The way local services are provided, and by whom, is a complicated, illogical and incomprehensible mess. Few people understand who does what. Transferring council services to unaccountable government agencies has made matters worse. So what overriding principles have successive governments adopted to promote accountable and effective local government and how has that shaped the current proposals for reorganisation in Sussex?

In 1985 the government adopted the European Charter of Local Self-Government enshrining the principle of ‘subsidiarity’: public responsibilities should be exercised as close to the citizens as possible. In other words, councils should be as small as practicably possible, to better relate to the needs of local people. Generally, member states adhere to this. In France, for example, the lowest level of functional local government is the commune. These vary in size enormously, from over two million people in Paris, to fewer than a hundred in rural areas. There are around 35,000 of them, exercising powers over local roads, planning, community events, the register office, local police, parks and public spaces, and many local services. Communes represent identifiable communities, regardless of their size, and are mostly far smaller than our district or unitary councils. This system has been in place, without major reorganisation, since the French Revolution.

The UK remains a signatory to this European Charter but has never really applied its principles. Since the 1971 reorganisation, local authorities have generally been created based on a minimum size. Often they cover areas with no real identity – Wealden and Rother for example in East Sussex. Larger towns with clear identities, for example Eastbourne and Hastings, are more logical, with a district council covering a single town. However, the two-tier system means that the bigger, more expensive services that grab most of the Council Tax are run by East Sussex County Council, based thirty miles away in Lewes.

Now, the government is recommending that new unitary councils should cover an area with a population of at least 500,000 – more than five times the size of Hastings.  This ‘big is beautiful’ approach runs entirely contrary to the principles of subsidiarity. The government argues that half a million inhabitants is the minimum size for a council to provide cost-effectiveness but there is little evidence for that.

The case for this minimum size is based on a study commissioned from PWC consultancy by the County Councils Network a few years ago. Perhaps not surprisingly, 500,000 is about the size of a small county so the study reinforces the case for unitary counties. Indeed, a BBC investigation in August 2025 revealed that the government had conducted no analysis at all of the actual savings arising from past reorganisations, relying entirely on this single PWC study, which contained no objective analysis of actual savings. 

Limited analysis by other organisations of the effects of local government reorganisation have revealed no significant savings from amalgamating districts and counties into single councils. Indeed, there are suggestions that larger councils are less cost-effective. 

Which brings us to the current proposals for Sussex. Again, the government suggests a minimum size of 500,000 for each unitary, a figure supported by a consultancy study commissioned by East Sussex County Council – which has a population of 500,000. In the public consultation that followed, three options were proposed:

• two unitary counties plus Brighton & Hove 
• all the existing districts becoming unitaries, plus Brighton & Hove 
• four new unitaries covering the coastal (more urban) areas and the inland (more rural) areas in each county, plus Brighton & Hove.

In Hastings, the public consultation overwhelmingly favoured the ‘unitary district’ model. At the council meeting that debated reorganisation, the Hastings Independents group voted for this model. The Labour Group supported the ‘four new unitaries’ model but the Green administration sided with the Tories to support the ‘unitary county’ model, which was then submitted as the council’s preferred choice. 

Despite the government’s official position of a 500,000 minimum viable unitary size, there are hints that the ‘four new unitaries’ model might be preferred. Helena Dollimore, Labour MP for Hastings & Rye, supports this model, as do the two Sussex Labour council leaders – in Brighton & Hove and Worthing. 

It seems very unlikely that all this will be sorted out by 2028, as proposed. Perhaps this heroic target could be achieved for the unitary county model, but four new unitaries would be much more problematic. In East Sussex a coastal and inland unitary council could not be created by combining existing districts. All the districts in East Sussex have a section of coastline, as though they all need access to the sea. These coastal sections would have to be chopped off to create a coastal unitary – only Hastings and Eastbourne could be included in their entirety. Added to that, Brighton & Hove are anxious about their future, being only half the government’s ‘ideal’ size for a unitary, and are angling to grab parts of the existing Lewes district. But redrawing boundaries opens a whole new worm can, with public consultations, discussions and battles over every road, village green and historical feature. The prospect of that being completed by 2028 seems remote.

In my view, the unitary district model would have been by far the best solution. If the French can manage with what are in effect unitary councils with a population of less than 100, then we should be able to cope with unitaries with a population of 90,000 or more. Indeed, it would be better to break up the larger, illogical districts such as Rother and Wealden to create new councils around more recognisable town and village groups. Even town and parish councils, which presently have no real statutory powers, could become ‘unitary’ councils. It is true that the very small French communes can’t provide some services entirely alone, so they group into larger collaborative organisations. But such arrangements are not prescribed by government; they’re worked out by the communes according to local needs and circumstances. It’s perfectly possible to do the same here. Small unitary authorities also make more sense of mayoral regions. A Sussex mayoral region with 15-20 unitary councils within it makes a lot more sense than a region with only three or five councils in it. 

Two-tier local government is illogical. When I was leader, there were always frustrations trying to work with another council covering the same area. Constant disputes over responsibilities and legal arguments between the two tiers were wasteful and inefficient, undermining public confidence in local government. Who’s responsible for what remains a mystery to most citizens of Hastings, and elsewhere. But unitary counties really aren’t the answer. Counties are too big to be local and too small to be strategic, based on ancient boundaries with which people no longer identify. Reorganisation is desperately needed, but this must be done in a uniform, logical and coherent way, with the principles of subsidiarity at its heart, taking all local public services into account. Unpicking the chaotic mess that piecemeal and random reorganisations over the last century have created won’t be easy, but it needs to be done if we’re to regain credibility for our local councils.

In the seventh century, we were a tiny kingdom squeezed between the bigger kingdoms of Kent and Sussex. Since then, Hastings has enjoyed some sort of local self-government. But now, 1300 years of devolved administration could soon be ended, concealed within a benign wrapper called ‘local government reorganisation’.

Local government needs reorganising, and the two-tier system we have in Hastings leads to some ridiculous outcomes. For example, removal of live weeds from footways is a county responsibility (because that’s maintenance), but removal of dead weeds is the responsibility of the borough (because that’s litter). Repeated patchwork attempts to reorganise local government have led to a messy smorgasbord of ‘gone off delicacies’ that were never to everyone’s taste. So how did we get to where we are and where exactly are we?

Since the Norman Conquest, Hastings has had regional significance, often enjoying special powers. Firstly as a Cinque Port, then as a mayoral borough and, in 1835, as a municipal corporation. In the local government reorganisation of 1889, two-tier local government appeared, dividing responsibilities between newly-created county councils and district councils. Some larger towns were given the status of County Borough. These were in effect unitary councils, retaining the powers and responsibilities of both district and county council. In East Sussex, Hastings and Brighton became county boroughs, with Eastbourne included a few years later.

HASTINGS’ OWN POLICE FORCE

For the first three quarters of the twentieth century, Hastings remained a county borough. Up to 1964, it had its own police force. But in 1972, parliament approved another round of reorganisation – all UK local government was to become two-tier. New metropolitan county councils were created to cover areas such as the West Midlands and Greater Manchester. It meant Hastings lost its unitary status.

So in 1974, a new, and reasonably logical system of local government came into being, with uniform tiers of responsibility outside London. This didn’t last long. The new metropolitan counties were seen as weak and ineffective, representing ‘artificial’ county areas. They were abolished after only 12 years of operation.

This sparked further reorganisation. During the 1990s, Wales and Scotland became single-tier unitary councils and have remained that way. But in England, changes were piecemeal and illogical. In East Sussex, Brighton and Hove district councils were combined to create a new unitary council, with other new unitaries created across the country. This was partly dependent on the size of the council but also influenced by political pressures. One of the smallest districts in the country, Rutland District Council became unitary having a population of just 40,000. Rutland was the parliamentary constituency of John Major – the then Prime Minister.

More unitary councils were created, with the process increasingly favouring larger administrations, with new unitary county councils as well as larger or combined districts. But this was done on a case-by-case basis, with different rules applied at different times and in different places leading to an inconsistent mash-up of one and two-tier local government across England. The smallest unitary council is the Isles of Scilly, with a population of just 2,300. The largest district council in a two-tier county is Colchester, with a population of over 200,000. The UK has fourteen unitary councils with smaller populations than Hastings.

As if all this were not complicated enough, in 2000, a further level of administrative responsibility was introduced: elected regional mayors. Directly elected mayors are a quite different kettle of fish from the old borough mayors. Based on the US model, they have considerable strategic powers rather than operational responsibilities.

ENTIRELY RANDOM MAYORS

The first of these was the Mayor of London, introduced to share the powers of the now abolished Greater London Council. Since then, elected regional mayors have been established in several rural and metropolitan areas. But again, this was done in a piecemeal way and with inconsistent responsibilities, based more on local negotiation than logic or consistency.

To add to the confusion, councils were also given the option of replacing the leader and cabinet model with an elected mayor. Twenty such mayors were created, again in an entirely random way – seven have since been abolished by local referendum. During the 2010s, the Cameron government attempted to establish elected regional mayors across most of the country, with mixed results.

In Sussex, a mayoral region for East Sussex, West Sussex, Brighton and Hove, and Surrey was attempted. As leader of Hastings Council at the time, that was a frustrating and fruitless thing. Despite the councils in East Sussex being run by five different political administrations (Green, Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Independent), there was a surprising level of consensus. But in Surrey all the councils were Conservative who bitterly disagreed on pretty much everything, so the whole thing failed.

Which brings us to where we are now. In our county we have two tiers of local government: five district councils (including Hastings Borough Council – HBC) and East Sussex County Council. In general, county councils run a few big, expensive services, and district councils run many smaller, less expensive services. In Hastings, 73% of your Council Tax goes to the county council, around 12% to Hastings Borough Council, the rest to the Police and Fire & Rescue authorities.

BIGGEST BITE OF THE BUDGET

The biggest and by far the most expensive area run by the county council is Social Services. Adult social care takes the largest bite out of the budget. With the conversion of most county-maintained schools to academies directly funded by the government, county councils now have a much smaller role in education. Other services run by the county include highway maintenance, streetlighting, libraries, trading standards, public health, regional transport (including senior bus passes and subsidies for some bus routes), waste disposal (including recycling centres and waste incinerators), youth services, minerals extraction licensing, and some areas of public access countryside.

Responsibility for highways is however confusing. Trunk roads are maintained by Highways England, not the county council… except in the former county boroughs (Hastings and Eastbourne) where they’re the responsibility of the county council. In some counties, maintenance of local roads and streetlighting is devolved to the district council through an agency agreement. But not in East Sussex.

The most expensive service maintained by district councils, including Hastings, used to be refuse collection. This has been overtaken by temporary accommodation for homeless households. HBC also runs a myriad of other services – see box below .

Hastings Council also owns a significant amount of land and property, including the Castleham and Pondswood industrial estates, Dunelm retail park, the two retail parks along Bexhill Road (Aldi and TK Maxx), Hollington Tesco and the Carlisle pub. These are a lucrative source of income.

Confused? You should be. In my experience as a council leader, two-tier local government is perplexing and frustrating. Successive waves of reorganisation throughout the twentieth century have created an even more confusing picture and have been hugely wasteful, often unpicking previous reorganisations. Unitary councils make it clearer to people who is providing their services and avoid buck-passing between the two tiers where responsibilities aren’t clear. But how big should these councils be, and will the current proposed reorganisation help? I’ll investigate that next time.

HBC’s Main Responsibilities

• Domestic waste collection and street cleaning
• Licensing – pubs, off-licences, events, taxis, etc
• Planning, and private housing regulation and advice
• Social housing allocations policy and local housing strategy
• Community grants (via the Foreshore Trust)
• Arts and culture (including Hastings Museum)
• Parks and gardens, and sport and recreation
• Seafront services (it owns the whole of the promenade structures)
• Environmental health (including air quality and noise) and food safety
• Dangerous structures
• Off-street parking (excluding privately-owned car parks such as Priory Meadow)
• Cemetery and the crematorium
• Housing benefits, and council tax and business rate collection

Following intended local government reorganisation, a future unitary council – whether it administers the whole of East Sussex or some other territory – will assume responsibility for the services currently performed by Hastings Borough Council (HBC): dealing with waste and recycling, street cleaning, housing, environmental health, planning, licensing etc. But what about the land, buildings and physical assets which the borough council owns?

As former HBC leader Peter Chowney points out in Our Town, Our Council on page 9, there are many industrial estates and retail parks owned by the council which bring in substantial income. On the other hand, current Deputy Leader Cllr Julia Hilton told the full meeting of councillors on 14 January that, whatever the future of the council, “one thing is clear that people really care about: what happens to local land assets, including community buildings, historic buildings, leisure centres, and our green spaces. Will these be a focus in a much larger and probably overstretched council to give true care and consideration to things like our parks and community spaces?”

Cllr Hilton went on to argue that the borough should protect its interest in these assets by taking steps to set up a town council that would survive the reorganisation. More sceptical onlookers might wonder how much care and consideration is currently being given by HBC to a number of these assets that seem to have been consigned to a deep freeze.

AZUR

The freehold of the Azur Marina Pavilion on St Leonards seafront is owned by HBC, with a long lease granted to Sea Change Sussex. Nearly £2 million of regeneration money was spent two decades ago building a restaurant and bar above the older sun lounge and café on the lower promenade, and turning the lounge into a conference centre and other function rooms. But three successive operating companies struggled to make it profitable, each failing to pay due rent to Sea Change. It was repossessed in January 2024, and has been left empty for the past two years.

Some needed roof repairs were carried out in 2024, and Sea Change reported in June of that year that up to 11 potential operators had expressed an interest in taking a fresh lease. At one point the agents instructed to market the premises, Fleurets, marked it on their website as “Sold subject to contract”. However, it emerged that there were more complex issues with the mains electrical supply which is shared with the wider Marina Foreshore complex administered by HBC, including the neighbouring sailing club, public toilets, workshop and car park. HBC agreed with UK Power Networks, the monopoly network operator, that the latter would lay a fresh cable under the street, and its spokesperson admits that it received the money to do this in March 2025. But it avoided undertaking excavation works “during the summer holidays season”, and although a new electrical kiosk was installed in October, enabling HBC to proceed with internal re-wiring, the new cable has still not been energised.

In the meantime, the fabric of the building is suffering from another winter of damp, rust and storm damage, both inside and out.

ST MARY IN THE CASTLE

The former church and arts venue has been empty since November 2022 when the previous leaseholder trust handed it back to HBC. Ambitious ideas to use Town Deal funds to develop it as a potential reception area to be linked with Hastings Castle by a lift or escalator were rejected. More recently, it has been added to Historic England’s Heritage at Risk Register in the hope of attracting national rescue funding.

Two months ago – i.e. three years after it was vacated – HBC launched a formal Expression of Interest process “to identify a new partner, operator or consortium to take forward [its] revitalisation”.

Submissions closed on 15 December. It’s understood that one proposal is to turn the venue into a music resource centre with rehearsal and recording facilities. The council has not made any comment since then on what responses it has received in this process, though Deputy Leader Cllr Julia Hilton told the cabinet in January that the council would need to put money into a long-term strategy to save it.

THE OLD BATHING POOL, WEST ST LEONARDS

The site of the former bathing pool at West Marina, owned by HBC, was earmarked for a mix of housing and leisure use regeneration in the local plan of 2015. In October 2021 HBC granted a 250-year lease for this purpose to West Marina St Leonards Limited (WMSLL), a subsidiary of national developers County Gate Properties. Neither the council nor the developer has been willing to disclose the lease terms.

