New Marine Conservation Zones do not include East Devon

The pink sea fan corals, which are very rare and found in our area, are therefore not protected.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-35328286

“How can the UK prepare for floods to come?”

” … The government is aiming to raise £600m in “partnership funding”, including from the private sector, where developers building in flood-prone areas contribute to the cost of defences.

Earlier this month, the government said it had so far raised £250m. However, just £61m came via the private sector, meaning £189m came from local councils – possibly not a viable future source of flood protection money given the spending cuts.” …

http://gu.com/p/4fczg

So, what’s different about Straitgate Quarry to this one?

From an article in today’s Daily Telegraph about the omnishambles that is the Swansea Tidal Lagoon project:

“… But another battle was raging over the developers’ plans to create a huge “super-quarry” on the Lizard Peninsula in Cornwall, from which they hoped to ship 1.5 million tons a year of the stone needed to build the six-mile long breakwater round Swansea Bay.

A case brought on behalf of local protesters argued that the planning permission rushed through Cornwall Council last April had broken the law by failing to include an environmental assessment of the potential damage the quarry would do to a whole range of natural sites officially designated for special protection.

Although just before Christmas Mr Justice Dove in the High Court ruled that the permission had been given illegally, it is only now his judgment has been published we can see just how damning it was to the council’s conduct in every way.

It also emerges that the planning officer responsible had been involved in two earlier decisions where Cornwall approved applications for two highly controversial wind farms.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/12103688/Mad-Swansea-tidal-lagoon-scheme-heading-for-the-rocks.html

More information on the judge’s scathing commented is here:

Click to access CADS-JR-JUDGEMENT-PRESS-RELEASE-7.1.pdf

Follow the money … housing benefit doesn’t go to the tenant, it goes to the landlord

“So, your plan is to bulldoze council ­estates where lots of people live, some of them renting, some owners.

What happens to them during the destruction and ­building phase and what happens afterwards?

You’re building fewer places to live in than were there before. How will it work?

… None of it makes sense unless you follow the money and try to work out who benefits from this ­madness. Not the country, not those on normal wages, not the poor and vulnerable.

Those who benefit are property developers and ­private landlords. Or to put it another way, Tory donors and Tory MPs as they hoover up all that housing benefit money.

Remember that next time your hear about the amount of benefit going to some hard-working person on low pay. She isn’t getting the housing benefit.

No, this wedge of taxpayers’ money is going into the pockets of private landlords.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-property-greed-wrecked-housing-7192291

Vanity project creative accountancy starts at the top

“George Osborne avoided official channels and Department for Transport oversight to offer the London mayor, Boris Johnson, funding for the garden bridge scheme, parliament’s spending watchdog has found, warning the project may not have been approved if the normal processes had been followed. …

… Sir Amyas Morse, of the National Audit Office, said of the project: “It is important to note that the results would not in normal circumstances suggest a compelling value for money case … The department’s own quantitative analysis suggested that there may or may not be a net benefit and, especially once concerns over deliverability were taken account of, the project might well not have met the department’s normal threshold for allocating its finite funds. …

… Gareth Thomas, MP for Harrow West, on Friday called on Osborne to justify the use of public cash on a “vanity project”. He said: “At a time of deep public sector cuts, this money could have been spent on countless other projects where the business case has already been proved.” …

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/jan/16/garden-bridge-george-osborne-avoided-official-channels-mayor

Cameron: Affordable Homes – 2 + 2 = ?

David Cameron asserted in Parliament this week that people needed only a £10,000 deposit to buy a new home now, so homes were affordable for people to buy on the “living wage”, “whereas he had needed £30,000 when he bought his first home – bet that wasn’t a starter home nor was he on a “living wage”!

However, today’s Telegraph has fact-checked this and found his maths somewhat disingenuous to say the least. No wonder the government can always seem to make 2 and 2 make anything but 4!:

” … The question put to Mr Cameron was if those on the national living wage would be able to afford a home.
Based on the current UK living wage of £8.25 an hour, an individual working 40 hours a week, 50 weeks of the year would earn £16,500 before tax.

A couple together would have a household income of £33,000, which based on a four-times salary multiple (a simplified measure) would enable them to borrow a maximum of £132,000 in a best case scenario, assuming they had a clean credit history, no other debts and minimal outgoing costs.

According to the Halifax House Price Index, the average house price across the UK is £208,000.

