent or sale.

But the MPs warned councils may lack experience of such schemes, and council tax bills or other services could be hit if they go wrong. They called on the Department for Communities & Local Government to review the commercial skills in different types of authorities, and provide an update by next summer on the scale and nature of these activities in order to better anticipate risks.

“We do not share the department’s confidence that the increased commercial activity in the sector adds no particular risk to the department’s own work,” the report stated. The department should also work with CIPFA to ensure the local government capital finance framework “remains current and continues to reflect developments”.

Committee chair Meg Hillier said funding cuts had led councils to rethink the way they use public money, and the government wanted councils to become largely self-financing, including through business rates retention. However, she warned that poor investment decisions could cost money that might otherwise be spent on public services.

“Our committee has previously highlighted gaps in the commercial skills of the civil service as a factor in the failure of some projects and we have similar concerns about local government,” she stated.

“Local authorities need the skill-set to invest wisely and the department must bear its share of responsibility for ensuring these skills are in place. But more fundamentally, the information central government uses is inadequate for understanding trends and associated risks in local government finance.”

This represented a serious flaw in DCLG’s ability to plan properly for the future and ensure councils are following a sustainable path, she concluded, but the department was complacent about the risk. …

Public authority accountants not impressed with ” transformation” plans

“Some sustainability and transformation plans are unrealistic and lack substance, a CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy) analysis has revealed.

The institute examined nine published STPs, of the 44 currently being developed in England. They aim to improve services and reduce cross by ushering in a cross-systems approach to health and social care.

But CIPFA said some of the plans failed to set out a credible case on deliverability. In particular, they failed to quantify some of the risks of additional pressures that may emerge and of savings not being delivered.

In some cases savings targets are over-optimistic as savings as the targets lack context.

CIPFA is urging more contingency planning to ensure the STPs are achievable as well as greater use of integrated working and a cross-sector approach to social care pressures.

Commenting on the findings, CIPFA chief executive Rob Whiteman, who chairs the North East London STP, said: “In order to improve care for local communities, STPs will have to make tough choices to deliver meaningful change.

“However, it is of vital importance that STPs fully assess whether the actions proposed can actually meet savings targets and boost the quality of services by doing robust financial planning. …”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/some-sustainability-and-transformation-plans-unrealistic-says-cipfa

Police and Crime Commissioner Hernandez VERY VERY busy

Too busy for this (sent apologies):

15 December 2016, County Hall, 2 pm
Thursday, 15th December, 2016 2.00 pm, Health and Wellbeing Board, MOVED
Venue: Committee Suite – County Hall

http://democracy.devon.gov.uk/mgMeetingAttendance.aspx?ID=200

She is REALLY busy attending things like award ceremonies, radio interviews and giving presentations to town councils and the like and attends LOTS of other meetings for PCCs all over the country:
http://www.devonandcornwall-pcc.gov.uk/meetings-and-events/calendar/

However this scooting around means she is much busy to update other aspects of what she has been doing – some pages on her official website have not been updated since February 2016:

Record of public meetings not updated since April 2016:
http://www.devonandcornwall-pcc.gov.uk/meetings-and-events/public-meetings/public-meetings-nov-2012-april2016/

Record of Strategic Partnership Meetings not updated since February 2016:
http://www.devonandcornwall-pcc.gov.uk/meetings-and-events/other-meetings/joint-strategic-boards/

PCC TV hasn’t been updated since the previous PCC was in post. For example:
http://www.devonandcornwall-pcc.gov.uk/news-and-blog/multimedia-hub/videos/

This is the person who told us she was going to use social media to fight crime! On the other hand, you can’t keep her off Twitter!
https://mobile.twitter.com/AlisonHernandez

“Promised £8bn extra for NHS is not enough, says hospitals boss”

Theresa May will have to rip up the government’s financial plans for the NHS and commit more than the promised £8bn extra by 2020, a hospitals boss has said.

Chris Hopson, the chief executive of NHS Providers, said ministers must come up with a new plan to fix the health service’s crumbling finances or risk it becoming unable to function properly.

In a submission to the Treasury before next week’s autumn statement, NHS Providers, which represents 96% of NHS trusts in England, says a rethink is necessary because the calculations underlying the government’s £8bn pledge are flawed.

