Somerset this week: 16 May 2025
This week: the real story behind the closure of Yeovil's paediatric services, Glastonbury's Life Factory on hold, more on Somerset Council's arrears, and Black Swan hit their target.
Dear readers
Today’s issue of Somerset Confidential is free to everyone. Please subscribe to get your free weekly news summary. There’s no need to leave credit card details, just sign up and we’ll do the rest. You can do that here - just select “None” and you’ll be in.
But if you can help support us in what we do, please consider a paid subscription. News is not free.
Whether it is supported by advertising or the BBC license fee, journalists have to be paid if you want decent news coverage. Individual posts of opinions on social media are not news, nor are they verified or peer reviewed.
A paid subscription costs just £30 or 58p a week. For that we’ll give you all this:
at least 48 exclusive paid subscriber only stories a year
access to our full back catalogue
the chance to comment on our stories
the pleasure of supporting Somerset’s most innovative independent journalism
You can subscribe here:
Thank you
Andrew Lee - editor
A week is a long time in … the NHS
On 6 May the board of NHS Somerset Foundation trust, the board responsible for running Yeovil and Musgrove Hospitals amongst other things, discussed the latest CQC Inspection at Yeovil District Hospital.
Things were so bad in acute paediatrics that the inspectors issued an s29 Warning Notice.
The mood at the board meeting appeared to be one of complacency. They were told that the Notice highlighted issues that they were already aware of before the inspection and had been working to address.
The board noted they had three months to address the concerns and evidence significant improvement in the service.
No problem, then?
Notwithstanding that this comes just over a year since Maternity Services at Yeovil were graded Inadequate (along with those at Musgrove).
Lessons may or may not be being learned, but another serious report barely a year after the last one does not give the impression of things being under control.
A new Safety Champion Board would convene with most senior clinical leads in midwifery, neonate & obstetrics and anaesthetics involved. A board level safety champion was appointed: Hayley Peters supported by non-executive directors, Inga Kennedy and Alex Priest.
You might be wondering why, if the issues were all known about and the board were working to address them, they had resulted in an s29 Warning Notice at all?
But just a week later a very different story was being told.
On 13 May a press release from the very same Somerset Foundation NHS Trust, was blunt and to the point: “Concerns about the safety of the care for babies and children at YDH mean that the trust cannot currently safely run the Special Care Baby Unit and safely provide care during labour and birth at the Yeovil Maternity Unit.”
Dr Melanie Iles, Chief Medical Officer for the trust, added: “These temporary closures have come about as a result of concerns about our care for babies and children at YDH. The Care Quality Commission inspected our paediatric services in January and issued a Section 29A warning notice because it assessed that the paediatric care we provide at YDH requires significant improvement. We also currently have high levels of sickness amongst senior paediatricians which has caused big gaps in our rota.”
No mention of the Safety Champion Board, or the issues being known about and already being addressed. Just closure of the unit and a lot of noise about support from Musgrove Hospital.
And a very direct message to the public that: “we cannot care for any newborns who require care in a Special Care Baby Unit or safely provide care during labour and birth at the Yeovil Maternity Unit.”
The decision and the shock at the findings of the CQC have both caused emotions to run high in and around Yeovil. Annie Tombs, the maternity campaigner from Chard told us: “Frankly, I do not think the NHS is being transparent with the public. No-one has been able to reassure me that the Yeovil unit will reopen within 6 months. Personally, I don’t believe we’ll see Yeovil Maternity Unit reopen at all but I genuinely hope I’m wrong.
I had my son Eli at Yeovil nearly four years ago. While my experience wasn’t perfect, I do not underestimate or blame the hardworking staff who show up every day under increasingly impossible conditions.
The Chief Medical Officer told me that Musgrove Park Hospital is safe. I beg to differ. Having spent a day of deep and difficult discussions about the current pressures on services at Taunton, it’s incredibly worrying to think about how the system will cope with even more strain.”
And there in lies the big question. Closing Yeovil is one thing, but how will staff already under pressure at Musgrove cope when they suddenly have to handle a new cohort of patients from Yeovil?
Annie Tombs continues: “Since the news broke, I’ve had a huge outpouring of messages from mothers — anxious, confused, and heartbroken. I will continue to support families to speak to their midwives, understand their birth rights, and advocate for themselves and their babies.”
