News

Badger and the new motto

Published

9 years ago

March 4, 2015

badger knows best THIS WEEK, Badger wants to invite you to Join him on a journey through one of the most famous sayings in English: Namely that if you provided an infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of typewriters (or, in these go-getting times, so-called ‘laptop’ computing devices), and an infinite amount of time then one of them would eventually come up with the works of Shakespeare. Or perhaps Frederick Forsyth. Badger forgets. Badger has written before about the County Council’s European Manager, Gwyn Evans. Mr Evans has a string of letters after his name which suggests that, whatever his failings in putting in place adequate guidance for the proper operation of a multi-million pounds grant scheme, he could re-arrange his qualifications into a formidable score at Scrabble. Hiding behind a cloud of verbiage and ink is, perhaps, an appropriate image for the Council’s own ‘Captain Euro.’ The kudos afforded to the ‘highly qualified’ European Team at Pembrokeshire County Council at a time when this week’s Audit Committee revealed that so convinced of their own expertise were its members that the basic stuff of doing their job passed them by. Having ticked the right box they were able to say everything was okay with its administration of millions of pounds of public money. Except it wasn’t. Bearing in mind the extent to which the report has been filleted at the desperate behest of County Council officers desperate to cling to their jobs and their pensions, what remains is striking enough. Imagine, readers, imagine what the unexpurgated version would have looked like had it been prepared by an independent assessor instead of the Council’s own officers. Assuming, of course, that an

independent assessor had been given access to the documents as they existed at the time they were created and not as subsequently ‘amended.’ Gwyn Evans knows all about ‘amending’ things to make the record look better. Remember, readers, Gwyn is the notorious ‘minutes-meddler,’ whose identification in this newspaper caused Bryn to summon senior officers, senior councilors and the former Audit Chair John Evans MBE and tell them he had ‘vays of making zem tok.’ However many changes an: made, readers, no number of weasel words can hide the fact that the procedural guide used to administer grants was — well, readers, Badger apologises for the crudity — crap. It did not provide adequate safeguards to ensure that scarce public funds were being spent as they were supposed to be spent. Or, perhaps, it was not the manual which was crap, just those charged with using it. In either circumstance, Gwyn might well look grim. As Badger’s dear old friend Grumpy has revealed — Grim Gwyn knew everything about the original grant manual. He was an authority on it. He told Grumpy that he knew he was an authority on it as he wrote it. It’s an interesting dilemma: Either Gwyn’s manual was useless and needed amending, or the manual was adequate but his fellow officers believed that be and it could be safely ignored. In his shoes, readers, would you rather your work was useless or that your co-workers thought it valueless? On the face of the Internal Audit Report, readers, all those letters, wit and skill managed to miss out pretty obvious steps, like requiring officers junior to him to establish that work for which payment was made had actually been done. And, readers, in case you

are dubious that such a highly expert and qualified individual could be that daft, here is what the Internal Audit Report actually says what should be in the revised manual it proposes: Detailed photographic evidence of all proposed grant funded work (internal and external) should be captured and retained prior to work commencing, at each site visit and on completion of works; The frequency of site visits should be stipulated and the exact checks undertaken should be clarified (i.e. cross-referenced to the specification and signed off as satisfactorily completed); Payment should only be made when the authorising officer is satisfied that the checks have been undertaken to verify the completion of work and evidence of defrayment has been obtained: Checks should be undertaken to verify the authenticity of infonnation provided, e.g. hazardous waste disposal certification. What does this all mean, readers? Look at what it says must happen in the future. Working backwards, and proceeding on the basis that those bullet points refer to deficiencies in the previous procedure, allows us to posit that: No detailed photographic information exists of projects that claimed hundreds of thousands of pounds; Site visits were haphazard and checks on works ineffective; Payment was made when no evidence of payment had been received. They never even got bank statements as evidence at the time claims for payment were made. Please note, readers, when asked after the proverbial hit the fan, the developer Cathal McCosker refused to provide them. He is said to have been willing to pay back £125,000 to make it all