It says demand for care is rising faster than envisaged in the blueprint drawn up by NHS bosses in 2014, the Five-Year Forward View, and social care has deteriorated.

Hopson said: “Some of the key assumptions in the Five-Year Forward View, on which the current financial and NHS delivery plans for this parliament are based, have turned out to be wrong. There is now a clear and widening gap between what is being asked of the NHS and the funding available to deliver it.

“The NHS simply cannot do all that it is currently doing and is being asked to do in future on these funding levels.”

Andrew Lansley, the health secretary from 2010 to 2012 in the coalition government, recently said the NHS needed a “Brexit bonus” of £5bn on top of the £8bn already pledged, given the widespread public demand for higher NHS funding revealed by the EU referendum.

NHS Providers does not specify how much more it wants invested. But Hopson said more than £8bn was justified because “demand for care is a lot higher, social care is in a much worse state, general practice is turning out to be more unstable, and the starting point for the deficit among hospital, mental health, community and ambulance trusts has turned out to be much larger.”

He said the overall health budget would go up by only £4.5bn by 2020, not the £8bn ministers pledged last year, because money was being taken from key areas such as public health in order to give the NHS its promised increase. Independent experts agree £4.5bn is the true increase that healthcare will get.

The NHS’s inability to deliver the £22bn of savings it had promised to make by 2020 – a target that had always been “too ambitious” – further underlined the need for more money to be found before the end of this parliament, said Hopson.

May has been under pressure recently over her repeated claims that the government is giving the NHS £10bn more, and more than the NHS England chief executive, Simon Stevens, asked for in 2014. Sarah Wollaston, the Conservative chair of the Commons health select committee, and other members of the committee wrote to the chancellor Philip Hammond to say the claims were untrue. Labour has asked the UK Statistics Authority to rule on whether the £10bn claim is justified.

Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, has subtly distanced himself from the £10bn figure and said the NHS will need a lot more money after 2020, at the end of its unprecedented decade-long budget squeeze.

Ministers have already told Stevens that the NHS will not receive a funding boost in the autumn statement. But NHS and local council leaders hope the chancellor may find some extra money to prop up the ailing social care system.

“NHS funding increases from next year onwards are not enough to maintain standards of care, meet rising demand from patients and deliver essential changes to services,” said Richard Murray, director of policy at the King’s Fund thinktank.

“If additional [NHS] funding is not forthcoming later in the parliament, the government will need to be honest with the public about the impact on quality of care and access to services.”

The Department of Health did not respond directly to Hopson’s comments. A spokesman said: “This government has taken tough economic decisions that have allowed us to invest in our NHS, which is meeting record patient demand whilst improving standards of care. We have prioritised funding for the NHS with £4bn extra this year.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/17/promised-8bn-extra-for-nhs-is-not-enough-says-hospitals-boss

Franksy writes to East Devon Watch

See below the letter Franksy asked a correspondent to send to East Devon Watch:

“To Tyrannosaurus Exe, also known as EDDC,

I marched with 386 others on Saturday to try and save Exmouth Seafront.

Did you not see us because your head is so high in the clouds filled with your own obstinate dreams of power?

Did you not hear us because you can only hear the sound of your own species? Maybe you cannot hear at all.

With your big and brutish attitude and your enormous footprint, you can barely see the ants you look down upon.

But ants are strong and resilient. They work hard, communicate and co-operate to achieve a common goal.

Important to note that ants are not extinct.

We hope this troubles you in your arrogance.”

Franksy.

More/fewer unaffordable/affordable homes

“Fewer affordable homes were built in the past year than any time in the past 24 years, while there was a 52% fall in the supply of new homes in just 12 months.

Builders put the finishing touches to 32,110 affordable homes in England in the year to the end of March 2016, compared with 66,600 over the previous year, according to figures from the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).

Of those, just 6,550 – about 20% – were for social rent, which critics say is the only truly affordable housing tenure, with the rest made available to rent or buy at “affordable” rates of up to 80% of market value.

Critics said the figures were disastrous, and called on the government to do more to encourage housebuilding. They come as the proportion of households that own a property is at a 30-year low and rising house prices have driven the cost of buying a home to more than 10 times the average salary in a third of England and Wales.