Following a lengthy period of ground surveys (assessing, among other things, the extent and quality of Southern Water tanks and pipes under the surface), WMSLL’s plans were exhibited as part of a pre-planning public consultation in April 2025. Detailed drawings and visual projections revealed their intention to build more than 150 new homes on the site. They have met vigorous opposition in the form of West St Leonards Neighbourhood Forum, local community activists who last year mounted a counter-exhibition proposing that the eastern end of the site be developed as a leisure destination with low buildings (if any), play and garden areas, and potential for a tidal pool or on-land lido.

No formal planning application has been forthcoming in the nine months since.

Assets Beyond the Council’s Remit

In fairness to HBC, however, there are plenty of other community and heritage assets of the town where needed development has also stalled or seems to be moving at a glacial pace. What might a Town Council do about these?

FORMER DEBENHAMS BUILDING

The building which formerly accommodated Debenhams at 1-3 Robertson Street in the town centre was bought in January 2020 by Moxie Management Two, a company owned by two sisters, Bella Landen and Sophie Hubble. It was dilapidated when they took it over, and renovated with the aid of public funds from the Town Deal. Part (over three floors) was – and remains – let to Freedom Works as office space; the rest, notoriously, to the ill-fated and short-lived Owens entertainments venture. Following the Owens collapse in September 2023, Moxie Management has indicated that it plans to sub-divide that part of the premises to accommodate a variety of commercial activities which may include retail and/or restaurant uses. A recent licence application was granted for a sports bar. Earlier this month Ms Landen told HIP that they “are exploring/working on a couple of potential opportunities for the site”. It seems improbable that any activity will be up and running there in the immediate future.

SUSSEX EXCHANGE

The Sussex Exchange was developed with public funds by Sea Change Sussex as a restaurant, bar, conference centre and restaurant centre on a 1.6-acre site off Queensway. It opened in 2012. Situated near the junction with the Combe Valley link road to Bexhill, it was aimed to serve other prospective regeneration developments in this hinterland area, but few of these have come to fruition. In July 2024 the operating company went bust owing large amounts of tax and rent. After remaining empty for a year, it was announced that it had been sold “to a local manufacturing company” on long lease, but there has been no indication of any commercial activity being conducted at the site over the last six months. A spokesperson for Sea Change told HIP this month that the new leaseholder “is expanding and seeking additional premises for research, development, training and conferencing purposes,” but is still declining to identify itself.

CLIFTON COURT

The block of 53 flats owned by housing association Orbit at the top corner of Cornwallis Gardens remains vacant more than four years after its tenants began to be decanted for prospective redevelopment. In the summer of 2024, it was briefly occupied by campaigners in the name of Housing Rebellion protesting at its being kept empty. A spokesperson for Orbit stated in April last year that demolition and rebuilding options were being discussed “in a working partnership with Hastings Borough Council”. Earlier this month another spokesperson insisted that Orbit is “committed to continuing to deliver new affordable homes across the Borough” and that it is “continuing to engage with the local authority to ensure delivery of as many affordable homes as possible to meet local housing needs and support the local authority’s housing strategy.” The council has offered no comment save that it “hasn’t seen any plans.”

HASTINGS PIER

As is well-known, this historic landmark was refurbished a decade ago with £14 million-plus of Heritage Lottery funds and local shareholder contributions, winning the RIBA Stirling Prize for best new building of 2017 (notwithstanding its 1872 substructure). It went bust the following year and was sold off by insolvency administrators Smith & Williamson to Eastbourne entrepreneur Sheikh Gulzar for all of £60,000. By way of justification, the administrators stated that out of the bids received, including from the community group Friends of Hastings Pier (FoHP), Mr Gulzar had demonstrated the best immediate finance capability: “It is anticipated that significant cash for working capital and investment purposes, amounting to over a million pounds, would be required to make the pier sustainable.”

In the seven and a half years since, no substantial investment has been forthcoming. Basic retail sheds were installed with temporary planning permission that has expired along with gold-painted décor that had none. Events have been limited to outdoor hospitality in summer, regularly falling foul both of licensing conditions and inclement weather. Maintenance of the substructure appears to have been minimal, the original engineers having been swiftly (and unlawfully) disengaged.

The pier has been registered by FoHP as an asset of community value and, when Mr Gulzar gave notice last October that he intended to put it up for sale, this triggered a six-month moratorium. MP Helena Dollimore claimed three months ago to have organised a meeting with local councillors and community organisations – “We are all united in our goal of ensuring that the pier is a valuable community asset for generations to come.” – but there has been little indication so far of any attempt to rally fresh public enthusiasm or raise public funds. Asked for a comment earlier this month, a spokesperson for FoHP said: “We are continuing to explore options.”

The conversion of offices into residential premises has been exempted from standard planning permission requirements since legislation introduced in 2015 by David Cameron’s government. Such change of use is allowed in principle as a permitted development right subject to certain safeguards. Each dwelling created must conform to minimum spacing standards and have adequate light; it must be served with adequate transport and highway facilities; there must be no undue risks of contamination or flood; there must be no unreasonable noise from other commercial premises in the vicinity. And the developer must make a prior application to the local planning authority for determination of these issues. 

Readers may recall that when a similar plan was put forward by other developers in 2019 to convert Ashdown House, the former DSS office block located between Sedlescombe Road North and Harrow Lane, into 246 flats, Hastings councillors mounted a very public campaign of objection. The then leader Peter Chowney complained that the 2015 legislation had had “catastrophic consequences” in other towns and cities, allowing poor quality conversions to take place and creating “slum housing”. He urged the prospective developers to consult with the council so as to bring about “good quality, energy efficient and affordable homes” under “proper local scrutiny”. 

Demolition

Whatever legal force there may or may not have been in that campaign, it appears to have been successful. The developers did not proceed with
the conversion, but instead sold to fresh owners who eventually made a much more acceptable proposal to demolish the block and build a new residential estate with the number of flats reduced by over a third (see www.hastingsindependentpress.co.uk/news/from-the-ashes-of-ashdown published in December last year). 

That reversal seems unlikely to be repeated in the case of Ocean House. No substantial housing estate could be built to replace the existing bricks and mortar; and, subject to basic lay-out checks, it is difficult to envisage at first view what grounds of objection might be found by the council to the plans of the owners, Wynbay Limited.

East Sussex Highways have already lodged an approval of the parking provision for 56 unallocated car spaces (allowing 13 more to be retained for the remaining commercial users), and there can be no issue as to the extent of public transport provision.

The conversion proposal reflects the over-supply of office space in the town centres of Hastings and St Leonards, or at least the perceived superiority of competing out-of-town office space. Readers may also recall the recent HIP report of major landscaping company Cultura terminating its tenancy at Ocean House in order to relocate to High Weald House within Bexhill Enterprise Park (see www.hastingsindependentpress.co.uk/news/link-road-attracts-office-relocations published in April).

Last Friday Hastings Borough Council issued its draft corporate plan and budget proposals for the next financial year (April 2021 to March 2022). It involves taking nearly £1.6 million from reserves rather than cutting services significantly or making more staff redundant. 

According to former council leader, Cllr Peter Chowney, who remains lead councillor for financial management and estates, the receipt of significant additional funding from central government to help with the impact of Covid-19, has been matched by the expense of providing emergency food support, staffing the community hub, administering grant schemes for local businesses, and providing temporary accommodation for the most vulnerable. The council’s income has also been much reduced – for example, in lower car park income and far fewer cliff railway passengers.

“But in this very difficult year, we don’t think it’s right to cut services significantly or make more staff redundant,” says Cllr Chowney.  “We also want to protect the most vulnerable in our community, which is why we’re still one of the few councils in the country to retain a 100% Council Tax Reduction Scheme for most people on out-of-work benefits.”

Cllr Chowney maintains that the council leadership “remain[s] ambitious for our town even in these most challenging of financial times. A new hotel in Cornwallis Street, the Harold Place redevelopment, new units at Churchfields Industrial Estate, and the Bexhill Road housing scheme are all worthwhile regeneration schemes. But until local government is once again properly funded by central government, and the needs of deprived towns such as Hastings are recognised, it’s going to be very difficult to provide the levels of services our community needs.”

Council leader, Kim Forward, added that the council’s vision and priorities remain: “to tackle homelessness, poverty and do all we can to ensure quality housing; keep Hastings clean and safe; make the best use of our land, buildings, public realm and cultural assets; minimise environment and climate harm in all that we do; progress our major regeneration schemes, particularly the Town Investment Plan; ensure that the council can survive and thrive into the future and now, of course, managing our response to the ongoing impact of the pandemic and help our community and businesses recover from its effects.”

Visitor Centre Overspend

Neither Cllr Forward nor Cllr Chowney made any reference to the decision taken at the council cabinet meeting on 4th January to increase both capital and future revenue budgets for completion of the construction, and thereafter operation, of the visitor centre in Hastings Country Park. The public were excluded from hearing the cabinet discussion on grounds of commercial sensitivity, and no figures for the increases have been formally released by the council. However, it has been reported elsewhere that the construction overspend is estimated at £340,000 on top of £770,000 already expended, and that the centre, which was originally intended to be self-financing, will need an annual subsidy from the council of over £40,000.

Hastings Borough Council has finalised its Additional Restrictions Grant scheme for businesses, and applications are now open. This scheme is a discretionary scheme, which means that although the funding has been provided by the Government, the Council has put the scheme together and decided the eligibility criteria.

This funding is for certain businesses who are not eligible for the Local Restrictions Support Grant (tinyurl.com/Local Restriction) and there is only a limited amount of funding available for this scheme. Details about eligibility for the grant, as well as how to apply, can be found on www.hastings.gov.uk/arg 

Cllr Peter Chowney, lead councillor for Financial Management and Estates said, “Whilst distributing funding for the Government’s business support scheme, we have also been working hard to develop this discretionary scheme to help even more businesses within the borough. We have devised criteria that we think are relevant for the local area. We want to help as many businesses as possible that were directly impacted by the recent restrictions but did not qualify for the Government’s standard local restriction support grant. It’s so important to support our local businesses especially at such an important time of year for them.

“We do only have a limited amount of funding, and the Government has told us that this has to last until April 2022, but we hope to support as many businesses as we can with it. This is an initial support scheme for the national lockdown period, and we will be working on a further support package for businesses. Before applying for this scheme, local businesses should check they are not eligible for the original Local Restrictions Support Grant scheme. You can go to our website to find more information.”

Applications for the new grant scheme must be made by 16th December. 

The law in question, which aims to ensure that all four home nations of the UK maintain undifferentiated trading rules and standards, appears to contradict provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement relating to the trading position of Northern Ireland which the government signed up to with the European Union last autumn. 

Proponents of Town Deal bid for West St Leonards meet MP Sally-Ann Hart on site

Constituency Labour party politicians Peter Chowney, the defeated candidate at the last two general elections, and Michael Foster, who was the elected MP between 1997 and 2010, have spoken out against the bill.

Mr Chowney said: “That the government could even be considering breaking international agreements, and jeopardising the still-fragile peace in Ireland through such bombastic hubris, is frankly terrifying.

“Failing to honour an international agreement, or even threatening to do so, would make the UK a pariah state, with whom no-one would want to do any future deals.

“What’s the point in negotiating a trade agreement with a state that unilaterally tears it up as soon as it doesn’t suit them? This would be bad enough at any time but, at a time when the entire economic future of the country is dependent on our ability to do new international deals, it’s catastrophic. The government must abandon this ludicrous bill. Jobs and lives are at stake.”

Mr Foster described the government’s action as unjustified and counter-productive. “Our best bet of getting a deal is that we show that we can trusted, that we stick to our word, that we are not lawless in pursuit of a deal which is our objective. I believe this bill is going to make it more difficult rather than less difficult.

“And how will other international dealings be possible outside Europe if we can’t be trusted, that we can’t stick to our word?”

But Mrs Hart, who is a member of the parliamentary select committee on the future relationship with the EU, did not merely file passively through the voting lobby with her party colleagues. She used her website blog this week to defend her support for the bill, asserting that it was necessary to “get Brexit done”.

She wrote: “I absolutely agree that upholding the rule of law is a fundamental principle. Adhering to obligations under a treaty is part of the rule of law.” But Article 5 of the Withdrawal Agreement places a duty on both sides to “act in good faith”, and Mrs Hart maintains that clauses in the bill regarding the trading position of Northern Ireland “will only need to be relied upon if the EU does not act in good faith.

“The government has been put in this position only because the EU has failed to honour its side of the Withdrawal Agreement and is failing to act in good faith.

“It is the EU which must act in good faith to secure a free trade deal, or it will have to accept that the UK can confirm our sovereignty in primary legislation by way of amendment to the detail of the Withdrawal Act.”

The bill has been amended to require further parliamentary approval before any breach of the Withdrawal Agreement is triggered. It is also expected to be challenged in the House of Lords. Five former Prime Ministers (Messrs Blair, Brown, Major, Cameron and Mrs May) have made their opposition public. 

On 8th July SELEP (the South East Local Enterprise Partnership, which channels both public and private funds into economic development in Essex, Kent and East Sussex) announced that it had secured £85m from the government’s Getting Building Fund.  The Fund is to be spent on ‘shovel-ready’ schemes in its area of operation – effectively, projects which could be started immediately and completed within 18 months – that would provide “much-needed jobs, growth and the groundwork for further investment”.

Following a meeting of its Strategic Board eight days later, SELEP then listed 34 projects that have been selected to share this largesse between them. Of these, two are in Hastings: £1.7m is for the restoration of the Observer Building: £3.5m is to be spent on “address[ing] the town’s immediate need for modern manufacturing space… 

“Close to 4,000 sq m of commercial floorspace will be made available to accommodate up to 15 businesses in an established industrial location with good transport links,” says the SELEP prospectus. “These manufacturing units will be constructed with sustainable growth in mind, using low- and zero-carbon technologies to provide a low maintenance and low energy cost solution.”

The project is calculated to “create 96 new jobs and safeguard a further 33, as well as creating 17 additional construction jobs”.

Who and where?

Oddly, and in contrast to almost all the other projects in the list, the Hastings manufacturing site is not identified in any of SELEP’s publicly available documents, nor is the identity of the developer concerned. These bits of information could only be inferred from a declaration of interest made by Cllr Rupert Simmons, representative on SELEP for East Sussex County Council but also director of Sea Change (brand name for East Sussex Energy & Infrastructure Development Limited) – and from the fact that Sea Change has been attempting to hawk a 12-acre manufacturing site at North Queensway Innovation Park for the past eight years after gaining a  £1.5m investment loan, also from SELEP, for initial development.

At that time, 2012, SELEP described the site as having the “potential to create 865 jobs in Hastings”, though Sea Change posited 700. Its funding application documents referred to “growing demand for commercial space amongst local manufacturing companies wishing to expand as well as companies from outside the area looking for a new base… (We) are in discussions with several interested occupiers.” It was suggested that likely takers would want to “self-build”, i.e. undertake construction to their own specification. All they needed was a junction off the Queensway road into the greenfield space plus the installation of basic utilities. The £1.5m was duly spent, but no takers emerged. 

