“Police yet to quiz Exeter’s crime tsar as inquiry into election expenses draws to close”

“Police have still not even asked for a date to interview Police and Crime Commissioner Alison Hernandez about expenses for the general election campaign, her chief of staff has revealed.

Ms Hernandez, who was criticised for taking a “selfie” with the chief fire officer at the scene of the Exeter fire last week, is set to be interviewed following a complaint about alleged false accounting, following her role as the Conservative Party election agent in Torbay MP Kevin Foster’s victorious campaign in 2015.

The allegations relate to expenses for the Tory “Battle Bus”, which brought activists to constituencies from outside the area with leaflets and are thought to have helped swing the vote.

Cornwall MPs Scott Mann and George Eustice are among those caught up in the investigations, which are continuing.

The issue has dogged the PCC since the story broke days before her own election victory in May by a narrow margin.

She has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and insists she stands ready and willing to assisst any investigation.

Andrew White, chief executive of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) said the investigation in Devon and Cornwall by West Mercia police was expected to conclude in weeks but no request has been made to speak to the commissioner.

Mr White, who I referred allegations about election expenses and potential breaches of electoral law on expenses in the Torbay constituency, said: “I am informed by the IPCC that the investigation is progressing. It is expected that the investigation should conclude by November this year. I can confirm that West Mercia Police have not yet requested an interview with the PCC, Alison Hernandez.”

“Following the investigation, a report will be presented to the IPCC and a decision will be made whether the case should be referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS),” Mr White added

“This investigation is one of a number of similar investigations being undertaken across the country.

“I will issue further updates as and when any relevant information, that I am allowed to disclose by the relevant bodies, becomes available.”

It emerged last month that Chief Constable Shaun Sawyer was also under investigation after comments he made about diverting police resources to deal with the inquiry.

The remarks which have got Mr Sawyer into hot water were made in a BBC interview, when he said that although “democracy is important” Parliament needed to consider procedures for dealing with complaints about the way elections are run.

“This is taking up police time,” he said. “It is taxpayers’ money.”

Adrian Sanders, who made the complaint, has said that it was not for the chief constable to make such comments.

“You can’t make statements like that unless you have some background detail,” he told the BBC.

“He’s not in a position to know that detail, especially when it’s his boss who is the subject of investigation.”

In a statement, the chief constable denied any wrongdoing and said he would cooperate fully with the investigation.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/police-yet-to-quiz-exeter-s-crime-tsar-as-inquiry-into-election-expenses-draws-to-close/story-29884683-detail/story.html

North Somerset and Bath: Goodbye NHS, hello Virgin Healthcare

Set to commence on April Fool’s Day next year

“Sir Richard Branson’s health firm, Virgin Care, has won a £700m contract to deliver 200 types of NHS and social care services to more than 200,000 people in Bath and north-east Somerset.

The contract, which was approved on Thursday, has sparked new fears about private health firms expanding their role in the provision of publicly funded health services.

Virgin Care has been handed the contract by both Bath and North East Somerset NHS clinical commissioning group and Conservative-led Bath and North East Somerset council. It is worth £70m a year for seven years and the contract includes an option to extend it by another three years at the same price.

It means that from 1 April Virgin Care will become the prime provider of a wide range of care for adults and children. That will include everything from services for those with diabetes, dementia or who have suffered a stroke, as well as people with mental health conditions. It will also cover care of children with learning disabilities and frail, elderly people who are undergoing rehabilitation to enable them to go back to living at home safely after an operation.

NHS campaigners warned that the history of previous privatisations of NHS services in other parts of England may mean the quality of care patients receive drops once Virgin takes over.

“This is obviously part of a big push by Virgin to dominate the supply of community health across England. The experience so far from NHS outsourcing is that companies struggle to deliver the level of service that patients need and make a profit,” said Paul Evans, co-ordinator of the NHS Support Federation, which monitors NHS contracts being awarded to firms such as Virgin.

“In too many instances outsourced healthcare has resulted in care being compromised to cuts costs. Patients need secure services that they can trust and rely on,” Evans added.

The collapse of the £725m UnitingCare contract in Cambridgeshire meant Virgin’s newly acquired contract would be the most lucrative ongoing deal for providing NHS care, he said.