go away rather than let the Council or WEFO examine his bank statements. Statements that the Council’s own procedure manual say should be provided before payments out are made; Checks were not carried out — or were inadequately performed – to validate whether substances such as asbestos (for example) had been safely removed and disposed of. Imagine not handling or disposing of asbestos (for example) safely. You would have to be mad, bad or both to even contemplate such a thing. Asbestos (for example) is lethal stuff and can cause all sorts of nasty problems: mesothelioma (for example). You can’t just bury it (for example) under a handy backyard, garden, or car parking area and hope for the best. Can you? And, of course, this is only one grant scheme: The Commercial Property Grants Scheme, funded by the European Union. The Town Heritage Initiative, funded by Lotto, did not even have a manual. Badger will restate that point, readers: So arrogant were officers in the Council’s Regeneration Department that they did not think they needed something as basic as a procedural manual to manage hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money. When Jamie Adams says he thinks it is about outcomes not processes, Badger hopes Jamie understands that there are occasions when procedures are important. Hindsight is a wonderful thing and has many benefits. The problem with Mr Evans and his colleagues is that they were told what the problems were by Mike Stoddart a long time ago. The response of the Council was to try and rubbish Councillor Slot!dart. Officers briefed against him, a fatuous – and demonstrably wrong – FAQ document was prepared to contradict him to the

general public; no effort was spared to help the IPPG claque try to knock him of course. Officers effectively stuck their fingers in their ears and shouted: “La-la-la” to stop the truth getting to them. Grumpy, Mike Stoddart may be, but he was right at the time, right all along in all important respects, and he is owed an apology by all of those who would not listen to an inconvenient truth when first told. So, readers, who is at fault? The answer, you might be surprised to learn, is not the man at the top: The Council’s own Dr Dolittle, Steven Jones. He is not to blame. He made it clear that the buck wouldn’t stop with him when this whole shebang kicked off in January. Badger notes that elsewhere in this paper he is still convinced the buck stops elsewhere. And it probably —almost certainly — won’t stop with Grim Gwyn, whose gyroscopic sense of his own importance and intelligence might actually have persuaded other officers that he is almost as clever as he thinks he is. No readers, some other patsy will retire on ill health and grab a pension before he is given a stern wigging and told not to do it again. Perhaps those wheels are already in motion, readers. Say no more. After all, readers, at Pembrokeshire County Council — and to Dr Dolittle’s relief — with great power does not come great responsibility. Let’s go back to those monkeys tip-tapping away on those typewriters, readers. In under five minutes, Bongo, the Macaque in the far corner, has come up with a new motto for the Council’s Regeneration Office and its ‘highly regarded and expert’ European Team. Let’s have a peek, shall we? What has Bongo come up with? “It matters not whether you win or lose but where you place the blame.” How true readers. How true.

Business

Scheme to upgrade Dinas Cross holiday park withdrawn

Published

14 mins ago

April 18, 2024

Bruce Sinclair Local Democracy Reporter

PLANS to create a ‘five-star resort’ in one of Wales’s most popular holiday locations have been withdrawn.

In an application submitted to Pembrokeshire Coast National Park, Chester-based Boutique Resorts Ltd sought permission to relinquish 50 mixed touring pitches (caravans and tents) at Fishguard Bay Resort, Dinas Cross, replacing them with “36 high quality timber-effect holiday lodges”.

The application, recommended for refusal at the April 24 meeting of the national park’s development management committee, also included an increase in the site area of the approved park, a new entrance, a new reception lodge, staff and visitor parking area, with extensive environmental improvements.

The site, established in the 1950s, currently has planning permission for 50 static caravans and 50 mixed touring units, and it is intended 23 of the proposed lodges to be sited at the entrance, with a further 13 throughout the site.

Despite the proposals seeking a reduction in outright numbers, the applicants say the scheme would see an increase in the number of full and part-time jobs associated with the resort, from 29 to 62 jobs.