In 2015 Sea Change advised that, with the provision of services, “interest has increased considerably… There are active negotiations with companies that will take 60% of the site once the infrastructure is underway.” A further grant was obtained for £550,000 “infrastructure costs”. 

Still no takers

Then they announced that they had found their first occupier – a furniture showroom, Michael Tyler Furniture Limited, which wasn’t creating any new jobs, just moving from elsewhere in Hastings. In the event, this company didn’t move in and nothing was built.

Another potential taker was the Bartlett SEAT garage, which currently trades from a site which obstructs completion of the nearby Queensway Gateway Road (another Sea Change project which has gone way over budget). Planning permission was obtained for this use at North Queensway in January 2019 – but no building seems to be happening.

Andrea Needham, Green Party activist, who has maintained a website, Seachangewatch, to keep tabs on the company, points out that the company has always wildly over-estimated the jobs that might be created at the site: 700 (or 865) in 2012; 300 in 2013; 176 in January 2016. She notes that the latest figures are more modest, but perhaps equally unsubstantiated. “How Sea Change keeps persuading SELEP to hand over vast sums of money, when their projects are almost universally a disaster, is something I’d very much like to know.”

There’s no point in asking Sea Change on what basis their current figures for North Queensway are calculated, however. Their spokesperson confirmed to HIP that they “have applied for funding from SELEP for a commercial scheme” but say that “the funding is not yet confirmed, and [they] don’t wish to give details of the scheme until it does get confirmed.” 

And it is true that the £3.5m grant is not yet a done deal. A further “business case submission” for each project must be received by the SELEP Accountability Board by 18th September and will be reviewed by it in October. There will be a reserve list of projects presented to the Board at that point, according to the SELEP Strategic Board minutes, “in order that any projects that can’t proceed for any reason can be swapped for an alternative prioritised project”.

Will Sea Change make the final cut at North Queensway? We will have to wait and see.

Sea Change: A political twist

At the Hastings & Rye electoral hustings held last December at East Sussex College, local Labour candidate Peter Chowney, then still leader of Hastings Borough Council, made a remarkably frank admission: that the two development companies, Sea Change (see main story above) and its predecessor Sea Space (brand name for Hastings and Bexhill Renaissance Limited), which have been channelling public sector funds for economic development in the area over the past 15 years, were “not fit for purpose…had never worked properly and had never been accountable”.  Remarkable, because Cllr Chowney was himself appointed a director of Sea Space in 2010 and still remains on the board; he also served as a director of Sea Change from its formation in 2011 until resigning in July 2015.

Unsurprisingly, neither his fellow-candidates on the podium, including MP-to-be Sally-Ann Hart, nor any member of the public audience sought to persuade Cllr Chowney at the time that his verdict (effectively on himself) was over-harsh. Perhaps they assumed that he knew what he was talking about.  It’s perhaps ironic, then, that Ms Hart went on record earlier this month to express her “delight” at  SELEP’s allocation to Hastings of £5m from its Getting Building Fund. 

“This is much needed investment in our town and shows that businesses are still committed to investing here”, she is quoted by SELEP as saying. “This latest announcement in funding will go towards restoring the old Observer Building in the town centre and supporting more manufacturing space, creating nearly 100 new jobs. This is great news for our town and I would like to thank everyone at the SELEP for investing in our area again.”

It seems unlikely that she was made aware of the involvement of Sea Change in the deal before making this pronouncement.

Labour Council Leader Removes Tories From Cabinet

On Monday 8th June Hastings Borough Council leader Kim Forward announced a reshuffle of cabinet portfolio holders. The new list is set out in full here. The most significant change was the removal of the two Conservative councillors, Cllrs Rob Lee and Andy Patmore. They had previously participated in cabinet meetings as an official opposition – a status allowed them under council regimes led by previous Labour leaders Peter Chowney and, before him, Jeremy Birch.  

There is no constitutional requirement in normal times for the majority party in a local council to invite opposition councillors to participate in cabinet.  In some ways it’s anomalous – like expecting Sir Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner to pop up at strategic meetings inside 10 Downing Street. Furthermore, the Conservative minority has had no effective power to affect the decisions made by the majority Labour party members in cabinet. Since the latter have almost invariably voted as a bloc in recent years, any opposition the Tories have expressed could be seen as purely decorative.

The timing of the announcement of the decision to remove them was, however, eyebrow-raising – just a few hours before the first cabinet meeting to be held (remotely, with live streaming: see report here) since the suspension of normal democratic arrangements on 18th March.

Powers of Managing Director

The full council, meeting on that day, passed a motion – ironically, seconded by Cllr Lee himself and approved unanimously on all sides – to allow its recently appointed Managing Director Jane Hartnell to make ‘emergency’ and ‘urgent’ decisions in the name of the council when councillors were unable to meet. The motion required her to check with at least four members of the cabinet, one of whom must be an opposition councillor, before making any decisions under these rules. But how can she do that if there is no such councillor? 

The full council has not met since March and isn’t scheduled to do so until 15th July. It is not clear, therefore, how any decisions (however ‘urgent’ or under conditions of ‘emergency’) can be legally taken by Ms Hartnell.

Previous Labour leaders have seen the importance of consulting with opposition parties instead of listening only to voices that agree with them|Cllr Lee

That’s a point of constitutional nicety that may actually suit Cllr Forward and her cohorts, however, since it is their policy, constantly repeated in press and public announcements over recent weeks, to “keep Hastings closed” – not only public toilets but almost all other council amenities (see Council Sports Facilities for a report on sporting facilities). Cllr Lee had, on the contrary, been calling for a substantial reopening. 

In a press release issued on 29th May, he compared the continued closure in Hastings with “other places along the coast”. He argued –  “The public tennis courts in Bexhill are now open, and the ones in Alexandra Park should now be open as well. Council-owned sports facilities such as this play an important part in people’s physical and mental wellbeing, and they should be open for residents to use. The opening of public toilets in the borough must also happen without delay as they have elsewhere, they are an important amenity in the town, and not to open them is damaging to public health. Social distancing and regular hand-washing are a must, but there is little excuse not to start to reopen the town.”

The stage was then set for a lively debate at the meeting on 8th June – but one that Cllr Forward clearly chose to avoid, even though she could no doubt rely upon her Labour majority to support her. 

“No constructive role”

Rick Dillon, communications officer of the Hastings & Rye constituency Labour party, defends her decision: “The role of Conservative councillors has been very useful on the overview and audit committees, but that hasn’t been so in the case of the leadership of the Conservative group in cabinet,” he told HIP. “They haven’t fulfilled any real constructive role. In terms of making their opposition known, they have ample opportunities to express opposing views.

“The toilets are a red herring. It’s not a political issue. The council has a legal, and in fact a moral, liability to ensure that public toilets are safe.

“As to the emergency powers granted to the Managing Director by the motion of 18th March, a number of real emergency decisions had to be made at that time. It was right that the opposition should be represented. Now the cabinet is meeting again, and things have moved on.”

Cllr Lee, of course, sees things differently. “It is a great shame,” he said, “that the leader of the council has made this decision to deny a voice to Conservative voters all over the town. No real reason has given for the move, and it will stifle debate locally. This is proof that Cllr Forward is not interested in hearing alternative points of view.” 

He added: “Previous Labour leaders have seen the importance of consulting with opposition parties instead of listening only to voices that agree with them. Over the last few years, the Conservatives have been proved right on many issues locally, including the recently aborted plans to build solar panels which was very embarrassing to the Labour leadership. The fear of effective Conservative opposition has proved too much for Cllr Forward, who does not dare to face challenging questions from outside the Labour Party.”

Views of other parties

The reactions of other political parties have been equivocal. Perennial Lib Dem constituency candidate Nick Perry is quoted on the Hastings In Focus website as supporting the move: “‘The Conservatives are showing the public at every level of government just how capable they are in office. Who can blame Cllr Forward for deciding to do without them?”

But Fellow Lib Dem Susan Stoodley, a member of the constituency party executive, told Hastings Online Times (HOT) last week: “This seems to be another example of the local Labour Party’s reluctance to have any form of open government in Hastings.

“There are several examples of projects where they have ignored input from other parties, including the question over whether to install solar panels in the Country Park, the former bathing pool site and building on the Bulverhythe recreation ground.

“We strongly believe that the actions of the borough council would be greatly improved by involving a broader range of interests in decision making that can impact on every resident of Hastings.”

Local Green party secretary expressed a similar view to HOT: “I do agree that they [the Tory councillors] should have the right to be able to attend and present differing points of view at cabinet.

“I also hope that this isn’t a sign of Labour ‘battening down the hatches’ and deciding only to hold conversations within the Labour bunker.”

There will be an election for deputy Labour leader, and therefore effectively of the council, two days previously on 16th March. 

At the meeting last week three candidates put themselves up for election as prospective leader – Cllrs Andy Batsford, current cabinet portfolio holder for housing, leisure and community engagement, and Trevor Webb, who also represents Central St Leonards & Gensing on East Sussex County Council, along with Cllr Forward. Each made “a very good pitch for the position”, according to HIP sources. There was then a ballot conducted by single transferable vote. It does not seem that there was any input from non-councillor Labour party members.

Born in Bexhill, Cllr Forward has lived and worked in and around Hastings and St Leonards all her life, with a former main career as primary school teacher. She has five children and five grandchildren.  

Fellow councillor Margi O’Callaghan described Cllr Forward’s victory as “an amazing achievement for women in local politics” (though the party was led locally by Mary Denning in the 1990s) and “a fabulous accomplishment to see such a strong woman elected to succeed Peter Chowney.

“Even though she has some big shoes to fill – both Peter and Jeremy Birch had a huge positive impact on our town – I feel that Kim has the drive and the vision to take Hastings to new heights and beyond.”

Peter Chowney said: “I’m very pleased that Kim has been elected as the new leader of the Labour Group and will become leader of the council. Kim has been incredibly supportive as my deputy and has my full support as the new leader, a job she already understands well and will be very good at.”

She in turn paid tribute to Peter Chowney’s legacy as leader and to his collaborative style of working. She said: “I have been involved every step of the way as we have battled with the budget to ensure that we can continue to deliver quality services for the residents of our beautiful town.”

Cllr Forward has been playing a leading role in developing plans for a new leisure and arts complex in the White Rock / Bohemia area. However the continued government squeeze on local authority budgets suggests that her primary task will be to implement a radical restructuring of services including imposing compulsory staff redundancies. The need to factor in responses to climate emergency is clearly an added pressure.

Fellow Gensing councillor Colin Fitzgerald said: “Her experience and enthusiasm are going to be vital as we look to continue standing against the disgusting impacts of Tory-imposed austerity upon our residents.”

PICTURE: Dave Young

Asked why not, and when it would be, a Council spokesperson said: “There are a number of agreements that have all been drafted, numerous questions and queries resolved, and the documents are with respective legal advisers to be finalised before formal approval. The Council and the developer remain committed to the scheme. While the Council was indeed hopeful of completing the agreements before Christmas, there is no deadline for the completion – it remains more important that they are properly constructed and worded in order to stand the test of time: 250 years in respect of the commercial lease, for example.”

It started awkwardly. A soft opening question on which fictional character the candidates would like to switch lives with led to several excruciating seconds of dead air as Labour candidate Peter Chowney floundered desperately in search of a fictional character. Any fictional character would do. Peter’s mind went blank – Jeremy Corbyn? Not fictional. Boris Johnson? Sadly not fictional. Time stood still until Peter eventually plumped for the decidely non-fictional Robert Tressell, celebrated local author of The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists. Nick Perry attempted to soften his image in comparing himself to Baloo the Bear – although the Lib Dems were not so cuddly in their five-year stretch propping up the Tory government – while Sally-Ann Hart displayed her modesty by implying her similarity to Jesus Christ himself, in the form of Aslan. 

PICTURE: Peter Mould

Soon a battle for the oxygen of publicity broke out between Independent candidate Paul Crosland and host Chris Connelley. Crosland bizarrely revealed his support for the Labour Party in Canterbury, calling into question the logic of running against Labour in another marginal. He invited the audience to visit his website 2066.co and Twitter page so often the words lost all meaning. Meanwhile, Connelley’s constant interjections into the debate made one wonder whether he was pondering jumping behind the desk and running for MP himself.    

Hart, a semi-professional Amber Rudd impersonator hoping to make it in the big leagues, demonstrated why she had kept a low profile in the campaign up to this point with a series of right-wing monologues. She took aim at immigrants after an unrelated question about the skills gap in the local area, before turning her ire on working people reduced to using the town’s foodbanks; and finally settling on people with learning difficulties who apparently should be paid less than the minimum wage because they ‘don’t understand money’. All classic vote winners, these. Give them enough rope, as the saying goes. 

And things only got worse for the Tory candidate overnight as various national news outlets got hold of her comments. Perhaps she should have taken a leaf out of her leader’s book and ducked out of the hustings altogether. Oh, wait, she already did that at the climate hustings. 

Perry was reportedly generated within Liberal Democrat headquarters by scientists tasked with designing the archetypal liberal, and he lived up to his billing with a torturous explanation of the party’s policy on Brexit – apparently backing revoke and a second referendum at the same time – mirroring Jo Swinson’s struggles with the same question. Chowney set out his stall as ardent Remainer, at odds with his famously neutral leader.

The night ended in farce as local PhD student and self-publicist James Prentice revealed the results of a local opinion poll he’d conducted, putting the Tories 10 percentage points clear of Labour, and then argued heatedly with audience members over the microphone. By this morning (Friday) we’ll know whether he’s been proved right.

The following exchanges – extracted and distorted across the national media – took place at the HIP Hastings Hustings at East Sussex College last Thursday evening when the four electoral candidates in the constituency of Hastings & Rye responded to a question from the floor. 

Questioner: Sally, you shared an article on your Facebook page saying that disabled people could work for less than the minimum wage. Would you care to defend that?

Sally-Ann Hart: Did you read the article?

Questioner: Yes.

S-AH: You read the article and it was about people with learning difficulties, about them being given the opportunity to work, because it’s to do with the happiness they have about working, and the obsession 

[some audience noise]

….it’s about learning difficulties…it’s about having….

[audience interjection: “How dare you? That’s patronising]…

Some people with learning difficulties, they don’t understand about money – it is about having a therapeutic exemption, and the article was in support of employing people with learning disabilities – that’s what it was. [Repeated audience interjection: “How dare you?] 

You should read the article. 

Paul C: It may be unpopular – I don’t mind saying things that are unpopular – but I do feel I have a responsibility to reflect what is said to me. The first person I asked for his ten-point citizen’s manifesto is here as my wing-man, Tony May. He put on his ten-point manifesto: do away with the minimum wage, living wage. He believes that there should be more opportunities for people to take whatever work they want to take.

[Audience interjection: “Everyone deserves the dignity of a living wage”].

S-AH: Everyone deserves the dignity of a job. 

[Shouts from the audience in reaction].

Paul C: Everyone deserves the dignity of a basic income and to then do whatever work they feel contributes to the community. There is so much work crying out to be done. My friend Tony May, he cleans up – he gets prizes for being the clean-up man – and, if you try to put that under a system whereby he needs to be paid the minimum wage, there would then be a welter of health and safety regulations put on top of him, it would be impossible for him to clean the litter from the streets, and that’s what he loves to do. There are people who do want to work…

Moderator: Paul, your minute’s up….Nick, if you want to comment…

Nick Perry: I don’t want to comment particularly on that, no.