Taking a more conservative £180,000, with a 5pc deposit using a standard 95pc mortgage you would need to borrow £171,000 (the other £1,000 from the £10,000 would be needed for stamp duty).

To be lent that much, assuming all other elements are in order, would typically require an income of £42,750. Using regional average prices, that figure is £80,000 for London and £53,000 for the South East.

David Hollingworth, associate director of communications at London and Country Mortgages, said: “The scoring requirement is likely to be higher for those with a small deposit so applicants will need to be sure they can meet the affordability requirements and have a clean credit record.”

The other point to make is if £10,000 is all that you have been able to save, it is unlikely your salary will be high enough for a 95pc mortgage. The equity loan can of course help here, if there are new builds available in your price bracket. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/mortgages/12100186/David-Camerons-10000-mortgage-deposit-claim-put-to-the-test.html

There may be enough Tory MPs to scupper attempts to water down Freedom of Information Act

“Attempts to water down Freedom of Information laws would make it harder to hold the Government to account, a senior Tory MP has warned.

Jesse Norman, chairman of the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee, is the latest Tory to speak out against David Cameron’s bid to change the FoI Act.

Speaking to the Mirror, Mr Norman said: “I think Government should be held to account and I don’t think any power that is unaccountable is legitimate.

“So I’m very tough on it. I’m a strong supporter of Freedom of Information.”

The MP also raised doubts about the Government’s ability to get the changes through Parliament, saying there were many Tory MPs ready to rebel.

He said: “I’d be quite surprised if anything much happened there. The Government has only got a majority of 12, and there are plenty of Conservatives who feel pretty strongly about the importance of it.”

David Cameron set up a review of the act in July, sparking fears he aimed to stop the public and journalists checking on the work of ministers and officials.

Commons leader Chris Grayling even suggested the Act was being misused by reporters to “generate stories.”

Tory MP David Davis, the former shadow Home Secretary, has joined forces with Labour deputy leader Tom Watson to campaign against any changes to the FoI Act.

He said recently that more than a dozen fellow Conservative MPs were ready to defeat the Government on the issue.

He said: “Whatever they come up with, we can find an appropriate response in one house or another.

“I think this is an eminently winnable campaign to protect what I think is the strongest constitutional legacy of the [Tony] Blair government.”

Mr Davis also hit out at the way the review panel had been stuffed with people opposed to the current FoI laws.

“They are all people who either for one reason or another express scepticism about FoI, or have themselves been embarrassed by its operation.

“There is a suspicion this is designed to cripple FoI either by increasing charges or by further restricting access to policy work or other areas,” he said.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-mp-warns-david-cameron-7188410

Newton Poppleford King Alfred’s Way development recommended for approval

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/approval_recommended_for_40_homes_proposal_1_4379446

“Affordable Housing”: main political parties squabble but don’t help to improve it

outh West Tory MPs have come under fire after opposing amendments calling for tougher rules on “habitable” homes and stable supplies of affordable housing.

The criticism from Lib Dem and Labour MPs follows the successful passage of the Government’s Housing and Planning Bill, which introduced a raft of reforms to the housing sector.

A total of 16 Devon and Cornwall Conservatives voted against the opposition amendments, leading to accusations the party “doesn’t give a monkeys” about the region’s low income families.

But MPs have hit back at the claims, dismissing the proposals as “unnecessary political posturing”. …

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Tory-MPs-accused-giving-monkeys-affordable/story-28534209-detail/story.html

Case law on 5-year land supply and NPPF

“The Court Of Appeal has this week been hearing joined appeals on the meaning of a key section of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) relating to “policies for the supply of housing”.

Cornerstone Barristers reported that the principle at issue in the cases of Hopkins Homes Ltd v SSCLG and Cheshire East BC v SSCLG is the meaning and scope of paragraph 49 NPPF which provides that “relevant policies for the supply of housing” are “out of date” when the authority cannot demonstrate a 5-year supply of housing sites.

“The consequence of the relevant policies being out of date is that paragraph 14 NPPF and its presumption in favour of permission is engaged, with radically different prospects of success for the applicant,” the set said.

According to Cornerstone, the meaning of paragraph 49 has been subject to at least three competing constructions in judgments of the High Court since the NPPF came into force in 2012.

The Court of Appeal granted permission to appeal on the basis that the paragraph 49 issue was of “wider importance” as well as standing a real prospect of success.