Eleanor Jackson, a Labour member of Bath and North East Somerset council, told the Mirror she was “horrified” by the decision. “Make no mistake about it, what has happened here is the beginning of the privatisation of the NHS in this country. Woe betide you getting ill in this area if you are old, disabled or have learning difficulties in the next seven years. It is just a horrifying decision,” she said.

There are concerns that handing the work to Virgin Care will take important income away from the many local NHS, voluntary, charitable and housing bodies that currently provide some of the services. They include the Royal United hospitals Bath NHS foundation trust, Great Western hospitals NHS foundation trust and the Avon and Wiltshire mental health partnership NHS trust. Charities affected include Age UK’s Bath branch and the Alzheimer’s Society.

Virgin will also run the urgent care facility at Paulton community hospital, which is 12 miles from Bath, and subcontract a number of other services to other providers, including the provision of dementia and end of life care and a “hospital from home” service for recently discharged patients.

“I am pleased that we can now start the process of transferring services. Following extensive consultation with local people and a very rigorous procurement process, the CCG board is assured that Virgin Care is the right organisation to deliver the personalised and preventative care that local people have asked for,” said Dr Ian Orpen, the clinical chair of Bath and North East Somerset clinical commissioning group.

“We will be working closely with the council and our new partners, Virgin Care, over the coming months to ensure that services and staff are transferred across safely on 1 April 2017 and to minimise disruption to the care and support that people currently receive.”

A spokesman for Virgin Care said: “We are really pleased to have been chosen by the council and CCG to deliver more joined-up care for people across Bath and north-east Somerset. We have a strong track record over the last decade of overseeing integration and improvement of NHS services across England and we’re looking forward to working with the many outstanding professionals, and a range of great partners, to provide and oversee high quality, easy-to-navigate services which are shaped by the people who use them.”

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/11/virgin-care-700m-contract-200-nhs-social-care-services-bath-somerset

Post- truth journalism

Guardian headline today:
“UK construction at weakest level for four years as housebuilding stalls”

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/nov/11/housebuilding-stalls-britain-eu-construction

Daily Telegraph headline today:
Construction downturn after Brexit vote not as deep as feared”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/11/11/construction-downturn-after-brexit-vote-not-as-deep-as-feared/

The impact of social care cuts

“Vulnerable older people are being denied regular showers and visits to the toilet because of cuts to social care budgets, a report by trade union Unison has said.

In The Damage: Care in Crisis Unison said 63% of homecare, residential support and day services staff said they had less time to spend with those they care for because of staff shortages.
It found 65% were doing their job alongside fewer staff than six years ago, while 36% said rationing of supplies had increased as a result of budget cuts.

Some care home residents were not getting access to showers and regular visits to the toilet, respondents said.

The survey drew responses from more then 1,075 care staff.

Unison head of local government Heather Wakefield said: “Cuts have left a trail of destruction and this is affecting those in desperate need of care.

“Everyone deserves decent care in their old age. But if the government doesn’t act now millions of people will be left facing a bleak and uncertain future.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/unison-survey-finds-impact-social-care-cuts

“Devolution is doomed, says Layfield inquiry member”

“A member of the landmark Layfield inquiry into local government finance has said the government’s devolution drive is unlikely to succeed because not enough fiscal powers have been localised.

George Jones was speaking at an event to mark 40 years since the publication of Sir Frank Layfield’s review, which called for a new constitutional settlement between central and local government. He echoed one of Layfield’s recommendations, saying devolution would need some kind of local personal taxation if it was to be successful. The Layfield report had called for a local income tax in its report in May 1976.

Asked if the current round of devolution was limited or doomed, he said: “I’d say it is doomed because, in all the schemes, there’s no devolution of fiscal powers other than business rates, which are irrelevant because they don’t bear on voters.”

Jones said the Layfield report focused on political responsibility and accountability rather than the technicalities of rates and grants, which gave it considerable constitutional importance.

“It proposed a choice based on two sets of arrangements – one based mainly on central responsibility and the other based mainly on local responsibility.”

Layfield argued no system of local government finance would be satisfactory if it did not follow from a “desired pattern of relations”, Jones added.