Local MP Adam Dance clearly shared some of those concerns and started a petition demanding: “a clear and public timeline for the reopening of the maternity unit at Yeovil District Hospital.” He also raised the matter at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday 14 May, demanding the Government seek to intervene in this decision.
Also on Wednesday (the day after the announcement) Councillor Graham Oakes, Lead Member for Public Health, Climate Change and Environment at Somerset Council observed: “Safety must come first, and we understand why Somerset NHS Foundation Trust has taken these actions. However, safe, local healthcare services are vital for our communities, and we are concerned about the impact of this closure on women, children and families in Yeovil and the surrounding areas.”
Meanwhile the following are changes to services from 5pm on Monday 19 May that will affect pregnant women, birthing people and newborn babies:
· The care of pregnant women and birthing people will be transferred to give birth at Musgrove Park Hospital or the maternity units at Dorchester or Bath.
· The trust is working with the Somerset Maternity and Neonatal Voices Partnership and neighbouring NHS trusts to ensure pregnant women and newborn babies have access to the care they need.
· Please speak to your midwife or the Somerset Maternity and Neonatal Voices
Partnership if you have questions or concerns.
· NHS Somerset have set up a helpline to answer queries or questions. Please call: 0300 303 6409.
Unplanned expansion?
Local residents in the parish of Compton Pauncefoot and Blackford Parish Council are up in arms that a series of developments have taken place at a local property without planning permission. Complaints shared with Somerset Confidential® suggest that a house, golf course, manège and stables has been built at Manor Farm House in Blackford without planning permission.
It all sounds a bit “one rule for us, a different rule for others”, but is it actually true?
And if all these additions have been made without planning permission, why is Somerset Council not using Planning Enforcement to take action?
We approached the Council for a comment. They told us that enforcement action was being taken and had actually started back in July 2024. Whilst it may look as if nothing is being done, the Council say that when breaches are identified they try and proceed with the co-operation of the owner before taking more strident action.
A spokesperson for Somerset Council told us: “There is a live enforcement case for this address and a planning application has been received for part of the works that have been undertaken. The Council is expecting a further application this month for the remaining elements of the site. These will be subject to consultation. We are continuing to keep the site under investigation and any actions we need to undertake will be reviewed if either further applications are not provided or in the event that the applications are refused.”
One retrospective application has been received that covers the following: “The erection of stables and tack room, formation of manège, change of use of land from agricultural to equestrian, alterations to existing access and other associated works.”
The retrospective planning application is in the name of a Mr and Mrs Chaney. Somerset Confidential® understands that this is Victoria Chaney, listed as Company Secretary to Kent based company blu-3, and Danny Chaney, one of five directors of the same company according to filings at Companies House.
The retrospective planning that has been received has already drawn a lot of comment. However a second retrospective application is expected and Somerset Council have confirmed in writing that: “if this is not provided by 16th May further Enforcement Action will be pursued.”
Of the comments received to date on the retrospective application, some 31 out of 49 have been objections, (the other 18 being supporters) led by Compton Pauncefoot and Blackford Parish Council. After listing a number of substantive concerns about allowing a retrospective application, not least the poor precedent it sets, they also go on to observe that it is: “surprised at the level of supportive comment for the initial version of this application that originates from non-Parish residents/individuals not on the Parish Electoral Roll.”
That was sufficiently unusual to prompt us to take a look ourselves. Of the 18 objections listed some are, if not within the parish, certainly within the county of Somerset. However, unusually, nine of them (so half) are from the other side of the country and eight are from the county of Kent.
Now we should state up front that there is nothing illegal in that. Anyone resident in the UK is entitled to comment on a planning application. It is simply highly unusual to get so many comments from so far away.
Interestingly eight of the supporting statements were received from individuals who gave addresses that were within a 20 mile radius of Aylesford, Kent.
Aylesford is the home of the headquarters of blu-3.
Meanwhile the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) investigation into blu-3 that we reported on last week continues. The SFO are investigating allegations that individuals at blu-3 may have paid over “£3 million of bribes to former associates of Mace Group in relation to the construction of a data centre in the Netherlands for the technology giant Microsoft.”