Jonathan Clay and Ashley Bowes of Cornerstone are appearing for Suffolk Coastal District Council, the appellant in the Hopkins case.

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=25682:court-of-appeal-hears-key-cases-on-policies-for-the-supply-of-housing&catid=60&Itemid=28

Flood defence cuts ” false economy” says Claire Wright

” … In November 2014, a damning report from the National Audit Office (NAO)found the risk of flooding was indeed RISING as a result of government funding cuts. Furthermore, half the nation’s flood defences had been left with “minimal” maintenance, according to the spending watchdog.

The NAO also contradicted Cameron’s claim that his government was spending more than ever before on flood defences. Funding had fallen by 10 per cent in real terms, said the NAO, when £270m of one-off emergency funding after the 2013-14 floods was excluded.

Flood defences are big ticket items and hard to fund when the nation’s finances are tight. But not finding the money is a clear false economy, as well as causing misery to many people. The NAO report said every £1 spent on flood defences prevented almost £10 in damage. It noted that Cameron’s £270m bail-out was poor substitute for sustained spending: “Ad-hoc emergency spending is less good value than sustained maintenance.”

The government’s £2.3bn of planned capital spending on flood defences over the next six years compares to £15bn on roadsover the same period – and almost £16bn on high-speed rail. …”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Comment-Cuts-spending-flood-defences-false/story-28533310-detail/story.html

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Comment-Cuts-spending-flood-defences-false/story-28533310-detail/story.html

“Shifting Sands” a talk on the effect of weather on the south west coastline

“Discover the effects of the weather on our south west coastline and see what our future coastline could look like. Join Phil Dyke, National Trust Coastal and Marine Advisor, for a talk about the management of our coastline.”

Royal Albert Memorial Museum, Exeter, Gallery 20
Tuesday 19 January 2016 13.00 –
Tickets £6, concessions £4

Apply online at:
http://exeterramm.admit-one.eu/?p=tickets&perfCode=412&ev=22348

Cloudy Transparency

10 EDDC meetings listed in this week’s Knowledge:

1 cancelled ( but would have been in private)
2 not needed (Licensing meetings, no licenses up for discussion)
3 meetings in public: Scrutiny, Housing Review and Development Management Committee, where it would be hard to justify secrecy

4 meetings in private:

Asset Management( in spite of assurances that this could be public with only commercially sensitive matters in Part B)

Recycling and Refuse Board Partnership

Community Fund Panel (ANOTHER group with no minutes and no agendas, save a passing reference in January 2015

Transparency gets more opaque.

10 EDDC meetings listed in this week’s Knowledge:

1 cancelled ( but would have been in private)
2 not needed (Licensing meetings, no licenses up for discussion)
3 meetings in public: Scrutiny, Housing Review and Development Management Committee, where it would be hard to justify secrecy

4 meetings in private:

1. Asset Management( in spite of assurances that this could be public with only commercially sensitive matters in Part B)

2. Recycling and Refuse Board Partnership

3. “Community Fund Panel” – which appears to meet in secret to decide whaT to spend money on. As its funds totals only about £22,500 per year it is hard to see why its deliberations are in private. Wouldn’t you want to know why your parish didn’t get funds yet another one did?

4. An intriguing meeting on “Work and Issues facing the Major Project Team in Development Management” ( another secret group with no agendas or minutes? Anyone seen anything about this group and its remit?). Presumably called to justify the hundreds of thousands of pounds being spent on more staff in Development Management. But we will never know!

Click to access the-knowledge-8-january-2016-issue-33.pdf

Dyed water shows developer responsible for flooding

A developer has admitted a pond on its housing estate has contributed to flooding of nearby properties’ gardens.
Residents of Acacia Close in Bideford, Devon, have complained about the flooding since the College Park estate was built two years ago.

Tests by the local authority using dyed water have now traced the floodwater to a pond on the estate. Redrow Homes has apologised and said it would remedy the problem “as soon as possible”.

The College Park estate has a drainage pond from which water flows into the road. But after the estate was built, residents living near the pond noticed their gardens were being flooded.

A dye test by Torridge District Council carried out 12 months ago was inconclusive, but the council did another test after complaints continued.

Reuben Cooke, technical manager of Redrow Homes in the West Country, said the firm was “very sorry” about the flooding.

“The drainage system we implemented was approved by the Environment Agency and Devon County Council and we believed was appropriate for the development,” he said. “We are now in discussion with Devon County Council to change the design of the drainage system to alleviate the flooding affecting the gardens at Acacia Close.”