A previous application was refused in 2019, mainly on visual impact, ecological impact and highway impact, and the applicant has sought to address the issues raised by that refusal, a supporting statement says.

It adds: “The applicant purchased the site in 2014 with the intention to upgrade the site into a five-star luxury resort. This is very much still the applicant’s intention and whilst he has replaced some existing static caravans with luxury lodges, he also seeks to replace the touring caravans and tents with luxury lodges too.

“The resort is now considered one of the most desirable holiday parks on the Pembrokeshire Coast which is evident on the number of holidaymakers who return to the resort year on year. Such is demand for luxury lodges on the site, the applicant requires additional units.

“The applicant now wishes to move the resort further by replacing the mixed touring pitches with luxury lodges but also provide a much-needed new entrance into the resort.”

Objections to the scheme were received from the National Trust, the national park’s strategic policy and ecologist, and the South Wales Trunk Road Agency, and 12 members of the public, along with one letter of support.

The application was recommended for refusal for reasons including it was “likely to have a significant detrimental impact on the special qualities of the National Park by intensifying the visual impact and intrusion of a large static caravan site within the extensive coastal views of this section of the National Park,” it would represent an intensification of the site, and was likely to “have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring residential amenity through increased noise and traffic movements”.

The application, listed for consideration by park planners next week, has since been withdrawn.

News

First step towards council tax and business rate reform

Published

40 mins ago

April 18, 2024

Chris Haines, ICNN Senedd reporter

MAJOR reforms to council tax and business rates have cleared the first hurdle in the Senedd.

MSs backed the general principles of the local government finance bill, which would introduce a five-year cycle for council tax revaluations from 2030.

The bill would lay much of the groundwork for Welsh Government proposals to redesign council tax, with current bands based on property values from 2003.

It would also increase the frequency of business rates revaluations from five to three years.

Rebecca Evans told the Senedd the bill forms a vital part of the Welsh Government’s wider programme of local tax reform.

Wales’ finance minister explained the bill would enable ministers to modify business rate relief exemptions and the multiplier to support policy priorities.

John Griffiths outlined the local government committee’s stage-one report recommendations aimed at improving the bill and guarding against unintended consequences for taxpayers.

Mr Griffiths explained that the bill provides a framework for future policy changes to be made by the Welsh Government via secondary legislation.

The Labour MS, who represents Newport East, said the committee heard concerns that this limits opportunity for public engagement and scrutiny by the Senedd.

Welcoming the Welsh Government’s commitment to retaining the single-person council tax discount at 25%, he highlighted wide-ranging powers in the bill over vital reduction schemes.

In terms of business rates, the committee chair said MSs heard broad support for a move to three-yearly revaluations, which he described as a reasonable, proportionate cycle.

Peredur Owen Griffiths, who chairs the finance committee, backed the bill’s key aim to create a fairer, more flexible system.

The South Wales East MS welcomed reassurances from the Welsh Government that the intention of council tax reforms is not to raise more revenue.

“Given the regressive nature of council tax, we support the aim to make it fairer without affecting the tax base,” he said.

Plaid Cymru’s finance secretary said the proposed powers will reduce the Welsh Government’s reliance on UK bills to make changes.

Alun Davies, a Labour backbencher, warned that delegated powers in the bill risk diminishing the role of the Senedd.

Sam Rowlands, the Tories’ shadow local government secretary, raised concerns about the bill putting more power in the hands of the Welsh Government rather than councils.

He warned the bill is a stepping stone towards higher taxes through the back door, saying: “This bill in and of itself does not necessarily do that but it certainly enables future changes.”

The former leader of Conwy council, who represents North Wales in the Senedd, called for reforms to the formula used to allocate funding to Wales’ 22 councils.

Raising concerns about digital exclusion, Mr Rowlands opposed a provision in the bill which would remove a duty to publish council tax notices in local newspapers.

He said: “We believe it’s a really important part of the democratic process in local government, especially in relation to transparency.”