Moderator: And Peter, do you want to say anything on that question or not?

Peter Chowney: Yes, I do. I think it’s disgraceful, the idea that people with physical disabilities or neurodiversity should be paid less than others – I mean it’s just shocking. [Audience applause and clapping]. I was out in an organisation called Little Gate Farm this morning where they specifically work with people with neurodiversity and learning difficulties, and we have helped them on the council. We’ve employed apprentices from that organisation, and so have lots of other employers in town. They haven’t tried to do that on the cheap, and they would be perfectly happy, as would the council….and indeed the council does pay them the £10 an hour wage. And we would always do that, and I think most employers would be happy to do that, because these people from that organisation are doing a job that they deserve to be paid the right wage for [Audience clapping], and I don’t think employers want to do anything else.

Footnote

Mencap defines learning disability as “a reduced intellectual ability and difficulty with everyday activities – for example household tasks, socialising or managing money – which affects someone for their whole life. People with a learning disability tend to take longer to learn and may need support to develop new skills, understand complicated information and interact with other people.”

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, neurodiversity “describes the range of differences in individual brain function and behavioural traits regarded as part of normal variation in the human population (used especially in the context of autistic spectrum disorders).”

Many weeks of national as well as local focus on voters in the marginal constituency of Hastings & Rye (Conservative majority 346 in 2017) should come to a head next Thursday 5th December when all four candidates will enter an open debate in East Sussex College organised by ourselves – the Hastings Independent Press. Sally-Ann Hart for the Conservatives, Peter Chowney for Labour, Nick Perry for the Liberal Democrats and Independent Paul Crosland have all agreed to take part, giving short addresses to a public audience and taking questions.

The event will start at 6.30pm and is open to all who wish to attend. However, all attendees are required to register, and are encouraged to do so in advance to ensure a place – see the HIP Facebook page for full details. There will be a maximum of 250 seats available on the ground floor of the college’s atrium hall with up to a further 100 standing places only.

We are very keen that the candidates should be pressed to explain their own and, in the case of party contenders, their party’s ideas and practical policies on both national and local issues. However, we also expect the debate to be conducted in a positive and respectful spirit that shows all of us capable of airing differences democratically and peacefully.

Immediately following the hustings event we aim to provide full coverage online (facebook and website) of who said what and how it was received. We encourage our readers to tap into this, if they are able, without waiting for our next newsprint edition. Our Issue 142 may hit the streets while the polls are still open, but the political beauty parade will be over by then.

What would you ask the candidates – Forward your questions now to info@hastingsindependentpress.co.uk or message us on Facebook

When considering who to place a vote for there may be many conflicting motivations and sources. Firstly, in a first-past-the-post system most MPs will be part of a parliamentary party and their votes on House of Commons motions will be determined by the party ‘whip’. The manifestos of each party are available online and looking at these policies might help in understanding which party best represents one’s interests and views. Be sure to find an official version of each party manifesto and watch what the leaders of these parties have to say for themselves on the Question Time Leaders Special available on BBC iPlayer.

Secondly, we must choose which person represents us as an MP. In Hastings and Rye we have four candidates running: Peter Chowney (Labour), Paul Crosland (Independent), Sally-Ann Hart (Conservative) and Nick Perry (Liberal Democrat). Each of these candidates have shown experience in politics from various backgrounds and it is worth researching each of these people to see if you would support them as an individual to represent you.  

In making the decision of who to vote for, we choose for ourselves, we also choose for our neighbours. Hastings is a town with high welfare dependency, large public sector employment, areas of deprivation, high rates of poverty and teenage pregnancy, high drug-related crime and a higher-than-average homeless population. Property prices and rents have risen dramatically over the past few years, whilst wages have stagnated. You might be affected by these issues or know people who are. These are the kinds of things to consider when choosing a political party and candidate. 

Brexit

Brexit has been a large factor in the discourse in politics over the last three years, now with clear water between each of the parties. The Labour Party has pledged to negotiate a customs union-based Brexit deal within three months, to hold a referendum on this deal versus remaining in the EU within six months, to remain neutral in this referendum and to make the outcome legally binding. The Liberal Democrat Party promise to revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit. The Conservative Party want to ‘get Brexit done’ with Boris Johnson’s deal, like Theresa May’s deal but with checks on imports and exports between Britain and Northern Ireland instead of the ‘Irish backstop’.

Environment

The environment has also become a key issue in public debate, Extinction Rebellion (XR) has raised the profile of climate crises globally and locally, with our local XR group hosting a hustings for the Hastings and Rye candidates. This event was well attended and showed each of the candidates in a positive light with the Lib Dem and Labour candidates sticking to party lines and Crosland speaking from a more esoteric and prophetic heartfelt authority. 

Perry’s best moment was the incredible dignity and presence of mind in refusing to answer a particularly sinister question about population control and limiting human reproduction. This primitivist green perspective was also challenged by a member of the audience and all the candidates followed Perry’s example in rejecting the notion that humans are the problem with climate crises. Perry highlighted the Liberal Democrat commitment to investment in education and mental health services whilst maintaining a budget surplus, as well as reducing UK emissions to carbon neutral by 2045. 

Chowney won the contest of personal green credentials with his self-imposed flight restrictions, diligent recycling and electric bike. However, Chowney was challenged by other candidates on his record as Leader of Hastings Borough Council (HBC). Chowney carries the weight of being Leader of HBC and all the decisions that have not worked out for the council count against him in this contest. This does however give him a broad understanding of the workings of this town and Chowney is very knowledgeable of the problems we face. He missed a key party policy – using renewable energies to power a regeneration scheme, offering 20% of profits from local renewables to regenerate deprived coastal communities like Hastings. Of each of the parties, Labour are offering the greatest investment into what they call the Green Industrial Revolution, promising the largest number of jobs created, the quickest reduction to carbon neutrality and a National Education Service so that every person can be given six years of education to retrain into the jobs of the future at any point in their life, for free. Chowney commented, “Change is possible through the actions of individuals.”

The comment of the night came from Crosland when he said, “The micro is indivisible from the macro.” Which is the point Chowney lost in his statement about the actions of individuals. Recycling and electric bikes are going to do very little to offset the massive emissions created by major military-industrial complexes or the fall-out of ever-looming nuclear apocalypse. Instead, Crosland suggested a cultural shift towards a sharing economy. This touched on the need to change the systemic destruction of the environment through personal actions, national and international legislation. 

Hart decided not to attend the event and was ‘empty chaired’ by the hosts. 

Facebook ‘live’

Instead of attending the XR hustings the local Conservative candidate chose to do a ‘live’ Facebook Q&A that turned out to be a video selection of pre-prepared questions. In which, Hart continued her predecessor’s nine-year promise to do something for local fisherman, offered her support for council houses but claimed the council was responsible for that issue, and suggested that Hastings and Rye have a local referendum to determine what her position on foxhunting should be but did not indicate if she would campaign one way or another. 

Question Time

Whilst local candidates were being grilled by XR, national leaders were each given half an hour to answer questions from a live television audience in a BBC Question Time special. This extended exposure has been the most clinical dissection of each of the leaders in a campaign characterised by sound bites and media training. 

Corbyn was challenged again on the party record on antisemitism, his plans to borrow and tax to fund a huge investment package, perceived fears of him as Prime minister and his ambiguated stance on a future Brexit referendum. Corbyn announced for the first time that under a Labour government he would remain neutral in any such referendum. This settled a previous unknown variable, after which he was calmer and more confident than previous appearances, answering questions in coherent plain English. According to several polls after the event Corbyn won by large margin. 

Nicola Sturgeon was next to take questions and was clear, concise, competent, largely responding to questions about Scottish independence.  

Jo Swinson was caught off-guard in the headlights of robust questioning. For the first time in this campaign a tough interrogation exposed inconsistencies in Lib Dem policies on Brexit: both offering to revoke and hold a referendum, asking for collaboration but refusing to work with anyone, her promises to invest in public services and her voting record of supporting cuts to public services, promising to protect the environment and having a positive enthusiasm for detonating a thermo-nuclear device. Swinson drifted back into her native Scottish accent when flustered and was visibly relieved to leave the stage, having said, “I do think the best use of nuclear weapons is to use them to negotiate a way other than nuclear weapons.”

Boris Johnson was flustered and repetitive, speaking mostly in slogans and when he did drift off script he seemed abrasive. Johnson took every opportunity possible to fall back on the comfortable territory of Brexit soundbites, promising to “Get Brexit done.” After questioning, he refused to clarify why he wouldn’t release a report into Russian interference in British politics or apologise for using Islamophobic and homophobic language as a journalist, recalling Johnson’s references to Muslim women as “letterboxes” and “bank-robbers”, as well as gay men as “bum boys”. 

Tactical Voting

Given that Hastings and Rye is a marginal seat, with only Labour and Conservative candidates having a reasonable chance of winning, there is also the consideration of tactical voting. In this election, in this constituency, voting for either of the major parties will have the most impact in deciding our future MP and government. Not for a generation has the difference between these two been greater.

Tory Candidate Named As Campaign Begins…

Rother councillor Sally-Ann Hart has been selected by the Hastings & Rye Conservative Association to represent them in the general election scheduled for 12th December. She replaces outgoing MP Amber Rudd, who lost the Conservative whip after resigning from Boris Johnson’s cabinet in September and will not be standing for re-election. 

The selection took place last Friday at Claremont School when party members met to hear pitches from three “finalists” in the candidacy process – Cllr Hart; Tim Clark, living in Ashford but employed as the principal of Skinners’ Academy in Hackney; and Stephen Bates, a business entrepreneur in food and hospitality with strong links to Europe. 

Mr Bates admitted that he had voted Remain in the 2016 referendum, though he was now committed to “getting Brexit done”. Cllr Hart and Mr Clark confirmed themselves as strong Brexiteers. Cllr Hart won a substantial majority on a second ballot.

The stage is thus set for a three-way contest in the constituency next month over the issue of Brexit, with each candidate clearly following respective party lines: Cllr Hart seeking to push through Boris Johnson’s leave deal; Nick Perry, the Liberal Democrat, committed to revoke Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (without a referendum in the unlikely event of gaining overall power); and Cllr Peter Chowney, for Labour, adopting Jeremy Corbyn’s policy to seek further negotiation with the EU, with any resulting revised deal to be put to a second referendum.

Brexit is far from the only issue of course, with Labour in particular keen to highlight the effects of almost a decade of “austerity”, presided over by the Tories (in coalition with the Lib Dems until 2015) on the economic and social fabric of the town, and promising an agenda of radical change, including huge investment in green industries. How this plays out locally remains to be seen.

For those unimpressed by mainstream politics, there is also a fourth candidate, Independent Paul Crosland, who wants to pause 5G, enhance community care and cohesion, and promote a low carbon economy. He says his target is only 365 votes, but as Ms Rudd’s margin last time was 346, that’s not to be ignored.

For a profile of Cllr Hart click here and further discussion of Mr Crosland’s intervention, click here

Targeting 365 Votes

Amber Rudd’s majority over Labour candidate Peter Chowney at the 2017 general election was just 346. The three other candidates, Nick Perry of the Liberal Democrats, Michael Sheridan of UKIP and independent Nicholas Wilson all lost their deposits.

The Lib Dems as unrepentant Remainers and UKIP as belligerent No Dealers had clearly differentiated programmes from both main parties in that election. Mr Wilson, however, was a paid-up member of the Labour party. He said he had joined it “to vote for Jeremy Corbyn” but was standing separately on an “anti-corruption” ticket. As he polled 412 votes, and Cllr Chowney lost by a lesser margin, it is hardly surprising that Labour held him substantially responsible for their shortfall.

Could history repeat itself two years on? For here comes another independent candidate, Paul Crosland, on the 2019 ballot – not, as far as is known, a recalcitrant Labour member, but one who is espousing radical causes that seem likely to attract more fringe Labour voters than Conservatives. 

In his pre-election pitch laid out in a letter to the Hastings Observer published on 25th October Mr Crosland explained that he is “standing for Generosity because I want to advance ‘Community Development ‘ work co-creating ‘Sharing and Care4Caring’ communities in St Leonards”. The major themes of his campaign would be pausing 5G; adopting a neighbour 20 years more senior with different political/spiritual beliefs to address the care crisis and lack of community cohesion; and planning for a low carbon economy with an improved quality of life.

“Political parties are, of course, trying to gain political power in 2019-24; I am not”, he wrote. “I am engaging in this election to raise the awareness of what we can all do to build more sharing and caring communities around us. Just 365 is the target number of votes I have set in order to have a credible basis on which to recruit a team of Community Development workers and found the ‘Sharing and Care4Caring political party seeking ten times the votes in five years time, i.e. 3,650”.

More recently he tweeted: “I don’t want to be your MP but I do want you to ‘Put a cross for Crosland’”.

Who’s to say that he won’t meet his modest initial target, or that the votes he garners – however few – may not affect the outcome? Liz Bygraves, for one, from the Facebook group Stop 5G Hastings has spotted an opportunity: “There must be about 350 local people on the 5G Facebook group and newsletter list combined,” she posted. “The Tory majority last time was only around 300. As many of us as possible must write to Peter Chowney stressing that we will vote for Paul unless he takes a stand on opposing the 5G rollout”.

“Now that’s a threat I respect!” came Mr Crosland’s reply.

Last Saturday Hastings Against War (HAW) held its annual remembrance for all victims of war at the war memorial in Alexandra Park. Local people, including Council leader Peter Chowney, gathered to remember the victims, military and civilian alike, before a wreath of white poppies was laid at the memorial.

At a short service Rona Drennan of HAW related that the white peace poppy can be traced back to the Women’s Co-operative Guild.  In 1933 members of the Guild, some of whom had lost loved ones in World War I, were the first to sell the white poppy. In 1934 the Peace Pledge Union (PPU), which campaigns for “a warless world”, began distributing the white poppy as an alternative symbol to create a different culture of remembrance. 

She quoted an article by Geoff Tibbs of the PPU in which he describes this culture as being one of “humility, education and deeper understanding. By clearing a space for remembrance of all victims of war on all sides, the white poppy rejects triumphalist narratives of our violent past and challenges perspectives that omit large parts of the world.”

Ms Drennan said: “We lay this wreath of white poppies in remembrance of those who died in uniform, the civilians who died, and those who were left to mourn them”.

Hastings is one of just three towns in Kent and East Sussex – the others are Margate and Newhaven – that have been selected to bid for up to £25m each of government funding out of the £3.6 bn Towns Fund pot announced by Boris Johnson in the summer.

The government is “committed”, according to an announcement made by Communities and Local Government Secretary Robert Jenrick last week, “to “levelling up all parts of the country. We created the Fund to help businesses grow, connect communities and give people the skills they need to succeed”.

As a first stage, Hastings Borough Council (HBC) is to receive from his Ministry (the MHCLG) a sum in excess of £173,000 by way of “capacity funding” to enable it to start establishing the processes needed to put together its bid. The initial step will be the setting up of a Town Deal board which is to be led by a “representative of the local business community”. Also on the board should be its MP (whoever that may be), one or more executives of SELEP (the South East Local Enterprise Partnership) and other members representing local government, “the community”, education providers and other businesses, large and small. 

Time is tight. “Readiness checklists” must be returned by the council to the MHCLG by 19th November, the board must be in place by January 2020, and it must have presented a Town Investment Plan by the end of the summer.