However, the Labour government led by Jim Callaghan did not opt for either of these arrangements, nor a middle way with minimum standards paid for by grant. Instead, the government pursued what Jones called a “muddle way” that was not clear where the main responsibility for local government finance should lie. This confusion allowed centralisation to increase in subsequent years, he said.

Both central and local government were embarrassed by Layfield, Jones argued, as it had raised fundamental questions they did not want to answer about the distribution of power in society.

Also speaking at the event, Sir Michael Lyons, who led a review of local government funding published in March 2007, agreed that Layfield pointed to a different way of running the country. Like Layfield, Lyons said, his report concluded that changes to local government finance could not effectively happen without its role being made clearer.

“Like him, I stressed there was no simple magic formula,” Lyons told attendees. “I said that key debates had to be about the key relationship between the centre and localities – not a simple call for devolution but a new contract that established very clearly those things that are national entitlements and those things that should be left to local determination.”

The government was also embarrassed by the scope of his proposed reforms and, in particular, was “petrified” they would be caught out on the issue of council tax revaluation.

While the coalition and the current governments had shown interest in devolution, it was a permissive kind, with rules councils had to meet. While business rates localisation was interesting, it was “manifestly not” the way to reach a new constitutional settlement, he said.

“If I’m working for an individual authority looking to further the interests of my community, I would take every opportunity that came along, believing that there is no appetite for the big questions set out in Layfield. I wouldn’t criticise folk for doing that, but it no more than a partial, limited improvement from where we are.”

Also speaking at the event, Tony Travers, the director of the Greater London group at the London School of Economics and chair of the London Finance Commission, said this amounted to “centralised decentralisation”.

He added: “If you have a system as centralised as this one, decentralisation is part of a centralised process, so it is very much step by step,” he said. “It is such a centralised system that even a tiny step towards decentralising a little bit of service freedom requires not only the Treasury to be convinced of it, but the service department. It is where we are starting from that makes this such a difficult process.”

Mike Owen, chief executive of Bury Council, said the Layfield report had highlighted a series of issues – including who held the purse strings and controlled public services – that were still of importance today.

Layfield had decided local autonomy was the right way to go. “This was absolutely right,” Owen concluded. “It really did start a debate that has gone on for 40 years, and that is a great credit to Layfield and a great credit to the report itself and to the [inquiry] committee.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/devolution-doomed-says-layfield-inquiry-member

Claire Wright exposes misinformation by NHS Property Ltd in Sidmouth

Be very grateful that Claire Wright is a DCCCouncillor!

“Sidmouth GPs are angry after an NHS property company gave a misleading update to Devon County Council health scrutiny councillors, on controversial plans to redevelop Blackmore Health Centre.

A written briefing was circulated to councillors from NHS Property Services on Monday 7 November, claiming that agreement with the practice had been reached on rent and service costs.

But Dr Joe Stych said he was infuriated at the claims. He asked that the committee be put straight at its meeting on 8 November.

He said: “I don’t know who they get their information from but it is wrong and should be made clear to the Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee – they are trying to pull the wool over their eyes.

“There is no agreement with the practice about rent and service costs. We met with NHPS about 1 month ago – the most senior manager for facilities management came to meet us and was clueless about why the costs we were being charged were so high. They confirmed costs for 2015-2016 to continue on our previous arrangement but since the meeing nothing in writing has come out. Nothing is agreed for this financial year 2016-2017 or moving forward.

“The only option for a redevelopment that is on the table is one we can not afford to enter a lease into as it sees non re-imbursable costs to the practice rise considerably and we have no control over rising costs.

“Lets be clear their redevelopment of the site is aimed at making as much profit as possible. Car parking is reducing considerably and we have seen no plans in writing which protect future expansion interests to the practice.

“Their plans are so unfavourable we are having to look at our options to relocate the surgery to a less convenient site.”

I raised the issue at the end of the meeting to put members straight. But it is deeply worrying that NHS PS is putting out such briefings that are clearly wildly wrong and misleading.

NHS PS now owns 12 Eastern Devon community hospitals and many of us are on high alert awaiting news of the rents, which if Sidmouth’s case is anything to go by, could suddenly be hiked beyond affordability at any time. NHS PS claims it is part of the “NHS family” yet it behaves like an amoral profit-making corporation, with apparently no accountability to patients who fund its existence and rely on its ability to treat its tenants fairly.