“The Tories have made ‘affordable housing’ a meaningless term”

Neal Hudson, a property market analyst for Savills, said the fall came as no surprise after 2014/15’s figures were inflated by developers racing to use up funds as the government’s previous affordable housing programme came to an end. Funds for a new programme were initially much lower, until more cash was released in last year’s autumn statement, he said.” …

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/17/number-of-affordable-homes-built-in-england-slumps-24-year-low

Or, as George Osborne is alleged to have said: “Why should we build social and affordable homes? The people in them vote Labour”

Sidmouth meeting on NHS bed and services cuts – 9 December 2016 7.30 pm

OUR FUTURE CARE!

Sid Valley patients and carers invite all residents to a public meeting in the Parish Church, Sidmouth Church Street,
on Friday 9th December at 7.30 pm

The Consultation (ending 6th Jan)
“YOUR FUTURE CARE”
proposes closing 600 hospital beds all over Devon, including at Honiton, Okehampton, Seaton, Exmouth, Barnstaple, Exeter and Sidmouth.

Beds have already gone from Axminster, Ottery St Mary, Budleigh Salterton and Torrington – without consultation

Let us talk about this urgently with friends, family, clubs, churches, WI groups, etc. and bring ideas from all in our valley to the meeting on 9th December

For more information call 01395 519292

Health transformation “fantasy”: For Norfolk read Devon and the rest of the country

“… In Norfolk and Waveney, the latest Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP), under guidance from NHS England, has only been seen by a small group of health chiefs.

It has been kept from MPs, councillors, NHS staff, GPs, unions and some hospital board members.

An initial version of the plan was published in June, which warned there would be a deficit of £440m by 2020 in the NHS and social care budget, if action was not taken.

The plan proposed keeping patients out of hospital by expanding community and social care, but little detail has been given so far about what that action might be or how they hope to save a proposed £160m.

The full STP plans have been published in several areas of the country, but Norfolk and Waveney STP is following NHS England guidance by not making their proposal public yet.

Managing director of Norfolk County Council Dr Wendy Thomson, who is leading on the STP, said their plan was “at an earlier stage in its development compared to many others around the country.”

““Plans are not yet at the point where they have clear messages about things the public want to know”
Dr Wendy Thomson, Norfolk County Council
“Plans are not yet at the point where they have clear messages about things the public want to know,” she said.

“As service plans are developed, EDP readers can be assured that changes will be subject to the right public engagement and statutory consultation.” The Norfolk and Waveney STP is expected to be published in late November, but it is understood there will still be little detail in the document about what health chiefs propose to do with Norfolk an Waveney’s health system to plug the financial blackhole.

North Norfolk MP and former health minister Norman Lamb said there would be little hope of the getting the public involved in the plans if they were presented as a “fait accompli”.

He said he supported the idea of saving money by having more people being cared for in the community and joining up health and social care, but said the idea that hundreds of millions of pounds could be saved through STPs was fanciful.

“It is in the realms of fantasy to imagine this is achievable,” he said. “I don’t think when it is published people will get that excited about it. It will not say anything significant in terms of detail of changes. What lies beyond that is much more disturbing for many.”

Jeff Keighley, Unison regional organiser, said STP leaders should have consulted the public “at the earliest possible opportunity”.

Although the union said it was not against “sustainable transformation”, Mr Keighley said he was concerned the proposals would not be sustainable.

“If they had found a wonderful way of saving this money by enhancing the services it would be amazing – and they would have not been keeping it a secret,” Mr Keighley said. …

… What’s happening in other areas

Some councils have objected so strongly to the lack of public involvement they have ignored NHS England’s demand to keep the documents private until a later stage and have published them on their websites.

The plans on how local NHS areas will move forward over the next five years focus on several key themes.

These include cutting costs, moving care closer to home, putting a greater emphasis on preventing people becoming ill in the first place and concentrating services in a smaller number of units or hospitals.

Some argue this will enable increased access to consultants around the clock and make the best use of specialist NHS staff and resources. There are also plans to streamline back-office functions.

So far, more than a dozen plans have been published or leaked. Here are details from some of the key ones:

•The plan for Durham, Darlington, Tees, Hambleton, Richmondshire and Whitby set out how either Darlington or North Tees could lose their emergency department, with one becoming a “specialist emergency hospital” and another becoming a “local hospital”.