Three arrests have been made and five properties searched but as we went to press the SFO had not confirmed either the addresses raided, the names of those arrested nor the status of their investigation.
We contacted blu-3 to ask for further details. They issued us with a statement that simply says: “blu-3 is currently supporting an external SFO investigation and is fully cooperating with the agency. We take matters of this nature extremely seriously and are committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and ethical conduct across all of our operations.”
Somerset Council answer
Two weeks ago we reported on the case of a Judicial Review that had been given leave to proceed challenging the grant of planning permission for a development in Henstridge (you can read the piece here: Judicial Review?).
In essence, the Judicial Review is into a Lawful Development Certificate issued after the developer started work before, according to a number of villagers, meeting some of the preconditions of the planning application.
We contacted Somerset Council at the time asking for their view on the granting of Judicial Review and whether or not they would be defending the case. At the time they did not respond to our request for comment.
We have now received their comments. Their spokesperson clarified the position as Somerset Council see it, as follows: “The conditions on the planning applications have been discharged and the work commenced on the application for 130 dwellings. The applicant then submitted an application called a Lawful Development Certificate which sought to confirm that the development had been ‘commenced’ within the required time frame. The Council agreed that the development was lawful but issued the decision notice on the Lawful Development Certificate with erroneous text on the document. The decision was taken down and re-published with the correction but this is an error in law. The Council is not permitted to re-issue a decision notice once it has been issued.”
So would Somerset Council be party to the Judicial Review? Apparently not. They told us: “The Council is not looking to defend the JR as there was an issue in the publication of the original decision notice.”
Town Deal Project canned
The blurb was full of promise. One of ten projects in the £23.6m Glastonbury Town Deal, the Life Factory was to fill an unused building at the Red Brick Building Centre. It was we were told, to become the new creative heart of Glastonbury and provide a vibrant community space where artists, musicians, actors, makers and other local people can meet, eat, learn, collaborate, inspire and thrive.
There would be a zone for music and performance arts. The local community radio station GWS FM will relocate into the new Community Media Centre and the state-of-the-art broadcast facilities will provide opportunities for training and creativity.
All that is now in doubt.
Following concerns raised about the financial control within the project, Somerset Council (which acts as banker to the town deal) intervened. It was unable to reconcile invoices included in the grant claims for the Life Factory project to the actual spend and apparent progress of the project. At the time it was paused, £2.89m had been spent on the Life Factory.
In the spring of 2024 Somerset Council called in the internal audit firm SWAP to review the project.
The review has taken over a year to complete and that in itself speaks volumes. The promised report which is to be discussed at next week’s Audit Committee meeting of Somerset Council was still missing from the agenda as we went to press.
However a statement from Somerset Council revealed that: “the project cannot be successfully delivered in line with the Grant Funding Agreement and it is not clear that the project can be completed at all.”
Somerset Council was itself criticised in the SWAP report according to Chief Executive Duncan Sharkey: “we accept the findings that our level of oversight and monitoring of this project could have been strengthened.”
The pausing of the project has caused considerable local hardship with many contractors who had completed work or procured suppliers, unable to get their invoices paid. The April meeting of Glastonbury Town Council was told: “The longer this drags on, the deeper the damage to the project, to our partners and to our community."
Meanwhile a spokesperson for the project observed: "It's deeply distressing to see this project turned into a political football. While we've remained silent out of respect for the due process, it's painful to see our work misrepresented."
the council are also considering demanding a repayment of the funds
However the situation could now get worse. Whilst stating clearly that Somerset Council will not release further funds to the Life Factory project, the council are also considering demanding a repayment of the funds that have already been spent. Which leads to the question: “from whom?”
Contractors who provided services in good faith cannot be held liable to repay the money. Which leaves only the board of the Red Brick Building or the Glastonbury Town Deal Board. Neither are likely to be in a position to have £2.89m lying around to repay the council.
Filling the funding gap
As we’ve reported quite a bit of late, Somerset Council face a funding gap of £100m for the financial year 2026/27. For now the council seem to be out of ideas as to how to plug that gap.
One solution might be to simply collect the money they are owed. We have reported previously on the amount of council tax arrears the council inherited from the four District Councils that merged with county to form Somerset Council on 1 April 2023.