For MONTHS now I have been chasing the company, which is wholly owned by the secretary of state for health, on how much income it takes compared with how much it spends on maintenance. They clearly don’t want to provide this information. I first asked for it in JUNE. And have asked several times since.

From the little dealings I have had with NHS PS, I don’t trust them one inch and I am disgusted with a government that created this very system.

Hugo Swire labelled me a scaremongerer in May for my concerns about NHS PS. He refused to take up the matter of the transfer of our local hospitals, with health secretary, Jeremy Hunt.

I wonder if he would still has as much confidence in the company as he did in May?”

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/sidmouth_gps_infuriated_at_nhs_property_services_misrepresentation_to_healt

St Ives neighbourhood plan second homes ban lawful

Interestingly, Cornwall Council are trying to use European Law to overturn the decision – when Cornwall voted for Brexit! No doubt Cornwall Council will appeal!

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28980%3Ajudge-rejects-challenge-over-second-homes-ban-in-neighbourhood-plan&catid=63&Itemid=31

The great devolution swindle

Lincolnshire County Council in late October voted against having an elected mayor (see below).

Will it be back on the cards now Javid has said clearly ” No Mayor, No money”?

Imagine – this is a single county voting against it, where we are being forced to take a two-county deal – two counties with very different aims and objectives which would have one mayor deciding alone on differing priorities.

And has anyone worked out how much these extra tiers of government will cost, offset against the very small sums being offered over 30 years – sums already cut from local authority budgets and for which less is being handed back than taken away?

Has anyone thought about the effect of the myriad “partnership deals” each district and city has already signed with other devolution subsidiaries which may conflict with mayoral interests (eg Greater Exeter v. Somerset v devolved Somerset/Devon or the Strata IT project (4 councils) v a devolved authority IT project?). p

Here is what they said in Lincolnshire:

“Lincolnshire county councillors have decisively rejected a proposed devolution settlement and directly elected mayor.

A total of 43 councillors voted against the proposals at a meeting on Thursday, October 20 [2016], with 17 voting in favour and five abstentions.

Many councillors expressed their anger at the plans for an elected mayor, a perceived failure of government to listen to their concerns, and fears of two extra layers of local government bureaucracy. …

… Councillor Colin Davie, portfolio holder for economic development, was another high-profile dissenting voice.

He said: “What we have on the table is a dog’s breakfast of a deal. We have a contract that has holes in it, and if I was in the private sector, I would never sign a deal like this.””

Lincolnshire devolution plunged into doubt as county councillors vote against deal

Some universities’ “growth” may be financially unsustainable

Alongside business people with dubious business interests, our Local Enterprise Partnership has three leaders from further and higher education. All of them blindly follow the mantra that economic growth is the only thing that government should be concentrating on.

This is what Public Service Finances currently has to say about this sector:

“The financial sustainability of higher education is uncertain, according to the government’s university funding body.

The Higher Education Funding Council for England said its analysis of the latest financial forecasts submitted by higher education institutions showed some could prove unsustainable by 2018-19 due to inadequate surpluses, declining cash levels and increased borrowing. …

… Financial forecasts to 2018-19 showed a widening gap between the lowest and highest-performing institutions.

Surpluses were projected at 2.3-4.3% of total income, which HEFCE called “relatively small margins in which to operate, particularly in an uncertain external context”.

Student number projections showed predicted growth of 10.3% among home and EU students and a 26% increase in fee income from international students, to £4.8bn by 2018-19.

HEFCE warned the sector might find these goals hard to reach due to a declining cohort of 18-year-olds, uncertainty about EU students’ long-term eligibility for loans and grants and potential changes to student immigration rules.

“These challenges, taken together, could have a significant impact on the sector’s financial projections, even if the currently weaker pound assists in the recruitment of international students in the short term,” HEFCE said.

Universities and colleges expect to invest £17.8bn in infrastructure over the next four years, 51% more than the previous four-year average.

However, within this total though nearly a quarter intended to cut their infrastructure spend, even though across the whole sector £3.6bn still needed to be spent to bring non-residential buildings to a sound condition.