 The MHCLG has directed that capacity funding should be spent on convening the Town Deal board, but also on

• Running business and wider community engagement events;

• Developing a Town Investment Plan;

• Providing technical expertise for business case development.

There is a requirement of transparency, which will be welcome to some of HBC’s critics who complain of its preference for dealing behind closed doors. The council will be expected to publish the Town Deal board’s governance structure and ways of working – as to how, for instance, the board will engage stakeholders and agree decisions over time.

Further guidance will be issued by the MHCLG in early 2020 on the scope of investments that may be pursued and on business case development. Each town in the scheme will then put together its business case to apply for up to £25m funding to implement its Plan. 

HBC council leader Peter Chowney said: “The three themes of the Towns Fund for developing our Town Deal are a good fit for our existing local priorities, which means we have a lot of evidence to support the development of our deal:  urban regeneration; skills and enterprise infrastructure; and connectivity. However, £25m doesn’t go very far towards fixing these problems – the cheapest proposal to bring HS1 trains to Hastings alone would cost ten times that, so the money would need to be focused on a small number of key projects if it is to create a lasting impact. We would hope to use the fund as a catalyst to focus the efforts of our partners and ourselves on the continuing but uncompleted story of our regeneration.

“The timetable is quite tight; we have to assemble boards of local businesses, public bodies and community groups by January 2020, with investment plans produced by the summer. But we have some excellent partnerships in place already, and I am confident we can meet these targets.”

Perry is standing for the current election on a platform of stopping Brexit and remaining in the EU. However, in this tightly contested Labour/Conservative marginal, a lot of his party’s local campaigning is aimed at attacking Labour, rather than Conservatives. 

On several occasions Perry has drawn attention to the meme page, Peter Chowney memes for Hastings and Rye teens, claiming that there is something weird about the page but declining to elaborate on the insinuation any further other than it being a ‘gut reaction’.

On 10^th November, the Hastings and Rye Liberal Democrats Facebook page published a sponsored post to appear locally that attacked “Jeremy Bloody Corbyn”, before swiftly editing out the ‘bloody’; along with other posts aimed primarily at attacking Labour. 

Nationally, the Liberal Democrats are hoping to attract more Remain supporters from the Labour party than they are Conservatives. Categorically ruling out coalitions and attacking Labour could be a strategy to boost the ovaerall LibDem popular vote; which will be key to the post-electoral defeat analysis playing out as an argument against first-past-the-post and for electoral reform.

These two election strategies, stopping Brexit and attracting as many Labour votes as possible, seem antithetical in Labour marginals like Hastings and Rye; however, Perry is confident of the ‘Lib Dem Surge’, telling HIP, “Hastings & Rye voters will use their judgement as to which candidate will best represent Remain in Hastings & Rye. 

“Our own data, based on this year’s actual election results, and additional independent polling, suggests that there is a Liberal Democrat surge here, and the election is wide open.”

In election materials, Perry has claimed to be “out in front”, referencing polling conducted by Coastal Action CIC (CA). CA is a polling company run by local PhD students, James Prentice and Chris Connelley, who produced the survey he quotes identifying the ‘Best Remain Coalition Candidate in Hastings and Rye’.

In their research CA state: “The survey asked Remain voters which party they identified as a Remain party, the aim being to create the pool from which a stop No Deal candidate could be chosen.”

This meant that those surveyed were first asked which parties they identified as a ‘remain’ party, which then limited their choices of candidates in future questions to those from these parties. This meant that Labour, who have not ‘identified’ as either a ‘leave’ or ‘remain’ party despite backing a second referendum with a clear ‘remain’ option, were selected against by many respondents in the opening stages of the polling.

The resulting bar chart, which appears on Perry’s election materials under the heading ‘Nick Perry out in front’, is an outrageous and bizarre example of data manipulation by the Liberal Democrats that has become memetic throughout this election; especially when contrasted with Hastings and Rye 2017 election results, or Best for Britain’s latest polling giving Perry an estimated 10.9% of the vote and 4% chance of success.

A poll conducted months ago, to survey the best candidate to lead a ‘remain coalition’ which has now been ruled out by all parties, and who are now  actively campaigning against each other, is being misrepresented as a poll of electoral prospect.

CA told HIP, “Our polling was undertaken some time ago, before the party conference season, the October 31st Brexit deadline expired and well in advance of the current General Election being called. 

“It sought to explore local Remain voters’ political instincts at that time, and in those circumstances. Results were duly published and content became accessible in the public domain.

“How the data continues to be used and interpreted is beyond our control.”

Nick Perry said: “The Coastal Action polling which showed me ‘out in front’ is just factual reporting”. 

But councillor calls for “ideas and creativity”

Hastings Borough Council (HBC) is about to complete the grant of a long lease of the former bathing pool site at West Marina to developers County Gate. Council leader Peter Chowney told the full council meeting on 23rd October, in response to a question raised by local ward councillor Karl Beaney, that the lease would be signed “in the next fortnight”. 

County Gate have been the preferred bidder for the site for more than a year, and the council passed a resolution approving disposal for development in April this year for a mix of housing and leisure use in accordance with the Local Plan. There was talk of proposals to build upwards of 150 housing units on the site, which seemed to leave rather little space for unspecified leisure facilities (apart from a slipway for boats to reach the beach). No details of the developers’ plans nor of the terms of the intended lease have been released by either side since then. Is all now about to be revealed?

Andy Batsford, lead councillor not only for housing and leisure but
also a new cabinet portfolio of ‘community engagement’, has told HIP that the signing of the lease will “kick-start” a process of consultation “that HBC and the development company have been waiting for since the tendering process was completed… The process of such a complex and detailed lease arrangements had to be done correctly so that HBC protects its assets for the town and ensures that we deliver the quality leisure and residential development that has been promised for such a long time”.

He dismissed the objections of those local residents “that do not want any development at all”. 

As far as he is concerned, “that public consultation happened over seven years ago during the development of the local plan”. 

However, he said that the new leaseholders were “very keen to establish a full timetable of engagement and consultation”, and that he would be making sure that all information and dates would be made available on an open website.

Cllr Batsford is determinedly enthusiastic about future local engagement: “I am encouraging all residents close to the proposed development and the wider Hastings population to get involved with the design process, bring their ideas and creativity, and find a receptive response. We have promised a leisure destination for the whole of the town, and to encourage investment and regeneration for West St Leonards. This is our best hope in delivering this, finally pulling both tourists and locals down to the west of the town….As the next phase of development starts, a high quality community engagement will step up”.

However, a residents’ forum, the West Marina Group (WM), has been less impressed. “Andy Batsford engaged well in the early stages”, says WM treasurer Robert Sorrenti, “but not at all in recent months. The council has had County Gate’s plans, but wouldn’t release them because the company ‘has copyright’”.

Another member of WM, Graham Wilkins, is more scathing. “We represent over 500 local people who are frustrated and angry. I like Andy personally, he has attended meetings, and we think his heart is in the right place, but we’ve seen no evidence that he has gained a hearing for any of our concerns.”

WM have argued that no development plans should be finalised at the bathing pool site until the future of other neighbouring sites, the former premises of Stamco and vacant land owned by the Ministry of Defence, has been determined. Mr Sorrenti says that WM want to develop a formal neighbourhood plan that encompasses these, and he is due to meet with the HBC planning department next week with a view to getting their commitment to engage with WM on it. However, it seems that the terms of the lease to County Gate may be finalised by then. 

What room will that leave for genuine future consultation between the developers and the public? We wait to see. Mr Wilkins says that Cllr Batsford told him at the beginning of the process: “There’s no point in putting anything here that people don’t want”. Which people did he mean?

In an article printed in Hastings in Focus, Hastings and Rye Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate, Nick Perry, cited indices where areas of Hastings are highlighted as suffering from deprivation. He stated, “The newly-released 2019 Index of Multiple Deprivation shows Hastings Borough becoming more deprived in seven out of the 11 identified domains, which has got to be a major cause for concern for all of us who care about it.”

The 2019 Index of Multiple Deprivation provides very little detail about local authority areas but does indicate that Hastings is now the 13th most deprived local authority in the country, dropping from 20th since 2015, according to data issued by the government’s Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. Baird ward was the neighbourhood indicated as suffering the worst deprivation and was the one Perry highlighted to criticise his rival, Peter Chowney, the Labour parliamentary candidate and Hastings Borough Council (HBC) leader. 

In response, Peter Chowney pointed out that, up to 2010, the Labour government had made significant investments in Hastings, spending over £300m on infrastructure projects, apprenticeships and other training schemes for young people in the most deprived areas. Some of that regeneration money went towards building new office accommodation in the town centre, industrial units on the Enviro 21 site on South Queensway and the Saga building in Priory Square.

Chowney said, “A failure to understand what infrastructure spending could achieve was part of the problem when the Liberal Democrats went into coalition with the Tories in government, and brought in nine years of austerity that ended such investment. No more ‘flashy building projects’, an end to new healthcare facilities, an end to better schools and colleges.

“But on top of that infrastructure spending, there was also a lot of money invested through Area Based Grants and other funding streams in social and economic projects, building up community structures in the poorest neighbourhoods and running projects, through the council, to set up apprenticeships and other training schemes for young people in the most deprived areas, to begin to tackle the skills shortages and poor educational performance. That had resulted in deprivation levels beginning to reduce.  

“After 2010, the Liberal Democrat and Tory austerity programme scrapped all that too. And on top of that, the Hastings Council’s core budget was slashed, with £55m cumulatively cut from our £15m annual budget since 2010. Inevitably, this led to big reductions in services, so much of the community development and training initiative work the council had been doing had to cease. East Sussex County Council suffered similar cuts, leading to further community projects in Hastings being scrapped. These cuts hit social services and other support programmes for vulnerable people hard, too, leading to big increases in homelessness, rough sleeping and anti-social behaviour, all of which pushed up costs for the Borough Council as levels of homelessness tripled and the numbers of people sleeping rough on our streets increased thirteen-fold.”

In his article, Perry argued, “However tough the national funding settlement is, all councils have choices on what they organise, how they prioritise and who gets what slice of the meagre pie they have been given.” 

Perry suggested, “For example, the Council could have decided to use its considerable land and property portfolio to set up a network of one-stop hubs powered by solar energy in our local neighbourhoods. These buildings could be used to provide a range of easy-to-access community and outreach services that encourage and engage residents (rather than cost extra bus or taxi fares).”

He continued, stating, “The Labour Council is the establishment, having been in office with big majorities since 2010. And it looks like it has been as seduced by a ‘flashy building projects’ approach to regeneration as was the Tory administration immediately before it.  

“The Labour leader of the Council sits on the Board of Sea Space, Sea Change (Sea Sick, or whatever it is called now), the totally opaque, unaccountable quango that has managed to spend millions and millions of pounds on unused commercial square footage in the town centre and the failed Enviro 21 industrial park off Queensway.”

Perry also criticised the council for squandering regeneration money, letting Brighton University close their Hastings campus, passing up opportunities to work with Hastings United Football Club, not completing the Hastings Greenway, allowing the Ore Valley Community Land Trust to be evicted and carpeting the long-vacated Priory Square building.

Again, Chowney responded, “Some of the schemes Nick mentions in his article, such as the Hastings Greenway Project, are worthwhile, but they need proper funding to be realised. He seems to think, though, that none of these projects need government investment, it’s just up to the council to ‘enable’ them: ‘hand-ups not hand-outs’, as he says. All that’s needed is for the country’s most deprived communities to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, they don’t need any financial investment – it was the policy of the austerity government he supported for all those years. It didn’t work, and it never will.”

The council leader continued, “We know what the reasons for deprivation in Hastings are. Poor transport infrastructure means employers won’t relocate here, exacerbated by low skill levels in the local workforce and poor educational achievement, coupled with a lack of support for mental health, addiction and other social problems. None of these are things the council can fix without additional funding, and certainly not with the huge funding cuts we’ve had to cope with, at the same time that pressures on council spending have significantly increased.”

Local authority funding is a glasshouse for Perry to be lobbing rocks from but may be an ongoing attack line for the fifth-time-running parliamentary candidate. In his role as Council Leader, Peter Chowney is arguably one of the people who has invested the most into preventing the excesses of poverty and deprivation affecting the residents of Hastings, but he supports the lead Lib Dem policy – remaining in the EU – and Labour have adopted a second-referendum policy. So, without the virtue of an exclusively ‘remain’ candidate, look forward to a bloody fight between these two in the upcoming election. 

By Bernard McGinley

At a full meeting of Hastings Borough Council on 23rd October, councillors debated a detailed motion proposed by leader Peter Chowney on modern slavery, made immediately topical by the grim news breaking on that day of 39 migrants found dead in a lorry in Essex.  

Cllr Chowney explained that modern slavery was to be found in nail shops and carwashes, big fisheries, the building trade and many other places.  The Council could and should oppose it in various ways, including in its procurement processes – challenging any abnormally low-cost tenders, highlighting to its suppliers that contracted workers are free to join a trade union, and requiring its tendered contractors to adopt a whistle-blowing policy which would support staff in exposing any suspected cases of slavery.

In reply for the Conservative Group, Cllr Lee said they fully supported the motion.  

Cllr Maya Evans, council biodiversity champion, then spoke on how climate change impacted on the most vulnerable, and the related issues of water shortage, carbon dioxide (CO2) and ‘the Global South’.  When she went on to discuss Afghanistan and her familiarity with its problems, and proceeded to read from her book on the country, Cllr Lee and others had had enough.  He told her that she was doing a disservice to the motion.

The Chair asked Cllr Evans to sit down. 

Other members then spoke.  Cllr Beaver mentioned the neglected role of funds transfers in modern slavery.  Cllr Turner defended Cllr Evans, and spoke of the importance of changing public attitudes towards the plight of human beings.   Cllr Edwards sympathised regarding exploitation and abuse, but sparked an audible reaction when he described slavery in the East as “part of their culture”. 

Cllr Andy Batsford spoke of slavery in Hastings, and how people in ‘our town’ were terrified and not safe – vulnerable people in local brothels, for instance. 

Responding to the various contributions, Cllr Chowney said that Cllr Edwards was wrong regarding Eastern culture, and as to the numbers of people affected.  He cited the 2015 Modern Slavery Act of the coalition government as recognising the problem. Slavery was more subtle than in the past, including in the abuse of passports. 

The motion was approved unanimously.

Having set a deadline of the end of September for submission of proposals, Seaspace issued a statement last week that it is “pleased with the interest levels” arising. “We heard presentations from a number of bidders, who put forward a wide range of approaches for delivering of housing on the site – with no two parties proposing the same. There were several very well thought-out proposals which need to be reviewed in greater detail.

“Our agents are now carefully reviewing the information presented, seeking clarifications where necessary, and will report this back to our board in the near future with comments and recommendations.”

Heart of Hastings Community Land Trust have confirmed to HIP that they are among the bidders, promising on their website a “Bottom Up Development” approach that would “deliver 77 homes, up to 100 jobs and lasting regeneration with wider benefits for the whole town”. It is understood that Gemselect Limited, the housing company based in Battle whose current projects include buildings at Archery Gardens and at Campkin Gardens (opposite Beauport Park), have also submitted proposals.