The plan says this will drive up standards, ensure a seven-day consultant presence with at least 16 hours per day consultant specialist access. More than 75% of patients could be assessed by a specialist consultant on admission and 100% assessed within 12 hours by a consultant.

Consolidating these services, together with other departments, could save millions of pounds, the plan said.

•The south-west London document outlines plans to cut the number of acute hospitals on the patch from five to four. Currently there are five hospitals at Croydon, Epsom, St Helier, St George’s and Kingston.

The plan says: “The only site which we believe is a ‘fixed point’ is St George’s Hospital in Tooting since it provides hyperacute stroke, major trauma and other services which are serviced by highly-specialised equipment and estates, which would be very expensive to re-provide elsewhere in south-west London.”

The document says reduction in sites is necessary to provide seven-day services with enough doctors and consultants – one of Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt’s main aims.

“We are very unlikely to be able to deliver services that meet clinical quality standards across five acute hospital sites. In particular, clinicians do not believe that we will be able to recruit or pay for sufficient workforce to deliver seven-day services at five acute sites.”

•In Birmingham and Solihull, the plan states that by 2021 there could be a deficit of £712 million across the health and care sector if nothing is done to address issues in the local health economy.

It says it will establish a single “lead provider” for maternity care and look to “immediately” implement a shared service for back-office functions across its four main acute providers and create a centralised laboratory for routine pathology work.

There are currently two main providers of maternity care – Birmingham Women’s Foundation Trust and at the Heart of England.

Plans to merge Birmingham Women’s and Birmingham Children’s Hospitals by next year have already been announced while University Hospitals of Birmingham and Heart of England FT announced in September the intention to create a “single organisation”.

•North-west London’s draft STP, seen by the Health Service Journal (HSJ) last month, aims to “consolidate acute services on to five sites” from the current nine.

Two London councils – Ealing and Hammersmith and Fulham – have said they cannot agree to a plan that assumes Charing Cross Hospital will be downgraded.

Stephen Cowan, leader of Hammersmith and Fulham council, said: “At the heart of the STP is an acceptance that Charing Cross Hospital will be demolished and replaced with significantly downgraded facilities, with the capital receipts from the sale of much of the hospital’s land intrinsic to the delivery of the STP. 1/8We are 3/8 strongly opposed to this, and therefore the STP.”

•The Cheshire and Mersey plan includes the downgrade of at least one A&E department along with a major consolidation of elective care.

The A&E at Macclesfield hospital would become a minor injuries unit. According to the Health Service Journal (HSJ), there will be a formal “major service review” at Southport and Ormskirk Hospital Trust, and the document includes options that could reduce the number of 24-hour A&E departments across three acute trusts.

•The north central London document sees officials over the next year examining whether some key services “would benefit from consolidation or networking”.

These services include maternity, out-of-hours emergency surgery, orthopaedics, mental health crisis care and dermatology.

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/health/bid_to_transform_nhs_in_norfolk_and_waveney_and_save_160m_in_realms_of_fantasy_1_4774673

Is the “Success Regime” really that successful?

From a correspondent:

“I just took a look at the CCG document “Devon Pre-Consultation Business Case” and found the following:

This document says that NHS England has four tests for service reconfiguration, one of which is “Clear, clinical evidence base”. This seems to come from an NHS England document “Planning, assuring and delivering service change for patients” which says the same thing and says that they are “set out in the Government Mandate to NHS England” however I cannot find anything referring to this in “The Government’s mandate to NHS England for 2016-17” and I can’t find any other similar document.

So “Clear, clinical evidence base” seems to have been made up by NHS England, which does go on to say:

“Service reconfiguration must be evidence-based and this evidence should be publicly available during the consultation and decision making stages.

A clear clinical evidence base

This ensures service reconfiguration proposals are underpinned by clear clinical evidence and align with clinical guidance and best practice. Commissioners should oversee the development of the clinical case for change, as part of the outline case. Medical directors and heads of clinical services of any providers involved can help build the clinical evidence base.”

Indeed this document could be very useful as it is some sort of blueprint for what CCGs need to do – and therefore something we can compare the CCG’s plans to.