Terry Williams, 75, who lives with wife Olwyn, 71, in Acacia Close, said they feared the flooding could come into their home. “The stress has been unbelievable because no-one would accept it was their problem,” he said. “We are both retired and we don’t deserve this sort of aggro.”

Torridge District Council said in a statement: “Provisional plans have already been drawn up so we are hopeful that the matter can progress quickly.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-35318276

Both our MPs vote against a bill to ensure rented properties are fit for human habitation

“Conservative MPs have voted against proposed new rules requiring private sector landlords to ensure their properties are fit for human habitation.

A Labour amendment to the government’s housing and planning bill, designed to ensure that all rented accommodation was safe for people to live in, was defeated by 312 votes to 219 on Tuesday, a majority of 93.”

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/12/tories-reject-move-to-ensure-rented-homes-fit-for-human-habitation

At least 73 of the MPs who rejected proposals to ensure rented homes are “fit for human habitation” are themselves residential landlords, Political Scrapbook can reveal. …

… The full list of MPs who voted against the measure and had recorded their income as a residential landlord under Section 6(ii) of the current register of members’ interests, “Income derived from property: over £10,000 in a calendar year …”

72 landlord MPs voted down law to ensure housing is ‘fit for humans’

One of those 73 named in the article is Tiverton and Honiton MP Neil Parish.
East Devon MP Hugo Swire also voted against it.

Sidmouth Neighbourhood Plan gets underway with Public Meeting, Tues 19 January, 7pm, St Teresa’s Church Hall

“The new composition of Sidmouth Town Council, resulting from the May 2015 elections, has allowed a Neighbourhood Plan (NP) to get started at long last. A Neighbourhood Plan, as you may know, gives some protection against speculative development.

Save Our Sidmouth hopes that you will show your support for this essential work, by coming along to the Town Council’s information meeting on Tuesday 19th January 2016, 7pm, St Teresa’s Church Hall, Connaught Rd (N.B. not Woolbrook Rd, as originally stated …”

http://saveoursidmouth.com/2016/01/14/sidmouth-neighbourhood-plan-gets-underway-with-public-meeting-tues-19-january-7pm-st-teresas-church-hall/

Cranbrook Town Council doubles precept – some residents very unhappy

Here are a few comments from the town council website:

Hi CTC, I for one would like to be able to vote for the people who …represent us and make decisions for us. I believe that ten people need to ask the council for an election to be held on the upcoming Councillors vacancy or the Councillors get to choose. I would like it to be noted that I am one of the 10 required people. Is this sufficient notice? Furthermore, if an election is to take place, none of the current Councillors have been put forward for a public vote – as there is controversy surrounding the original candidates (ie: a lot of the people in this community were never told candidates were being looked for so never got the chance to stand) (then the 9 people who were never voted for got to choose the 3 because noone knew they needed to ask to be able to vote in our democracy !)…. Can the people of Cranbrook finally be given the opportunity at this election to vote on not just the future ones but all of our the existing town Councillors?

Hi CTC: The Localism Act 2011 provided local residents the power to… veto excessive Council Tax rises. I believe the proposal to increase the town council tax precept by 100% in a time of austerity is excessive and is not supported by or affordable to the residents of this town whom you represent. I cannot find anything to suggest that the Localisum Act 2011 has been repealed, rescinded, is not in effect or CTC are except from it. Therefore I ask for a referendum so the people of this town can vote for or against the proposal to increase council tax so drastically. I cannot find anything to suggest this request can not be made in this manor however if you require this to be made in a particular format please advise as I will facilitate. References: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy-council-tax-reform/2010-to-2015-government-policy-council-tax-reform http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20/contents/enacted

Yesterday at 06:39
Hi CTC: From 2014 it appears we have the right to know how our Coun…cillors voted on the recent decision they made to double the town council tax precept. Article: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/town-halls-asked-to-help-freeze-council-tax-this-year Excerpt: “To further local accountability, from this year, every vote cast by councillors on Council Tax and budgets should be made a matter of public record and allow residents to see where elected officials have voted with their best interests at heart” Therefore I ask that you please publicize the names of our councilors who voted for this tax increase forthwith.


Oh dear …

Wainhomes – children are affected by their run-off in Feniton

From a correspondent:

“You may be interested to know that as a result of the flood water that has run off the Wainhomes site and deposited silt on the children’s play area, this area is now out of bounds to the children and swings have had to be removed to prevent an accident.