Meanwhile the cabinet of Hastings Borough Council agreed unanimously last week to acquire the freehold of woodland and waste ground in the valley from Seaspace. Council leader Peter Chowney described the land concerned as an “urban wilderness” which would have “no human access”. The intention was to transfer it to a conservation group that could “help to enhance and protect the biodiversity of the area”. Initial repairs and maintenance costs, estimated at some £57,000 (excluding VAT), would be funded from specific reserves of the council retained from a previous Section 106 agreement.

Fight For Amber Rudd’s Seat Reduced To Three-Way Contest 

The local Green Party issued a statement last Sunday that it has decided not to field a general election candidate in the Hastings & Rye constituency “in the current political circumstances”. The party has also indicated that it will not endorse any other candidate to replace Amber Rudd as MP –  unlike in 2017, when it gave official backing to the Labour challenger, Cllr Peter Chowney.

Meanwhile it has been reported, though at the time going to press there has been no official confirmation, that the recently appointed Brexit party candidate Tom Bewick has shifted his attention to another constituency. Thus, if an election is triggered within the next few weeks, which appears probable, it seems that there will be just a three-way contest in Hastings & Rye between Cllr Chowney, Nick Perry of the Liberal Democrats, and an as yet unnamed Conservative.

Andrea Needham, Hastings Green Party spokesperson, said, “In the Green Party – unlike in other political parties – decisions are made by the membership. In this instance, members voted not to stand a general election candidate. We have made no deals or alliances with any other party…(The party) will instead be focusing on its campaign for the 2020 Hastings Borough Council elections. We urge all voters who want to see real action taken to tackle the climate emergency to vote Green in the 2020 local elections.”

It is understood that Cllr Chowney made a pitch to Green members at a meeting last Thursday. Although he did not win their official electoral endorsement he subsequently put an upbeat slant on their decision: “I’m very pleased. 

“They made the decision after I explained what policies I supported, and how the need to prevent climate change was, in my view, by far the most important issue facing humankind.

“I outlined other policies I’d be promoting too – including support for proportional representation – whether they decided to stand aside or not.”

Mr Perry had also offered to meet with the Green membership to ask for their endorsement as the ‘Remain’ candidate. Following their withdrawal he told HIP: “This is an honourable decision by the local Green Party. It will help to keep the Remain vote united, and of course I accept their wish not to endorse another candidate. With the Conservatives’ new candidate being Brexit Party endorsed, Hastings & Rye will have a choice between a hardline pro-Brexit Tory and a Stop Brexit Liberal Democrat. The Labour Party will tell us their position on this pivotal issue after the election”. 

Little Gate Farm has already clocked up five years’ experience in improving the lives of learning disabled, autistic, and vulnerable children and adults in East Sussex, supporting over 40 people with autism and learning disabilities into paid work over that time.

But a National lottery grant in April this year has enabled Little Gate Farm to set up its new Supported Apprentice Scheme. The target is to create apprenticeships for 50 young people over the next five years by working with local employers, continuing its work to improve job prospects for young adults who may feel limited in career choices. 

“This scheme means we can find real jobs for our young people aged 16-25 with local employers,” explained Little Gate Farm CEO and founder, Claire Cordell. “We are really excited about the opportunities this will bring to local businesses and the enrichment it will bring to the apprentices involved.”

Hastings Borough Council is one of the first large businesses in Hastings to back the scheme and will be supporting an apprentice post and a trainee post in 2019. 

Cllr Peter Chowney, leader at Hastings Borough Council said
that the Supported Apprenticeship Scheme “Fits perfectly with Hastings Borough Council’s ethos of supporting the local area and giving our young people real opportunities to experience the world of work”. 

Both the employer and apprentice will be fully supported by a job coach and training provider throughout the apprenticeship and traineeship.

Huw Merriman, MP for Bexhill and Battle, who has been working with Little Gate Farm since 2015, said: “They are an inspirational local organisation which is fully committed to providing work skills and fulfilling career opportunities for people with learning disabilities and autism. 

“I am fully supportive of this inclusive scheme and I would encourage local employers to get involved in the scheme to discover how these enthusiastic and hard-working apprentices can be a real asset to their organisation.”

Little Gate Farm had a stand at the recent Hastings Jobs and Apprenticeships Fair held by Amber Rudd at East Sussex College Hastings Campus.

PICTURE: Dave Young

The stated purpose of this largesse, described by DCMS as the “biggest ever single investment by Government in the UK’s built heritage” is to “transform disused buildings into shops, houses and community centres” and to “help traditional businesses adapt to better compete with online outlets”. Each favoured town or city will have a Heritage Action Zone, overseen by Historic England (the re-brand of English Heritage). 

Of the £95m being made available, £3m will be provided by the National Lottery Heritage Fund “to support a cultural programme to engage people in the life and history of their high streets”. The rest comes as two slices of the investment cake of £3.6bn announced in July by incoming Prime Minister Boris Johnson in the form of a “Towns Fund”.  One slice of £52m is from a “Future High Streets Fund” administered by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG); the other of £40m via the DCMS.

Communities Secretary of State Robert Jenrick led the upbeat rhetoric in Saturday’s press release:

 “I want to make sure the nation’s high streets continue to be at the heart of local communities. Today’s funding will revitalise much-loved historic buildings, helping to reverse the decline of our town centres. Ensuring that prosperity and opportunities are available to everyone in this country, not just those in our biggest cities, is a priority of this Government in our mission to ‘level up’ the regions.”

Culture Secretary Nicky Morgan proclaimed that the  funding will be used for a variety of projects, including to:

• Complete essential repair works in historic buildings and reveal hidden and forgotten features of buildings by restoring shop-fronts and facades; 

• Stimulate commercial investment in high streets by demonstrating how historic sites can be successfully repurposed;

• Develop education projects and bespoke events to help reposition historic buildings as community hubs at the heart of local towns and villages;

• Help address the UK wide skills shortage of heritage professionals in expert fields like stonemasonry and conservation by providing local property owners, residents and businesses with the opportunity to train in these areas.

PICTURE: Dave Young

Historic England’s Chief Executive, Duncan Wilson, was also in on the launch, declaring:

“Our high streets are the beating hearts of our communities. Many have roots that go back hundreds of years. Their historic buildings and distinctive character tell the story of how our towns and cities have changed over time. They are places where people come together to socialise, shop, run businesses and be part of their local community, but now they face an uncertain future.

“Through physical improvements and cultural activities, we will work with partners to find new ways to regenerate our high streets. It is a challenge, but with our experience and track record, as well as the knowledge and passion of local councils, businesses and community groups our historic high streets can be thriving social hubs once more.”

None of these luminaries commented on the much larger allocation of £1bn made by the MHCLG from its Future High Streets Fund in recent months to a different list of 100 English towns and cities from which Hastings has been excluded, despite the Borough Council making a bid for “up to £25m” provision from it to redevelop the town centre. 

PICTURE: Dave Young

Alert readers of HIP (Issue 126) may recall our report that council leader Peter Chowney, while supporting this bid and saying he hoped it would be successful, queried the short term and competitive nature of the bidding system at that point. “It’s a process which forces the poorest and most deprived areas to compete for scraps from the rich man’s table”, he told the Hastings & St Leonards Local Strategic Partnership meeting on 29th April.

The latest provision, however much it is talked up by government, hardly challenges this assessment. Division of £95m by 69 gives average funding of less than £1.38m per town centre. How much “transformation” of old buildings and traditional businesses is going to be achieved with that?

“The Government is expending a lot of energy to prepare for ‘no deal’ but I have not seen the same level of intensity go into our talks with the European Union, who have asked us to present alternative arrangements to the Irish backstop.

“The updates I have been grateful to receive from [the Prime minister’s] office have not, regretfully, provided me with the reassurances I sought.

“I must also address the assault on decency and democracy that took place last week when you [Johnson] sacked 21 talented, loyal One Nation Conservatives.

“This short-sighted culling of my colleagues has stripped the party of broad-minded and dedicated Conservative MPs. I cannot support this act of political vandalism.”

The next MP for Hastings and Rye

Hastings and Rye Labour parliamentary candidate, Peter Chowney, said, “I’m pleased that Amber Rudd has realised what many of us knew already: that the Tories are in utter disarray, and that Boris Johnson is not fit to be an MP, let alone Prime Minister.

“She once said that Boris Johnson was the life and soul of the party, but you wouldn’t want him to give you a lift home. Now she’s firmly slammed the door on him and decided to walk away, avoiding the car crash this government has turned into.

“I look forward to other prominent Conservatives, both nationally and locally, taking the same honourable route.”

Local Lib Dem parliamentary candidate, Nick Perry, said: “Amber Rudd’s resignation provides further evidence that Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party is now a Trojan horse for the Brexit Party. With the Conservatives and Labour in the hands of political hardliners, the Liberal Democrats will continue to welcome voters who want an open, tolerant and socially progressive party, committed to economic competence and stopping Brexit altogether.” 

Soames it ever was

In a Twitter exclusive, Jim Pickard, chief political correspondent for the Financial Times, tweeted: “I can reveal that Amber Rudd is going to stand as an independent at the next election – but not in Hastings & Rye”. 

Packard started a poll asking where Rudd might stand in an upcoming election, suggesting Putney, Kensington, Uxbridge, and The Rhondda. Rudd has since ruled out Uxbridge. 

The resignation article in The Times insinuated that Rudd might move ‘up the road’ to Mid Sussex, Nicholas Soames’s seat. Soames, who incidentally is Winston Churchill’s grandson, has recently had the Conservative whip withdrawn after voting against the government on the Benn bill and has been rumoured to be vacating his safe Conservative seat. This move to Mid Sussex seat has been predicted since Rudd’s majority was reduced to less than 346 in the 2017 general election. 

One Johnson pulls out, the other doesn’t 

This resignation may be a moral stance or a shrewd political calculation, depending on your sympathies. Twenty-three Conservative MPs have lost the party whip under Johnson’s leadership, including Soames, Rudd and Jo Johnson, Boris’s brother who also recently surrendered the party whip. A lot will depend on when they will have the whip restored. It seems unlikely in the extreme that Rudd will not return to the fold after this unusual period of open acrimony within the party. If the whip is returned before the next election and the seat becomes available, Mid Sussex can look forward to a new MP. It’s within an hour of London and she can see that they’ll win. If not, Rudd says that she’ll run as an ‘independent Conservative’. 

Given some of the policies and practices that Rudd has been able to tolerate, this move is unlikely to be a noble resignation. As Home Secretary, Rudd was a key architect in creating the ‘hostile environment’; she refused to acknowledge or implement the Dubb’s amendment which should have given thousands of child-refugees safe sanctuary in the UK; she gave the famous ‘Rivers of Rudd’ speech at the 2016 Conservative party conference in which she suggested that the majority of Britain’s problems could be solved by being tough on immigrants; she lied about the Windrush scandal and was eventually hounded out of office by the press. As Work and Pensions Secretary, Rudd oversaw the roll out of Universal Credit, a system that has caused extreme suffering, rent arrears and homelessness for the most vulnerable in society and was part of a government that considered raising the pension age to 75. Rudd campaigned enthusiastically to remain in the EU but was happy to sit in a cabinet that was prepared to prorogue parliament in order to see through a no-deal Brexit. The party whip being withdrawn from fellow MPs seems a strange place to draw a line in the sand. 

The next leader of the opposition?

Rudd’s move away from government can be interpreted as a bet against the current Johnson administration from someone at the centre of its innermost circle. When she returns to cabinet this resignation will put her in a strong position for a top job. 

Rudd would make a better leader than Johnson, he could never have been a successful Prime minister because he is a fool. His role is to make people laugh. Johnson reeks of British public-school exceptionalism, where effort is an affront to a born entitlement, he has only ever wielded power through proximity. Now that there are no higher authorities to hide behind, his jokes are falling flat, the gaffs no longer funny, the lack of effort and research, dangerous. If Rudd’s bet pays off, we may be looking at the collapse of the current government and a new leader of the Conservative party before Christmas. 

Hastings may have seen the back of Amber Rudd but the world has yet to see the end of her ambition.

Ore village, already suffering from the closure of its library, has lost, at least temporarily, its post office. Southeastern rail services to its station are also planned to be cut.

On 15th August, the premises at 490 Old London Road offering post office services were closed without any prior warning. The manager up to that point, a Mr Ahmet Kul, had been in an agency relationship with Potent Solutions Limited, who effectively administer a large number of sub-branches for the Post Office. It has been reported to HIP that there were financial difficulties.

The Post Office issued a statement explaining that they do not own the premises and that they were “withdrawn for post office use at short notice”. They added: “We apologise for any inconvenience the temporary closure at short notice has caused.

“We understand how important a post office is to a community and we would like to reassure customers that we are working hard to restore a post office in that area as soon as possible. We are in discussions with local retailers.

“Any retailer interested in incorporating a post office in their premises should email  ND.enquiries@postoffice.co.uk or  phone 0333 345 5560.”

In the meantime, the nearest alternative branches are in George Street in the Old Town or at Malvern Way.

Rail Service Cuts

Meanwhile the rail service to Ore station is under substantial threat following an announcement by Govia Thameslink that from May next year it intends to start and terminate all Southeastern trains on the Charing Cross/Cannon Street line at Hastings. Passengers to and from Ore would thenceforth have to change at Hastings for a connection with the Southern service on the Ashford line (or use, generally at a higher price, the alternative HS1 route to and from St Pancras).

Govia are holding a “consultation” with affected parties which will be open until this coming Monday, 9th September.

Martin Woodfine of SHRIMP (St Leonards and Hastings Rail Improvement group) has pointed out that passenger use of Ore station “increases year-on-year and the station serves an expanding area…. The proposed withdrawal of services is very unhelpful.”

Council leader Peter Chowney has added his objections: “Ore is close to some of the most deprived areas of Hastings, itself the most deprived town in south-east England. With direct peak hour trains replaced by a potentially unreliable service from Eastbourne, the economic regeneration of this area could be inhibited, making it less attractive for employers and those considering moving to the area.”

Govia have described usage of its services at Ore as “extremely low”.

The first thing he did was to trim cabinet numbers from ten to eight. (“That saved around £10,000 in costs on Day 1,” he says). Of those, five are independents, two Liberal Democrats, and one Labour, each selected on grounds of experience and readiness to work in harmony. The new Planning committee chair is Cllr Jonathan Vine-Hall, an independent. But Paul Osborne, conservative councillor for Eastern Rother, has been retained as chair of the Scrutiny committee.

There are 17 new councillors out of 38 in all. Oliver says he has attended every new member training and briefing session and has been impressed by their quality: “They show a real desire to serve – which of course I should have expected.” He thinks this is already having a knock-on effect in their relations with council officers – “who have welcomed their involvement”.

The main policy plank of the independent councillors in Bexhill who swept to electoral victories in May over sitting Conservative members was a resolve to set up a separate Bexhill Town Council. This remains a priority for Oliver, who aims to get it functioning as a forum for addressing planning and other  issues local to Bexhill by 2021. But obviously the District Council, whose jurisdiction spans the territory from Bexhill in the west to Battle and Robertsbridge in the north and Rye and Camber in the east (excluding  Hastings and St Leonards between) has many other concerns.

The requirement imposed on Rother by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government is to grant planning permissions for 365 new units of housing per year across the district. And prime responsibility for the planning process, including consideration of housing development projects such as those at Barnhorn Green, Spindlewood and Clavering Walk in Bexhill; Blackfriars in Battle; and Gullivers Sports Ground in Sidley, remains at district level.