NEW Devon CCG’s “Clear, clinical evidence base” is the following:

“The clinical evidence is clear that prolonged hospital stay increases long term physical and psychological dependence”

“The clinical evidence is clear that prolonged hospital stay increases long term physical and psychological dependence” a second time

“The Case for Change sets out clearly the evidence on gaps in existing services which we aim to address through the proposed changes. As part of this diagnostic work clinicians have undertaken a detailed review of care models for four groups of high-impact patients, who currently use significant resources in the community. This is based on identifying good practice both nationally and locally. In particular, the development of services in North Devon following development of community health and social care teams to be a single point of co-ordination for people with complex needs and a reduction in community hospital facilities”

Whilst I have not read in detail the N Devon documents that have been circulated, as far as I can tell the N Devon experience cannot genuinely to be considered to be a positive reference, and in any case the evidence linked to in the CCG documents is not “clinical evidence” but is instead a subjective survey of patients asking them whether the administration of their home visits (i.e. bookings, turning up on time) was satisfactory and says NOTHING (and I mean that in absolute terms – nada, zilch, zero, absolutely nothing) about whether the treatment was clinically effective or indeed as clinically effective as hospital care.

On page 89 there is a table which does provide some anecdotal clinical evidence, but there are no links to the underlying evidence (though we might be able to find it to verify that they have used it correctly if we search for it):

img_1340

However the only evidence above directly relevant to their home-care proposals relates only to one specific type medical condition (total hip and knee replacement), and they then seem to have made a leap of faith that they can apply this to every medical condition which currently results in a stay in hospital beyond the point that hospital medical care is needed.

So it would seem that one target for “consultation feedback” is whether the CCG has met the requirements set by NHS England for a “Clear, clinical evidence base” that shows that their proposals are 1) effective and safe when considered alone, and 2) are at least as effective and safe as hospital care.

Another target for “consultation feedback” is to look at all the other areas defined by NHS England that the CCG has to meet, and see whether they have in fact done so.”

Whatever happened to ….. EDDC councillor ” champions”?

A year or two ago, you couldn’t move for EDDC councillor “champions” – Tory councillors without cabinet portfolios but with “special responsibilities” for specific tasks. Now, without fanfare, they seem to have disappeared without trace.

Those recently memorable to Owl were Councillor Phil Twiss, who had special responsibility for broadband services in East Devon and a councillor who had “special responsibility” for tourism who seems never to have said anything meaningful about it – ever. And who could forget the councillor with “special responsibility” for construction design – whose legacy is … er … perhaps best not go there!

History tells us that at least two councillors in the past declined these “champion” roles, having been awarded championships without even being consulted, of what might be perceived as “poisoned chalices – “beaches and foreshores” (Councillor Wragg) and “affordable housing” (then EDDC councillor Claire Wright)

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/councillors-reject-role-champions/story-12682633-detail/story.html

And who could forget Councillor Philip Skinner being stripped of his role as “rural champion” by then EDDC leader Sarah Randall-Johnson when he sent her what she perceived to be offensive Christmas greetings:

http://www.cornwalllive.com/leader-sacks-rural-champion-christmas-card-message/story-11517317-detail/story.html

Oh, and finally, perhaps the “creme de la creme” of champions, disgraced ex- councillor Graham Brown who was excommunicated and stripped of his “business champion” role (and his Chairmanship of the notorious East Devon Business Forum”) after a Daily Telegraph front page sting in which he asserted:

“If I turn a green field into an estate, I’m not doing it for peanuts”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9921333/If-I-turn-a-green-field-into-an-estate-then-Im-not-doing-it-for-peanuts.html

Ah, perhaps Owl has accidentally solved its own conundrum!

£117.3m spent on tourism in East Devon

And does our Local Enterprise Partnership value tourism in its ” growth” agenda? Not on your life, unless you count trips around Somerset nuclear plants, perhaps! And does EDDC have a dynamic tourism strategy? Attempts to find a councillor “champion” for tourism on the EDDC website were fruitless.

“New figures have revealed that the value of tourism in East Devon is continuing to rise.

In 2015 alone, tourism contributed £3.5million more to the local economy than it did in 2014, rising to £252.5million.

“The figures come from a new report provided to Visit South Devon and the Devon Tourism Partnership, which analyses trends in tourism year-on-year.

The latest findings show that UK-originated and overseas trips to East Devon increased four per cent to 521,000 trips in 2015, compared to 502,000 trips 2014.

The average number of nights per East Devon trip rose by eight per cent, equivalent to 166,000 additional nights in the local area.