HEFCE said the sector’s trend of falling liquidity and increased borrowing had continued with borrowing expected to exceed liquidity levels by £3.9bn at July 2019.

It described this as “not sustainable in the long term”.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/hefce-issues-warning-university-finances

EDDC 2015/2016 accounts still not signed off by external auditors

Report from external auditors KPMG (page 10 of agenda papers). The auditors original statement was that they hoped to have concluded the outstanding matter by the end of October 2016. This has obviously not been possible.

“We received an objection to the Authority’s financial statements from a local elector. We are currently concluding the outcome of our work on the matters raised and, until this is completed, we are unable to issue our certificate. Once issued, the certificate will confirm that we have concluded the audit for 2015/16 in accordance with the requirements of the Local Audit & Accountability Act 2014 and the Code of Audit Practice.
We will report separately on the outcome of the objection to the Authority’s Audit & Governance Committee.”

The matter is now pushed on to the next Audit and Governance Committees on 5 January 2017. (page 42 of agenda):

Click to access 171116combined-a-and-gagenda.pdf

When “Care at home” goes bad – often


“Complaints about care provided in people’s homes rose by a quarter over the last year, while those about care homes increased by a fifth, a report has found.

The local government ombudsman (LGO) received 2,969 complaints and inquiries about adult social care in 2015-16, up 6% on the previous year.

Of those, there was a 21% rise in complaints about residential care homes, while complaints about home care rose by 25%.

The report comes after the King’s Fund warned earlier this week that councils could face legal challenges from families for failing to provide good quality and appropriate care to the disabled and elderly.

The LGO found themes across the complaints it received on home care, including staff failing to turn up, being late, not staying long enough or cancelling visits.

Some people received visits from too many different carers, while there was also poor record-keeping.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/10/complaints-about-home-care-up-by-a-quarter-report-finds

Diviani votes against Claire Wright DCC motion to re-examine Honiton hospital closure

Reblogged from the site of Claire Wright, indefatiguable independent councillor fighting non-stop on health service cuts.

NOTE: EDDC Tory Leader Paul Diviani sabotaged her effort to “stop the clock” on cuts to re-examine the effects of closing Honiton and Okehampton hospitals.

REPORT FROM CLAIRE WRIGHT, DCC HEALTH SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

“• CCG does not know how many more staff it needs

• No answer (yet) to public health stated assumption that care at home costs the same as care in big hospitals

My proposal at yesterday’s health and wellbeing scrutiny committee meeting to suspend the consultation which proposes to halve the remaining community hospital beds in Eastern Devon, fell by two votes.

There was a packed public gallery. Several members of the public, including Di Fuller, chair of Sidmouth’s patient and public involvement group and Cathy Gardner, EDDC Independent councillor for Sidmouth spoke powerfully, expressing deep concerns about the bed losses.

Di Fuller said the consultation should be rejected as “invalid.”

Cathy Gardner called on the committee to demand more funding from central government.

Councillors, Kevin Ball and James McInnes from Okehampton made strong representations on behalf of the town relating to the hospital being excluded from the consultation.

(I am part of a sub-committee of health scrutiny that meets tomorrow to scope an investigation into the funding formula for Devon’s health services, which many people, including me believe is unfair, despite the government’s claims that Devon receives more funding than its fair share).

Staff from the NEW Devon Clinical Commissioning Group presented to the committee. They were Rob Sainsbury, Jenny McNeill and GPs – Joe Andrews and Simon Kerr.

We were shown a video of patients happy with the hospital at home scheme which operates in Exmouth and Budleigh Salterton only, as evidence that care in people’s homes work.

This to me didn’t seem to be adequate evidence given that hospital at home is limited to Exmouth and Budleigh Salterton, is consultant led and mirrors the kind of care one might expect in a hospital. It is a good service but expensive to run.

This is not what is being proposed for the remainder of Eastern Devon.

The four presenters tried their best to sell us their new model of care. Some of us weren’t convinced.

Cllr Andy Boyd was critical of the plans and other members asked questions about housing and various NHS procedures.

I asked how many more staff they would need to operate their new system. We heard they needed more “therapy staff” and other disciplines, but not how many more of each. We were told that a staff analysis was currently being carried out.