This is the third time it has happened. Feniton Parish Council have paid for the clean up twice in the past but are reluctant to spend money cleaning up Wainhomes mess.”

The true price of ” austerity” – woman has to sleep in wheelchair

Rachael Watt could be your mother, daughter or sister:

“Rachel Watt is 42. She is severely disabled – she has multiple immune disorders – and uses a wheelchair, owing to a spinal condition. She relies on care workers coming to her home to help her move, eat and dress.

Over the course of five years of austerity, Watt has watched as two-thirds of her social care package has been cut. In 2010, just a few months into the coalition government, her local authority stopped her visit from a care worker who helped her get ready for bed.

Her domestic assistance was reduced a few months afterwards: to the cleaner, to hoover and dust her home, and eventually just the gardener, who kept the backyard from becoming overgrown. The following year, they cut her evening care call, meaning the end of her having a hot dinner.

My social worker just said, ‘We can’t do it any more. We have to make cutbacks.’ What could I do?” Watt tells me, sitting in her adapted bungalow near Southampton. “They practically cut it overnight. A week and it was done.”

Now Watt, whose story is told in a report by the disability charity Scope, exists on one 45-minute care slot a day: a morning visit to help her quickly get washed and dressed. She has to give up £30 out of her disability benefit each week to help pay for this – the same amount as before her care was cut. She describes even holding on to a daily wash as a “fight”. (Her local authority suggested three showers a week would be enough.)

When her body is particularly weak, she can’t undress properly at night or move from her wheelchair into bed. On her worst days – without her evening care visit – she tells me she has to sleep in her wheelchair, in her clothes. She pauses, “It’s horrible. I don’t sleep easily, anyway. [When I sleep in my chair] I wake up in pain.”

This is the hidden face of Britain’s social care crisis: disabled people left without help in their own homes.

Read most coverage of the cuts to social care and it is easy to believe the crisis solely affects older people. According to research by Scope, 83% of disabled people in this country are now living without sufficient hours in their care package. That means being unable to get out of the house or waiting 14 hours to go to the toilet.

This is what happens when austerity strips £4.6bn from social care spending in five years. As the government squeezes local authorities, social care has been left with a “funding gap” – a gaping wound, shall we say – that is growing by £700m a year. The King’s Fund thinktank has told the Guardian that the financial prospects for Britain’s social care system in 2016 “could not be worse”.

For the third of social care users who are disabled and of working age – with potentially decades ahead of them – their life is now a calculation on a spreadsheet.

Meanwhile, Watt is left to struggle to feed herself. “Before, I would have had someone to make a meal for me. When my arms aren’t working properly I can’t cook, so I just eat fruit or bread,” she says. “The last time I was in hospital, the doctors told me I was malnourished.”

Forget a social care system that helps disabled people to build a life – meeting a partner, going to work, having a drink with friends in the pub. A regular meal is now a costly luxury.

The biggest trick the government can play is the myth that any of this is inevitable.”

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/14/rachel-watt-sleep-wheelchair-austerity-social-care

“Why are Brits so obsessed with buying their own homes?”

“… Economics and culture are of course interconnected. The British economy is built on this home ownership hysteria and if the government bangs on about cutting the public deficit, it is partly to avoid talking about the country’s stratospheric level of private debt – which it encourages.

The British are among the most indebted people in the world. At the end of 2015, they personally owed almost £1.5trn, and the Office for Budgetary Responsibility forecast puts household debt in 2019 at 182% of disposable income – more than twice as much as in France. This is mostly driven by mortgage debt, but also by the heavy use of consumer credit.

… Britain has a risk-taking culture. In France, we are risk-adverse and debt is considered a social disease. Even if you want to borrow yourself to death, as in Britain, you can’t – the law doesn’t allow it. Monthly repayments, to pay off a mortgage for instance, cannot exceed 30% of your income. In other words, in France the legislators make sure you have enough left every month to buy your daily dose of reblochon and go to the movies.

So while the French are left to enjoy life’s many modest pleasures, courtesy of legislators who look after them like mother hens, the British live more dangerously, and by doing so sustain the country’s infrastructure. In other words, while we save, you spend; while we rent, you buy, sell and buy again. And make the British economy roar. As they say, no pain, no gain.”

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/jan/14/why-are-brits-so-obsessed-with-buying-their-own-homes