The number on 1 April 2023 was £43.1m.
Yes, you spotted it. That is indeed nearly half the money that the council needs to plug the apparently insurmountable funding gap for 2026/27.
At any one point, the amount the council is owed may be in arrears, but it is all collectable funds. Any amounts relating to addresses claiming council tax relief would be written off and not appear in the arrears figure.
These write-offs are not small sums of money either. Somerset West & Taunton had written off £3.3m in the four years of its existence; South Somerset District Council wrote off over £8m between 1993 and 2023; Mendip District Council wrote off £4.5m in the same period. We have failed to obtain figures for Sedgemoor District Council despite frequent Freedom of Information requests.
Returning to the arrears figures, as of 1 April 2025 the amount of council tax arrears was £46.7m, not dissimilar to the level in 2023.
The curious thing though, and this should be of interest to all the taxpayers of Somerset, is that of that £46.7m, half of it, some £23.1m related to the period prior to 1 April 2023. In other words it is more than two years old.
You have to ask yourself what sort of commercial business would tolerate having a debtors ledger where half of the debt was over two years old?
Why are Somerset Council not making more strident efforts to collect that which is owing to them? If they did so, they would be able at a stroke to cut their funding gap. You can only pull that trick off once, but simply improving and enforcing collection (and then maintaining the same degree of rigour into the future) could be worth £23m to the council as a one-off gain.
The amount of council tax billable by Somerset Council was £360.8m for 2024/25, making the council’s arrears at the end of March 2025 equivalent to 13% of council tax billed.
Of course neither Bath & North East Somerset nor North Somerset find themselves in the same financial pickle as Somerset Council. But even so it is worth comparing how they perform with their own collection efforts.
North Somerset reported council tax arrears of £17.7m at the end of March 2025. That was based on total council tax billable of £179m. Which is equivalent to 9.8% in arrears.
Bath & North East Somerset had just £7.9m in arrears at the end of March 2025 having billed residents for total council tax for 2024/25 of £120.3m.
In other words, they had just 6.6% arrears.
Say that Somerset Council were to improve its collections simply to the same level of efficiency as Bath & North East Somerset. In other words they were to get arrears down to 6.6% of the billed council tax of £360.8m.
which would bring in an extra £22.9m in cashflow
That would leave council tax arrears of just £23.8m. Which would bring in an extra £22.9m in cashflow (ie £46.7m less £23.8m). Not by doing anything special. Just by being as efficient as a neighbouring council.
Which is interesting, being a number not too far removed from the amount the council has failed to collect that is now more than two years old!
Black Arts
Finally, some good news to wrap up with. Black Swan Arts in Frome is looking forward to celebrating its 40th anniversary in 2026. Black Swan is a gallery in the centre of Frome that provide frequent excellent exhibitions most of which are free to the public. They also host a shop, studios, workshop space and an excellent café, as well as running competitions in the arts too.
They have an exciting programme of free events planned for their special year. This will include their usual fare of Open Exhibitions and gallery programmes which offer opportunities for artists at all stages of their practice to showcase their work to audiences.
But there’s a bit of a black cloud on the horizon. Following large hikes in their energy bills and maintenance costs, the very existence of the centre has been threatened.
In response they set up a JustGiving page in an attempt to crowdfund £10,000 to keep them fighting fit.
The public have responded generously and when we last checked they had raised an impressive £11,025.
Not just a lifeline but a vote of confidence in the pleasure they have given to the local community (and beyond) over the years.
If you enjoyed this article please share our website link so others can read it too:
Why not gift a subscription as a present for a friend or family member? You can do that here:
Somerset Confidential® is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
In theory, Council Tax should be one of the easiest debts to recover. The person responsible is known, their address is known, the debt is simple to prove in court and, if if it remains unpaid after court action, a charge can be imposed on the property or an order obtained for amounts to be deducted from income, as appropriate. Yet, once again, our councils have demonstrated their incompetence and lethargy in failing to follow these simple procedures to protect public money.
Re the piece on Yeovil Hospital maternity care. What do you mean by a "birthing person"? Do you mean a woman giving birth or a birthing partner such as her husband supporting her?