I said I was surprised that this information was not known, halfway through the consultation, with an expected figure of savings at around £5-£6m. How can the CCG be confident that the new system will save money when basic information is not known, such as how many staff are required?

Under the previous agenda item I had turned to page three of the October 2015 public health acuity audit – a document used by the CCG to back up its case for shutting beds, where it states as an assumption: “Caring for a patient in an acute care setting is either more expensive than, or at least as expensive as, caring for a patient in alternative setting, including at home.”

I asked for a reaction to this statement. Angela Pedder, Success Regime chief, said she would get back to me about it.

It is surprising that in a document the CCG is using to back up its case, where they say caring for people at home will save money, it states that this care costs the same as acute care (such as the care provided at the RD&E for example).

I raised the issue of Devon County Council’s adult social care budget being £5m overspent and how this overspend will need to be brought back to zero by April 2017. This will surely have a potentially significant impact on any NHS care that is provided in people’s homes.

But Rob Sainsbury said that social care packages could be organised in a different way to support care in people’s homes.

I said that earlier NHS (incorrect) statements about a third of community hospital beds not being used has now morphed into third of bed space not being used. If this is the case surely it is due to previous community hospital bed cuts over the years!

And the other CCG claim relating to Eastern Devon having far more beds than other parts of the county is surely because they have been cut in other parts of the county!

According to a public health audit from last year, there are 94 per cent bed occupancy levels in Eastern Devon. They are far from being half empty.

Finally, I raised the issue of a government watchdog – the Independent Reconfiguration Panel – that examined the Torrington Hospital case for bed losses. It stated in its response that communities must feel they have a genuine opportunity to influence the outcome of a consultation.

I proposed that the consultation be suspended while the CCG included both Honiton and Okehampton in the options to retain beds.

The proposal was seconded by Brian Greenslade but unfortunately was lost 5-7.

Instead, chair, Richard Westlake asked for urgent talks between the CCG and Honiton and Okehampton communities.

In other news, two motions calling for more funding to Devon’s NHS and for the Success Regime to be paused, were agreed by the committee and will go before full council in December.

To view the webcast see – https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/244717

To comment on the consultation email: d-ccg.yourfuturecare@nhs.net
The deadline is 6 January.

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/proposal_to_suspend_plans_to_cut_71_east_devon_community_hospital_beds_fail

NHS: How to profit when excrement hitting the air conditioning

The NHS’ new “Success Regime” aims to put a firm brake on health spending, but it’s proving to be a bonanza for consultants on lucrative contracts who oversee the process. And some of these consultants are former senior NHS managers who received generous payoffs when their jobs disappeared as a result of the Tories’ top-down reorganisation of the health service in 2012.

There were a few wry smiles, therefore, at Monday evening’s public “consultation” in Sidmouth to discuss closing the town’s community hospital beds, when Dame Ruth Carnall, chair of the “Success Regime” which is monitoring these cuts, bemoaned the disastrous “fragmentary” effects of the 2012 Health and Social Care Act.

She may not like it, but as chief executive of NHS London which was abolished by the Act, she received a payoff in 2013 which included a £2.2 million pension pot.

Then with another former NHS executive she created consultants Carnall Farrar Ltd who were chosen by NEW Devon CCG to advise them on how to save money before she was appointed “Independent Chair” of the “Success Regime”. Rumours suggest this will net her several hundred thousands of pounds in fees!

See
https://nhsreality.wordpress.com/…/nhs-executives-rehired-as-consultants-after-payoff

Javid reiterates: no super-Mayor, no devolution

So that’s that – either Devon will be ruled by a Somerset super-mayor, or Somerset will be ruled by a Devon super-mayor or BOTH will be ruled by a super-dodgy-business-person with vested interests in one or both counties!

Speaking to the County Councils Network on Monday, the local government secretary said:

“… he was open to reorganisation proposals, such as that put forward by Buckinghamshire County Council to abolish its districts and form a county unitary.

This proposal was “exactly the kind of proactive, locally driven thinking I want to see”, he said.

While not committing commit himself on Buckinghamshire’s plan, he said: “Unitary status can be a great model…but I’m not for one moment saying it’s for everyone. This is not compulsory. It’s not going to be imposed.