Neighbouring councils

But Oliver is also keen to develop closer relations with East Sussex County Council (ESCC) and with leaders of neighbouring councils – Peter Chowney at Hastings and Bob Standley at Wealden. The South East Local Enterprise Partnership (SELEP), with its local federated board branded as Team East Sussex, provides a forum for these council leaders to thrash out strategic priorities with business, social enterprise and education chiefs. Oliver feels that the fact that he is not one side or the other of the Tory/Labour faultline is a big advantage.

“We are joined at the hip with Hastings,” he says, pointing to the developments around the Combe Valley ring-road, to 1066 tourism projects including the country park, and to combined NHS medical provision, “but we have failed to work together previously because of political division.”

Car parking

Closer to home, there is one issue – car parking throughout the various town centres of the district – which has the potential to divide opinion between the interests of residents, shopkeepers and visitors. Oliver says that the civil parking enforcement regime implemented under the previous administration has been subject to community consultation, and that most people accept that the scheme introduced by ESCC at the request of Rother enhances the safety of all road users. It is subject to annual review in order to identify appropriate operational changes. All surplus revenue, once the set-up costs are covered, will be returned to the county council for the benefit of highways and transport funding. 

As with all local authorities the key issues are financial – how to generate economic growth, and maintain and improve services, while keeping expenditure within the council’s budget. “We will spend money as if it’s our own, not someone else’s,” says Oliver, “in order to provide services expected by Rother residents.”

A Note From History

The first hundred days of a new administration is a concept borrowed from American political history. President Franklin Roosevelt, from his inauguration in March 1933, enacted 16 major legislative bills within 100 days, a level of frenetic energy that all subsequent incoming US administrations have been measured against. The starting point for Roosevelt’s New Deal was national financial catastrophe and the threat of societal breakdown. Not quite the context for the new regime in Rother – or perhaps it is.]

Cllr Chowney recounts that, from 2010 onwards, planned regeneration programmes were replaced with competitive funding schemes and short term, one-off initiatives, both from the government and from the EU. Many bids made by the council and/or by other local groups have been successful over this period. But, as he points out, the overall money offered, though significant, is “nowhere near the levels of funding the town was receiving pre-2010”. Moreover such funding “is random, based on what programmes are out there that the Council and local partners can bid into, rather than a planned investment to address the problems that Hastings still faces”.

He acknowledges frankly that some of the major investment initiatives have had disappointing outcomes – in particular the hopes raised, then dashed, of the University of Brighton settling long term in the town centre ; and of the pier restoration, achieved through Lottery funds and community enterprise only to be sold off to, as he puts it, “a controversial private owner”. He also concedes, with an admission of “could do better”, that development of new office accommodation in the town centre has failed to attract the level of new businesses and employment that was hoped for; that some projects have run “significantly over-budget and over-time”; and that “the publicly owned regeneration companies” (he doesn’t name them but is presumably referring to Seaspace and Seachange) have “lacked transparency”.

There have, on the other side of the balance sheet, been successes, Cllr Chowney maintains. “Hastings has changed substantially since the 1990s, having become a much more desirable place to live in, work in, and visit. The Council’s Cultural Regeneration Strategy has been particularly successful, promoting Hastings as a cultural destination, attracting new visitors, and encouraging those working in the cultural sectors to settle here”. 

The town will continue to apply for external funding through competitive grants as and when that’s available, Cllr Chowney writes. “But we’ll also be moving towards a more ‘project based’ way of working, planning a series of our own physical regeneration projects that can be ‘self-funded’, for example through the sale of housing, as well as seeking grant funding towards this”. He enumerates a number of projects which are either already in motion or may be shortly.

A new regeneration company may be needed to take these plans forward. If so, it is likely to be developed jointly with Rother District Council, whose new leaders are said to be “much more interested” in joint working than their predecessors. But, without “proper planned public investment” at the level of the 1997-2010 period, long term problems and the plight of the town’s most deprived communities “will continue”.

• Lists of the principal regeneration projects – past and present – are set out below. Cllr Chowney’s full report can be seen on his Labour party website but will also be posted on the HIP website www.hastingsindependentpress.co.uk soon.

Regeneration projects 1997-2010 

• Combe Valley Way, the Hastings – Bexhill Link Road; 
• Employment space (Hastings Town Centre and Rother Sites); 
• New Hastings Secondary Academies; 
• Hastings Station improvements and transport hub; 
• Marina Pavilion; 
• Redevelopment of the former coach and lorry park to create the Stade Open Space, Stade Hall, Stade café, facilitating the development of the Jerwood Gallery (now Hastings Contemporary); 
• Crime reduction initiatives by Safer Hastings Partnership – including purchase of CCTV system; 
• New further education colleges (Hastings Town Centre and the Ore Valley); 
• Station Plaza Health Centre; 
• New Hastings Railway Station; 
• Central St Leonards Urban Renaissance Programme; 
• Central St Leonards Renewal Area ; 
• Hastings Innovation Centre; 
• Creative Media Centre; 
• Town Centre Renewal (Priory Quarter); 
• Brighton University campus.
Also a number of Neighbourhood Renewal  and Area Grant Programmes to fund housing improvements and social and employment initiatives, plus Area Committees and local regeneration partnerships in specific localities, including Hollington, Ore Valley, Central St Leonards and Castle ward.

Regeneration projects 2010-19

• Various seafront improvements, including restoring White Rock Baths as The Source Skate Park, new kiosks, new signage, and the White Rock water feature (currently being constructed); 
• Cultural initiatives, including fish fairs, Stade Saturdays, and the ROOT1066 festival to mark the 950th anniversary of the Battle of Hastings; 
• Bottle Alley refurbishment and lighting scheme;
• Hastings Pier restoration; 
• Rock House housing and workspace; 
• Health Inequalities Programmes by the local Clinical Commissioning Group; 
• North East Hastings Big Local Programme; 
• Connecting Hastings and Rother Together (CHART), an EU-funded programme to fund social and employment projects in the most deprived areas; 
• Funding to help rough sleepers and address escalating levels of homelessness; 
• The Coastal Space project, a joint initiative between Hastings Council and Optivo Housing Association to create around 100 units of social rented housing in St Leonards by restoring abandoned properties; 
• Hastings Opportunity Area education improvement programme; 
• SUCCESS, an EU-funded grants programme for arts and cultural businesses; 
• Two rounds of EU Fisheries Local Action Group funding to help the local fishery; 
• Hastings Town Centre Business Improvement District; 
• The Observer Building, now being restored by Heart of Hastings Community Land Trust. 

Current and future projects

• Redevelopment of White Rock Gardens and land in Bohemia as the ‘Bohemia Quarter’, to provide housing, visitor accommodation, a new arts and leisure centre, and new gardens; 
• Housing development incorporating 40% housing association rented homes on land behind Bexhill Road (the ‘lower tier’ site); 
• A housing and leisure development at West Marina; 
• A new business start-up unit creating 78 jobs at Sidney Little Way; 
• New housing on the former Harrow Lane playing fields; 
• Potential redevelopment of Priory Street car park and the post office sorting office. 

The website posting declared that a review board within East Sussex Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (HOSC) had approved recommendations by Hastings and Rother Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). All that was needed now was “the final backing of NHS England”.

The centre would then stay open seven days a week from 8.00am to 6.30pm, according to Mr Dillon. “In addition, the special needs of patients will be met more fully by bringing on board other care agencies.”

However the CCG have told HIP that these claims are premature. Alex Colbran, their Media and Marketing Manager, pointed out that the HOSC review board isn’t able to approve recommendations by the CCG – that needs to be done by a full HOSC meeting which won’t convene until 26th September. In any event the CCG are yet to finalise their proposals. Their recent consultation “has indicated a need to retain relevant health care services within the town centre, particularly for some of our more vulnerable patients, so a number of options are being explored”. But it was “inaccurate” to suggest that, as a result of a meeting of the review board, HOSC had approved recommendations by the CCG. 

In the meantime, even if a decision to retain the walk-in centre is eventually confirmed,  neutral observers may question whether the political credit claimed by the Labour party is not somewhat synthetic. It is true that Labour stalwart Erica Smith launched a petition with Change.org to challenge the original closure decision, made in March 2018 when the CCG were in “special financial measures” and needing to find £18m savings. But so did Conservative opponent Amber Rudd MP with an i-petition, and it was she who chaired a public meeting last September, with Labour candidate and council leader Peter Chowney in attendance, calling for local residents to “come out and voice their support”.

At that time Mr Chowney commented: “It does seem a little strange that our MP is opposing the closure, when it’s her Conservative government that has forced the CCG to consider this by demanding £18m savings in their budget. While it’s important to fight this closure, the CCG will presumably just have to consider another cut elsewhere, unless the government funds our local healthcare services properly.”

We can no doubt expect more political exchanges of this sort as events at Westminster propel the prospects of an early general election.

The site is owned by SeaSpace, the trading name of ‘regeneration’ company Hastings and Bexhill Renaissance Limited. International estate agency Savills has been entrusted by SeaSpace to gather bids from potential developers. But whether it will attract any positive bids which trump the proposals previously put forward by HoH and its commercial partner Bioregional for the development of more than 70 “sustainable and affordable” self-build houses on the site (see Sore Valley here) remains to be seen. 

Particulars on Savills’ website make it clear that sale will not necessarily be to the highest monetary bidder. Proposals will be considered, according to SeaSpace, “not just on the basis of price but on community benefits – such as the delivery of affordable housing and the creation of local work and training; on the financial strength of the offer; on consideration of a number of site and proposal-specific matters including suitability in planning policy terms and project funding risks; and on deliverability to ensure the scheme selected has the best chance of regenerating the area”.

There is no set asking price; offers may be conditional or unconditional; and at present no deadline date has been fixed. “Exact bid requirements” will be devised by Savills in due course.

The background should be well known in outline to HIP readers. In 2015 Jess Steele and others were promoting an idea for an “organisational workshop” project, designed to develop skills of local people for building community housing. Cllr Peter Chowney, who is a director of SeaSpace as well as leader of Hastings Borough Council (HBC), says that he suggested the Ore Valley site to them as a good place to do it.  This led to the SeaSpace board agreeing to license the site to HBC for an initial period of 18 months, later extended, so that the council could in turn sub-license it on to HoH, a company of which Ms Steele is founder trustee. The purpose, in Cllr Chowney’s words, was for “HoH to take forward their ideas for developing the site”. SeaSpace also offered a potential grant of £700,000 towards development costs, though that sum was later withdrawn in circumstances which have not been explained by either the company or the council. 

HBC commissioned a study from “viability and affordable housing consultants”, Adams Integra. They reported back to the council in February 2018 that a sum in the region of £1.2m would be needed to cover ongoing decontamination costs and other expenditure required for basic infrastructure at the site. Adams Integra concluded that there was no economically viable model for development, whether by HoH or anyone else, without significant public subsidy. 

The story then becomes rather murkier. HoH are insistent that, as a community land trust, they were not only well-placed to bid for grant funding but did indeed receive favourable indications from relevant funding bodies –  provided that they could demonstrate ownership of the land. Cllr Chowney agrees that this is the case. But he says that at that point “the SeaSpace board decided not to extend the licence further, and to market the site”. HoH were required to vacate for this purpose. They protested, arguing that SeaSpace should have accepted their credentials along with Bioregional as appropriate community developers; or, even if SeaSpace were under some formal duty to test the market for alternative bidders, they could do so without putting an end to HoH’s occupation. Cllr Chowney and another director of SeaSpace, Steve Manwaring, who as director of Hastings Voluntary Action represents the town’s volunteer community on the company board, say that they both argued that HoH should be allowed to remain on the site while it was marketed, but that they were overruled by a majority of the board. HoH duly departed before the end of April. 

Cllr Chowney and Mr Manwaring both insist that they cannot argue specifically in favour of HoH’s bid, or “campaign” for them. If they did, “that would exclude us from participating in the decision on the disposal of the site, because we’d have a prejudicial interest as a supporter of one of the bids. So both of us have insisted that a fair process has to be established, in which HoH are allowed to present their ideas to the SeaSpace board before any decision is made”.

A neutral observer might well conclude that the criteria for assessment established by the SeaSpace board are in fact, with whatever motive there may be, tipped in favour of HoH. What other bidders are likely to come forward who will not only deliver affordable housing but also create equivalent local work and training? On the other hand, why do Cllr Chowney and Mr Manwaring regard themselves as barred from applying their knowledge of, and contacts with, the local Hastings community – attributes which you might think they had been appointed to the SeaSpace board to deploy. And why have Savills, hardly the most inexpensive of agents, been hired to marshall the process? One might invert Polonius’ remark: “if this be method, there’s madness in’t”. 

On June 24th over 70 members of the public packed into Hastings District Council chamber to hear the leader, Peter Chowney, answer questions on the future rollout of a 5G phone network.

Written queries had already been tabled and answered, this forum was to allow their authors to ask supplementary questions.

When asked by Barbara Lowe if HBC had any 5G strategy, Councillor Chowney answered that they did not. Lowe referred to a letter she had received from Amber Rudd stating UK government’s intention ‘to be a world leader in 5G and to ensure that the majority of the population have access to a 5G signal by 2027.’

In reference to an earlier FOI request concerning 5G and LED street lighting Chowney said that street lighting was dealt with by ESCC. Liz Bygrave said her local councillor had informed her that in the event of a 5G roll out using lampposts, there would need to be a planning application. This would be a public document and HBC would be asked for their comments.

Many of those attending the meeting were members of the group ‘5G Free Hastings’ founded by Liz Bygrave who became involved in raising awareness of 5G technologies in February this year. She began working under the umbrella of a national group and then in May founded 5G Free Hastings to provide a local forum for discussion and action. The group is ‘committed to raising awareness and taking action around the health, environmental and privacy issues to do with the 5G rollout, smart technology and the Internet of Things (as well as microwave radiation in general).’

In a written question local organic farmer Joel Brook asked if the Council, when considering any 5G strategy, would take into account: 

• Current global opposition to a 5G rollout and appeals by scientists and doctors made to the UN, EU and WHO citing peer-reviewed science on the biological and health effects of microwave radiation. 

• Glastonbury and Frome councils in the UK have put a moratorium on 5G developments, as have various European and US municipalities. 

• The substantial body of scientific research showing biological harm to both humans and the wider environment from existing levels of microwave radiation even at very low levels of exposure.

Councillor Chowney replied that HBC might consider developing a 5G strategy if 5G were to be rolled out locally. This would include potential health impacts. He commented “some parts of Hastings have no phone signal at all, and 4G is somewhat limited. Local residents and businesses views would also be taken into consideration as part of the consultation process.”

Emily McMorran wanted to know whether HBC would be looking for evidence of independent research into health and environmental effects of non-thermal, [non-ionising] microwave radiation of 5G technology combined with existing exposures.

Chowney replied that Planning has to comply with local and national policy. Current regulations state ‘if a proposed installation meets the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection [ICNIRP] guidelines for public exposure then it will not be necessary to consider further health aspects and concerns.’

Planning permission for placement of ‘small cell’ 5G antennas is covered by ‘permitted development’ legislation at a national level, leaving local authorities with little power to refuse any application.

Councillor Chowney did however express concern that the research relied upon by governments is generally coming from industry rather than independent sources. And that many technologies we have relied upon have turned out to be unsafe. He referred to the agricultural chemical glyphosate, now being banned around the world. 