Backing a revaluation of all 1.5 million properties in Wales, Labour MS Mike Hedges described council tax as fundamentally unfair.

He said: “Someone living in a property worth £100,000 pays around five times as much council tax relative to the property value as someone living in a property worth £1m.”

Mr Hedges, who represents Swansea East, also opposed the removal of the duty to provide council tax information in newspapers.

On business rates, he said: “I’ve always supported the returning of them to local authorities. We don’t need an all-Wales system; let each local authority set its own business rates.”

Ms Evans told the chamber she intends to make a statement on the next steps for council tax reform before the summer recess.

The Senedd agreed the general principles of the reforms without objection, and the bill now moves to stage two which will see MSs consider detailed amendments.

News

Senedd backing for major infrastructure approval changes

Published

51 mins ago

April 18, 2024

Chris Haines, ICNN Senedd reporter

THE SENEDD agreed reforms aimed at streamlining the consenting process for significant infrastructure projects in Wales.

MSs passed the infrastructure bill, which will establish a unified process, known as infrastructure consent, for major on and offshore projects.

Infrastructure consent will replace existing procedures for energy, transport, waste, water and gas projects above a certain size or capacity threshold.

Julie James, Wales’ housing, local government and planning secretary, argued the bill will introduce a modern and simplified process.

She said the bill will play an important part in moving towards net-zero emissions by 2050 by enabling consent for renewable energy projects in a timely but robust manner.

She told MSs: “Not only will it improve the competitiveness of Wales as an attractive place for investment and jobs, it will also empower local communities and other key stakeholders.”

Ms James said it is a “process bill” with much of the detail to follow in secondary legislation and a significant amount of work ahead to ensure a smooth implementation process.

She told the chamber that secondary legislation will ensure the infrastructure consenting process operates effectively, efficiently and with maximum engagement.

She explained that two consultation papers will be issued by late May, with the first focused on pre-application consultation processes and the second centred on fees.

A third and final consultation paper will follow this year outlining the whole new process.

Janet Finch-Saunders, the Conservatives’ shadow secretary, described the reforms as hollow and lacking in fundamental details.

She argued this is in complete conflict with the bill’s core aims of delivering a streamlined process and empowering communities to engage.

Ms Finch-Saunders warned that the bill is missing a vast amount of details, including on how open-floor hearings will be triggered and time limits for making decisions.

She said: “It is apparent to any reasonable person that this bill does not represent anywhere near what it promises to do, and that is a streamlined and unified process.

“The reality is that so much information is omitted that we do not know how these processes are going to work in reality.”

The Aberconwy MS added: “Clearly, the legislation is not as I believe it should be. We do not believe that it delivers a robust process for Wales.”

Delyth Jewell stressed the importance of striking the right balance between tackling the climate emergency and safeguarding the natural world.

Plaid Cymru’s deputy leader said planning processes must be more accessible to the public.

“Too often communities are left feeling disenfranchised and marginalised when decisions about infrastructure are made without their say,” she warned.

Calling for a coal-free future for Wales, Ms Jewell reiterated her party’s calls for coal to be removed from the list of significant infrastructure projects in the bill.

The South Wales East MS said: “We will keep pushing for a number of changes in regulations. But passing the buck and allowing this bill to fail would be a retrograde step.

“Let this be the first step in a journey towards democratising our planning process. There’s an awful lot more that we need to do, but it can at least start here.”

Ms James reiterated that many details were deliberately not included “on the face of the bill”.

She said: “If you were to put that into primary legislation, it would become out of date so fast that it wouldn’t make the end of the year.

“So, it is very important that we put those things in secondary legislation.”

Before the debate could be held, the King’s consent had to be sought because the bill could impact the Royal Family’s interests, such as the Crown Estate.

MSs agreed the stage-four vote on the final text of the bill, with 36 in favour and 15 against.

The infrastructure bill now enters “post stage four”, a four-week period during which it could be challenged by the UK Government but it is expected to move on to Royal Assent.