However, he dashed hopes that he would allow devolution in county areas without the creation of elected mayoralties.

Former chancellor George Osborne had insisted on mayors as a condition of devolution deals but after his departure some county leaders hoped to change this policy.

Javid told the CCN: “I get that directly elected mayors aren’t universally popular within local government. And I know that’s especially true of the counties.”

He recognised arguments that counties were too large for one person to control but said: “I’m not going to devolve significant new powers and more taxpayers’ money without a corresponding increase in local accountability.”

Mayoralties would be “a real red line for me when it comes to negotiating devolution deals”, he added.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/nearly-all-councils-submit-plan-four-year-funding-deal-says-javid

Owl’s Midweek Herald competition – Spot the News!

Rules:

1. Examine each page of the Midweek Herald for REAL news.
2. Rehashed press releases do not count.
3. This includes puff jobs for the Thelma Hulbert Gallery.
4. Advertorials (advertising dressed up as news items) don’t count.
5. Fires in airing cupboards, sheds, etc immediately put out don’t count.
6. News reported from other news media doesn’t count.
7. EDDC’s official notices don’t count.

Good luck!

Seaton public meeting on bed cuts: East Devon Alliance asks MP troublesome questions!

“MP Neil Parish came under pressure to oppose the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement unless more money is allocated to the NHS to prevent community hospital bed closures when he attended a public meeting in Seaton on Friday.

The MP would not commit to a “Yes” or “No” answer, and said he is “hopeful” of not having to make that choice.

Having spoken passionately against a proposed reduction of beds in East Devon’s community hospitals at a packed Gateway last Friday, the MP was challenged by Colyton resident and former East Devon Alliance chairman Paul Arnott.

Mr Arnott said: “If in the Autumn Statement later this month more money is not provided [for the NHS], will you vote against that Autumn Statement?”

Mr Parish said he liked the question’s sting in the tail and went on to say: “The answer is that I will very much put pressure on both the Chancellor and the Secretary of State for Health to provide more money for Devon, and I will endeavour to get some more money.”

He stressed he had voted against the government before, and added: “I’m hopeful that we can get them to give some ground, so therefore it won’t put me in the position to have to vote against the government – but if they don’t budge at all, then you might find me in the other lobby.”

The public meeting had been called by Seaton doctors, town councillors and hospital league of friends members concerned about the possible closure of beds at Seaton Hospital.

The meeting was chaired by town councillor Martin Pigott and the panel included, among others, NEW Devon Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) Chief Officer Rebecca Harriott and Seaton Hospital League of Friends chairman Dr Mark Welland.

Councillor Pigott explained that the purpose of the meeting was “to raise questions and perhaps get answers”.

Currently there are a total of 143 beds spread across eight community hospitals in the area covered by NEW Devon CCG.

But health bosses announced drastic proposals that would see only 72 beds concentrated to three sites, with a shortlist of four options, and launched an ongoing public consultation.

It is this announcement that sparked campaigns around Devon to save the beds.

Mr Parish, for example, was heading to a similar meeting in Honiton straight after the Seaton one.

The CCG needs to save money and also says that many patients lose their independence, and could deteriorate physically if in a hospital bed, so would benefit from being cared for in their homes instead.

Campaigners and the CCG do agree that community hospital beds are needed, but are poles apart when it comes to numbers.

Ms Harriott told the meeting: “We rely on beds far more than other places in the country do.”

The concept of caring for patients at home as opposed to in hospital is being questioned by campaigners, but the CCG says it has evidence from around the UK that it works.

The CCG will have its own consultation sessions in Seaton on Thursday, November 24th. These will also be held in The Gateway, from 2pm-4.30pm and from 5.30pm to 8pm.

The four options presented by the CCG are:

Option A Beds at Tiverton (32), Seaton (24) and Exmouth (16)
Option B Beds at Tiverton (32), Sidmouth (24) and Exmouth (16)
Option C Beds at Tiverton (32), Seaton (24) and Exeter (16)
Option D Beds at Tiverton (32), Sidmouth (24) and Exeter (16).
A petition organised by the meeting organisers, supporting Option A, had amassed 800 signatures by last Friday.”

http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/in-the-press/20161108/pulmans-seaton-colyton-neil-parish-pressure-beds-protest-meeting/

Feedback from bed cuts meetings: Sidmouth and Exmouth

SIDMOUTH (Robert Crick):

“The evening session in Sidmouth saw a chastened CCG and a more confident community pushing back relentlessly.