John Briggs referred to the issue of electro-hypersensitivity, which according to EM Radiation Research Trust UK affects up to 8% of the population. The European Parliament Resolution of 2009 called upon member states to recognise EHS as a disability. And the EU Council of Europe has advised member states to provide ‘white zones’ [areas free of microwave radiation.] Given the likelihood that 5G would increase microwave radiation exposure had HBC considered making provision of white zones to help mitigate effects on local people? Briggs also referred to actions around the world to reduce children’s exposure to Wi-Fi in schools and concerns that children may absorb far more radiation than adults. Was HBC considering the problem?

Chowney replied that the policy team were not aware of any plans for white zones. EU or international requirements would need to be part of UK legislation before the council could implement them. Local schools now have varying policies on wireless networks. The councillor’s influence only extended to Sandown Primary where he is a governor.

During the course of the meeting several councillors were heard commenting to the effect that council meetings had never been so well attended.

Past flooding on Lower Tier, Bexhill Road
PICTURE: David Dennis

This land was originally set to be part of a larger programme for the construction by Keepmoat Homes of 400 residential units alongside a new “sports village” at Combe Valley. Keepmoat pulled out of this project last year, but HBC had by that stage applied for a grant from the government agency Homes England (HE) to fund a flood remediation scheme for the area. As it became apparent that a grant of almost £7m would be forthcoming under HE’s Local Authority Accelerated Construction, HBC has taken the opportunity to pursue this part of the development itself – or rather as a joint venture with a locally operating housing association, probably Optivo.

According to Council leader Peter Chowney, the aim will be to sign up construction contracts within the next twelve months. Stage 1, the flood remediation works, is required under the grant terms to be carried out by March 2021. Stage 2, the construction, is estimated to cost around £27m over the following two years. HBC as a 50% stakeholder will need to raise over £11m from capital borrowing, repayable as completed homes are sold off; the balance of its contribution will be as landowner, with the building plot ascribed a current value of £4.45m. 

It is intended that 40% of the homes to be constructed will be classed as ‘affordable’, defined as bearing 80% or less of market rents. In this case the housing association homes would be at or below the local housing allowance, which means housing benefit would always cover the rent. In addition, the current budgetary calculations forecast an overall profit of £8m. If that is achieved, HBC would, according to Cllr Chowney, apply at least a proportion of its 50% share to buy back some of the homes into a housing company formed by the council for letting purposes. This company will not be subject to the ‘right to buy’ legislation. 

Cllr Andy Batsford, HBC’s portfolio holder for Housing, Leisure and Community Engagement, is enthused by the proposals, which include provision for sports, leisure and play facilities. “We hope the site will act as an exemplar for local development and maximise social value.”

However, there is plenty of local opposition too. In cabinet the Conservative members voted against the proposals. Local ward councillor Karl Beaney complained of the loss of green space and additional traffic influx; lead Tory member Cllr Rob Lee argued that the local infrastructure was wholly inadequate for this level of development. 

More fundamental objections are being raised by environmental campaigners – see the objections set out in our article here.

Cllr Chowney had not seen these objections prior to our publication, but commented: “At the moment, the area is mown grassland, which has low ecological value and not much biodiversity. Domestic gardens are far more biodiverse – one study recently showed UK domestic gardens to be amongst the most biodiverse ecosystems on the planet. There are some species that like mown grass, but there’s lots more mown grass in the sports pitches adjacent to the site. The flood mitigation ponds and wetlands will also create new habitats and add to biodiversity.”

He told his cabinet: “Almost all the sites we will be putting forward for development are going to be controversial, but we have to do that in order to meet the housing numbers that are going to be required.”

Hastings Borough Council has called for an end to legislation which could see a developer convert a seven-storey office block in St Leonards into ‘slum’ housing – without planning permission.

Telereal Prime Property Group – a subsidiary of Telereal Trillium which owns the building -has already been granted prior change of use consent to turn Ashdown House on Sedlescombe Road North into 246 studio, one and two bedroom flats.

The permission was given without the council’s consent under legislation introduced by former Tory Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles in 2015.

The legislation provides that certain building works and changes of use can be carried out without having to apply for planning permission from the council.

However, HBC says it is horrified that the government policy is “being used to drive a coach and horses through the housing policy.”

Permitted Development Rights (PDRs) have produced some of the most poorly developed housing in the country which falls well below the normal planning and building standards required. Plans submitted by Telereal show that no changes will be made to the appearance of the office block, which currently houses the Department for Work and Pensions, set to relocate shortly to Lacuna House in Havelock Road.

Council leader Peter Chowney said the legislation has had catastrophic consequences in other towns and cities, creating slum housing. 

 “Despite repeated demands from local government to scrap this policy, the Government has refused to get rid of it and continues to allow poor quality conversions to take place, with councils unable to prevent it or have any say in it.”

“We are very concerned that this could happen to Ashdown House.”  

The council is now looking into ways of challenging the legislation and says it is urging current owners, and any future owners to consult with them about how a proper redevelopment of the site could take place to create good quality, energy efficient and affordable homes, with the proper local scrutiny that a full application would bring.

“The last thing we need in Hastings is a shoddy conversion to create poor quality housing of the kind we’ve seen elsewhere where permitted development rights have been used to create housing conversions without going through the planning process.” said Mr Chowney.

Trillium, now Telereal Trillium, was established in 1997 to acquire and manage the 16,663 square metre Department for Work and Pensions estate. In 2000 it was bought by Land Securities, becoming Land Securities Trillium before being acquired by Telereal in 2009.

Crowds of around 10,000 are expected at the 14th annual St Leonards Festival this Saturday 29 June. The festival, starting at noon and finishing at 10 pm, centres on Warrior Square Gardens with community stalls, storytelling, food, activities and live entertainment. There’s also a street market on Kings Road.

The festival will kick off with a welcome from Hastings Mayor, Nigel Sinden, and Council Leader, Peter Chowney: a live Zumba session then really gets the crowd warmed up. There then follow performances from Buzz Performing Arts, Silver Swans, Enoch the Partyman, Gizmo Kids, Oksana and the Midnight Cats, the Boathouse Signing Choir and the Bangladeshi Community. A ‘Colours of St Leonards’ parade along the seafront at 3pm includes local drumming and community groups. It culminates in a drumming circle in Warrior Square. 

The festival headline band, Kissmet, a Bhangra-rock fusion, round off the afternoon entertainment at 5 pm. The band – supported by Eat Global – is playing St Leonards Festival on their way to perform at Glastonbury later the same day. 

“Kissmet are an amazing band,” says Mandy Curtis of local events company, 18 Hours, the festival organisers. “Their infectious energy, gusto and sheer talent have audiences bouncing around with huge smiles on their faces.”

Live storytelling takes place throughout the afternoon in the children’s Storytelling Marquee, sponsored by Hastings Storytelling Festival. Performers include Spud & Yam (Irish/Caribbean storytelling), Richard Storybeard and Anusha Subramanium.

At 4 pm opera singer Thomasin Trezise takes to the stage, before Kissmet’s headline session. Following a short break, it’s time for new young talent to shine, with Incubate musicians from Eggtooth, including Commercial Edge Dance, Elisha Edwards, Purely Grey and Benva Doll.

As the sun begins to set around 9.15pm, Warrior Gardens become the magical setting for Ghost Caribou by Thingumajig Theatre. Giant illuminated Caribou puppets will be welcomed to the gardens by a specially commissioned score composed by Juliet Russell and performed by singers from the Vocal Explosion Massive.

A light show in Bottle Alley brings the day to an end at 10.15pm.

When the historic landmark was refurbished with £14 million of public, Heritage Lottery and shareholders money, it seemed to mark a triumph of community – led regeneration. But after former owners, Hastings Pier Charity fell into administration in November 2017, it was placed on the market by administrators Smith & Williamson. Despite a community bid from Friends of Hastings Pier who wanted to keep it in public ownership, and a private bid proposing a £10 million investment from Roger Wade of Boxpark, it was sold to Eastbourne pier owner Sheikh Abid Gulzar on 15th June last year for £60,000. 

Following the sale S&W said that out of the bids received Mr Gulzar had demonstrated the best immediate financial capability as well as the operational capacity and experience to help the pier move forward, stating:

“It is anticipated that significant cash for working capital and investment purposes, amounting to over a million pounds, would be required to make the pier sustainable.”

Twelve months on, the heritage asset which won the prestigious architectural RIBA Stirling prize, shows little sign of receiving any of that £1 million investment. No long term plan has been published, it was closed to the public for over three months during the Christmas and winter period and its full time engineering team are suing for constructive dismissal. Temporary “log cabins” (effectively garden sheds), were given planning permission by HBC in March, but have yet to be built. Its £1.5 million Visitor Centre, funded by HLF for educational purposes, has been granted change of use by HBC to become an amusement arcade with slot machines but so far these have not been installed.

Following the sale last summer Mr. Gulzar told HIP the pier would be open 365 days a year and that long term plans would involve reinstating the other pavilion building destroyed by fire in 2010. He said in the short term he planned to build an ice cream kiosk as well as various other outlets selling souvenirs and other merchandise. The kiosk did materialise fairly quickly, and has since been granted retrospective planning permission but is currently only open sporadically.

When asked again by HIP this week about his future plans he responded: 

“It’s none of your business. The pier belongs to me, it doesn’t belong to the people…er, it belongs to me. It’s in my ownership and I will look after it to the best of my ability.”

Meanwhile Community Group Friends of Hastings Pier, who agreed at a public meeting directly after the sale to act as a watchdog on behalf of the community and try to build a positive working relationship with Mr Gulzar, said that so far, their aims had met with mixed success: 

“It is particularly disappointing that we have not been able to obtain any indication from him of what his long term plans for the Pier are.”

“The most remarkable thing about the first year of the Pier’s new ownership is that very little has really happened, other than the sad three -month closure.”

There has been very little sign of the kind of long-term investment that the administrators, Smith & Williamson, said they had found in Mr Gulzar.”

The group has been in touch with Council leader Peter Chowney to ask him to look into holding an annual safety maintenance review of the infrastructure.

“It is vitally important that the Pier should be properly maintained for the future. We very much hope that the Pier owner will agree to co-operate with this suggestion.”

At a meeting of the Hastings and St Leonards Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) held at the chambers of Hastings Borough Council on Monday, Director of Regeneration, Simon Hubbard, gave a presentation of the council’s latest bid for national funding: £25 million from the Future High Streets Fund for redevelopment of the town centre. 

This Fund was launched by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government in December 2018 with a promised pot of £675 million to be spread across the country as part of its Plan for the High Street to “help local leaders implement bold new visions to transform their town centres and make them fit for the future”. Mr Hubbard told councillors and other members of the LSP that there is a two stage process of bidding –  a first phase under which bids were submitted in principle, followed by detailed submissions in the spring of 2020 for those which have been favourably received. Selection of these will be notified this summer.

Applying elementary maths, the value of the Hastings bid can be calculated as amounting to a 27th of the entire sum on offer. However, with all first stage bids in, High Streets Minister Jake Berry MP revealed last month that there are more than 300  of them – which suggests that either the chances of success for Hastings are less than one in ten, or else that funds will be eventually awarded in far smaller packages than originally envisaged.

Mr Hubbard was, nevertheless, upbeat in his assessment of prospects. A proportion of the full pot –  £55 million – is specifically earmarked to support the regeneration of “heritage” high streets. Bids “will help to restore historic high street properties for new work spaces or cultural venues” according to the Ministry. He described the current Hastings town centre as combining old and new buildings but with a pivotal place in history that should be taken advantage of for purposes of development of both tourism and education.

In comparison with many other town centres, Hastings “has done really well” over the last decade, he went on to argue. It maintains three distinct centres  – the Old Town, the new town and Central St Leonards. While the bid would necessarily concentrate on the new town, it would aim at increasing connectivity between the three. Already, despite being a “poor town” and “without resources”, there are lower rates of retail vacancies than average. Office space was almost fully taken. Any decrease of footfall of local residents in the centre has been more than compensated by the increase in visitors.

Loss of the university, with the forthcoming sale of its buildings in the Priory Quarter and on Havelock Road, had been disappointing but now presented opportunities. “We need to plan and improve, otherwise the risk is that we will go backwards” .

In discussion Peter Chowney, leader of the council, expressed concern that the national Fund would target “failing” town centres. That didn’t really fit Hastings: in the last quarter, due in part to the arrival of Primark, footfall was actually up. 

More generally, while supporting the bid and hoping that it would be successful, he queried the short term and competitive nature of the bidding system. “It’s a process which forces the poorest and most deprived areas to compete for scraps from the rich man’s table”, he said. The Future High Streets Fund was the latest in a long history of this kind of funding. On the other hand the recently published House of Lords report on the economies of seaside towns had concluded that the real need was for an overall long term strategy. 

Mr Hubbard responded that “come what may  – we may get the funding or not – we still have to develop a vision that reflects the town’s needs. We’re climbing a hill. But we are climbing”.

“What does democracy look like? This is what democracy looks like!” So went one of the vocal and impassioned chants at Hastings’ second Youth Strike for Climate last Friday, 15th March. Around 180 people gathered in the town centre to join their voices with protestors around the world demanding action on climate change.

Despite the gloomy weather, local young people showed up in force to voice their well-informed anger at government inaction on the climate crisis we are now facing. Creative and inventive home-made banners shouted their messages for all to see: The Seas are Rising: So are We; Pollution Causes Revolution; Our Future in Your Hands; Schools Have to Be Parliaments If Parliament is a School Yard; Fight For Our Future; I Speak for the Trees; I’m Missing History Today So We Can Make A Future; Be Part of the Solution Not Part of the Pollution.

Protestors varied in age from six months up to 18 years. Connie Fox, aged six, said “This is a special day. I am with my friends, celebrating the world, it’s kind of like a party.” Young people were joined by adults showing support for their message. One mother, Hannah, explained “I am here to support my kids to take action. I was inspired by the energy of so many young people.”

A fantastic show of community, the Youth Strike was attended by pupils from primary and secondary schools across Hastings, Rye, Bexhill, Battle and St Leonards, as well as many home-educated youngsters. Local politicians including Peter Chowney (Labour) and Julia Hilton (Green Party) lent their support by attending and listening to strikers. An exuberant carnival atmosphere was created by the young protestors, and their message was enthusiastically received by passers-by. Jacqui Hyett, aged 70, commented: “I have been surprised at the amount of support the parade is receiving – people came out of the shops to watch and encourage. It is the children’s future. It’s their day now. I want to see politicians harnessing their positive energy and backing them.”

One of the strikers, Raven, aged 13, explained his participation: “About ten of us had to sign a leaflet for my headteacher, Mr Vice, at Robertsbridge, to let him know we were going out on strike. He supported us. I am here because I believe climate change has to be acted upon now; if it isn’t, it will be too late, and it will ruin the world for my, and future, generations. We are drumming, with my dad leading, as it is a great way to motivate the marchers and keep us together as one. The only thing we could do to improve this is to have more people – and, to do that, everyone here needs to bring more friends on the next march.”

Youth Strike 4 Climate UK have announced that the third national protest will be on Friday 12th April, so you can join the rising tide of young people demanding action in Hastings then. 

• Find out more on social media #fridaysforfuture or www.ukscn.org

ALL PICTURES: Agata Read  agataread.com