Associated spend by tourists visiting from outside the local area leapt by £7.6million to £117.3million in 2015.

However, income from day trips fell by £4.1million to just over £135million – equivalent to a three per cent drop.”

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/figures_reveal_that_value_of_tourism_in_devon_is_rising_1_4779567

“Elderly failed by ‘shameful’ care system”

“Age UK and the Alzheimer’s Society criticised both the quality of care and the way it was rationed as they published fresh evidence on the state of the care sector.

It includes figures that suggest the number of older people not getting help has risen by nearly 50% since 2010. …

… three pieces of research showed:

There are now an estimated 1.2 million over-65s going without help for care – nearly one in eight of all older people

Some 300,000 of them have difficulty with three or more tasks, including dressing, bating and going to the toilet

Councils agreed to help under half the 1.3 million people who approached them for care last year

The BBC identified 11 councils that rejected more than 75% of applications
Where home care was provided “serious problems” were identified in the way dementia patients were treated

Staff said they had not been given enough training to cope with the complex needs people had

Families reported examples of poor care, including loved ones not being given medication, being left in dirty clothes for days and going missing after homes had not been properly secured

Caroline Abrahams, of Age UK, said she was “extremely worried” about the “shameful” state of the care system.

“The sad irony is that it would be far more effective as well as infinitely more humane to give older people the care and support they need,” she said. …

…Councillor Izzi Seccombe, of the Local Government Association, said: “Unless social care is properly funded, there remains a growing risk to the quality and safety of care, and the ability of services caring for our elderly and vulnerable to meet basic needs such as ensuring people are washed and dressed or helped out of bed.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-37992488

Skypark: 30,000 sq ft let – only 1,300,000 sq ft or so left to go!

“Exeter-based housing association DCH is set to relocate its city centre headquarters to a new office building at Skypark.

It will be the first office occupier on the new business park near Exeter Airport when staff move into a new 30,000 sq ft office space at the 1.4 million sq ft scheme.

The new offices will join the Ambulance Special Operations Centre (ASOC West) and DPD UK’s new 60,000 sq ft distribution centre on the site.”
http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/housing-association-dch-to-move-exeter-headquarters-to-skypark/story-29906748-detail/story.html

30,000 sq ft out of 1.4 million sq ft available!

The (quite small) ambulance centre opened in 2014 and the 60,000 sq ft DPS distribution centre opened in 2015. With DCH in (probably) 2017 this will be 3 tenants in 4 years.

No wonder EDDC mooted having their HQ there – and plans are now being changed to accommodate things such as a nursery and hotel … remember, Diviani promised us all 6,500 new jobs from this development.

And how will people from areas outlying Exeter area find their way to Skypark? At the moment one bus will take most people (tenants, potential tenants and employees) into the central offices in Exeter – getting to Skypark will entail another journey out, with consequent expense.

But selling off the offices in Exeter (for student housing? which already surrounds the bus station) will be very lucrative.

Clinton Devon Estates wants to make it easier to build in AONB – Part 2

A correspondent writes:

“Also relevant to CDE’s approach to development in Newton Poppleford is their latest attempt to get planning permission on Frogmore Road in nearby East Budleigh. This is in the prominent field that slopes up towards Syon House (CDE’s old HQ) on the south side of Oak Hill along the road between Budleigh Salterton and Newton Poppleford. The site is outside the built up area boundary, subject to recurrent flooding problems, and, as with Newton Poppleford, within the AONB. It is also Grade 1 agricultural land, of which there is very little in East Devon.

The East Budleigh emerging neighbourhood plan, now in its final phase and just about to be submitted to the Inspector, has identified suitable sites for future development in the village but the Frogmore Road site is not one of them. It was comprehensively rejected in place of other sites during the statutory democratic Community Consultation conducted by EDDC in 2012 as part of the process of formulating the East Devon Village Plan.

Despite this, CDE made an outline planning application in 2014 (14/2959) for 18 dwellings covering approximately half the field. This was eventually withdrawn. Now a new outline planning application (16/1673) has been lodged for only 5 dwellings. This obviously covers a smaller part of the field, but, curiously, the application includes 14 car parking spaces on roads that appear to lead nowhere. Flooding, however, is a reserve matter (as it has been with Newton Poppleford).”