“CCG abandoned their Powerpoint sequence halfway through and never even put their Options forward for discussion or vote; but acknowledged that the NHS is in chaos and that the Health and Social Care Act had fragmented the system but added that the community care provision had been outdated and broken for a good 20 years. All agreed this needs urgent attention.

“Much scepticism about the way forward and anger about NHS Property Company stripping community assets entrusted to the Secretary of State in 1948, whose successor in 2012 kept the property but dropped the responsibility for delivering the care.

“Sterling work by James and Momentum Barnstaple with some support – in words – from Conservative Councillors, although the lead was taken by the Independent East Devon Alliance in the meeting. Many efforts made by the ‘facilitators’ to rule any ‘political’ questions out of order. Claims about the success of the ‘Sick Regime’ in North Devon were dropped and instead we were told that Plymouth has a good integrated health and social care package. Any evidence available?

“How do you provide care at home for those who are homeless or visiting or living in poverty? And many other trenchant questions. Much food for thought for the unfortunate CCG. Local GP challenged the 80 wise clinicians who had reached the absurd conclusions in the proposal. Much embarrassment.

“Please let Exmouth and other towns know that it was not a victory for Sidmouth Hospital but a successful push by Sidmouth community to rejectall proposed cuts until and unless the alternative is in place and tried and tested, which will require investment in staff recruitment, training and retention, morale restoration with full review of pay differential between managers and clinicians.

“Analogy: we are burning too much fossil fuel – so we will close down all the power stations next year while we consider how to invest in massive insulation and renewable energy programmes.”

EXMOUTH (Louise McAlister)

“Had to leave early but lots of critical questioning from participants.

Much anger (from me anyway) when we were told we have a rep from the CCG at our table to ‘help us frame our questions’. I immediately told her that we don’t require that. Instead we bombarded her with our own questions and then helped her consolidate them.

The CCG would be hard pressed to make claims for any support from the event.

Dr Mezjner (who I have met before as he is responsible for the non-existent Budleigh health hub) did a long speech basically demonising hospitals. Lots of claims, no evidence.”

How many tiers can “Local” Government take before it collapses?

Owl has lost count of the number of tiers and organisations and partnerships currently interfering in so-called “local” government, see:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/11/03/unitary-councils-save-money-yet-a-few-years-ago-they-didnt/

Which leads to the question: just how many tiers of government do we NEED and how many can we AFFORD? And how many is too many?

For example, the savings by eliminating district councils, regional super-authorities and makeshift arrangements such as Greater Exeter would almost certainly be huge. You could still have flexible cooperative arrangements such as Strata, without having all the paraphernalia and bureaucracy.

Anyone campaigning for the County Council who includes on their platform local government reorganisation, with County and Parish Councils as the only tiers of local government might well be very popular. It would be possible to combine such a package with maximum localism/subsidiarity. For example, if the District Council was dissolved, all its responsibilities, where practicable, could be transferred to the lower tier councils for truly local management.

Removing two or three tiers of government would almost certainly produce enough savings to eliminate local NHS cuts and debts at a stroke. “Save the NHS by cutting local government bureaucracy” would be a heck of a slogan!

And the elimination of all that bureaucracy and repetitive form-filling and buck-passing could bring enormous efficiency savings and productivity.

In East Devon we would probably be immediately £15-20 million better off just with the cancellation of the new HQ at Honiton.

Whilst many staff would be transferred to town councils to continue to do the jobs that they presently perform, there would probably be a loss over time through natural wastage of perhaps 100 to 200 jobs, representing a cost saving of £3-5 million per annum. Plus reduced operational running costs of around £2 million.

This means a cash windfall of about £300-400 per household to everyone in the District, and average council tax bills would be about £130 lower.

But the big benefit would be in greater efficiency and local connectivity. A huge democratic boost.

Discuss!

Webcast link for this afternoon’s Devon County Council Health Scrutiny Committee

https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/home