A CALL to expand the licensed area of a Pembrokeshire community pub, recently hailed as one of the most friendly in Britain, has been given the go-ahead by county planners.

The White Hart Inn in St Dogmaels was ranked second friendliest pub in the UK in a study by security experts Get Licensed, which looked at Tripadvisor reviews and median crime scores around each pub to find the friendliest in the UK.

The 250-year-old White Hart, on Finch Street, reopened as a community pub in 2021 following a campaign after it closed in May 2019, when the last landlords decided to refocus to other activities.

The White Hart Community Inn Ltd was formed as a Community Benefit Society and a community share offer launched with the guidance of the Wales Co-operative Centre.

Two years of fund-raising and campaigning saw enough money raised through individual community shares purchases together with financial support from the European Regional Development Fund through the Welsh Government via the Social Business Growth Fund administered by Social Investment Cymru at WCVA, alongside a grant from Pembrokeshire County Council.

White Hart Community Inn (St Dogmaels) Ltd had asked Pembrokeshire County Council for permission the expand the licensed premises through a change of use of the former manager’s accommodation, vacant since early 2022.

The application was conditionally approved by planning officers.

This is the second application for works at the White Hart recently.

An application by White Hart Community Inn (St Dogmaels) Ltd to install solar panels at the historic pub was recently granted by Pembrokeshire County Council.

That proposal was backed by St Dogmaels Community Council, which said it “fully supports the application for the installation of photovoltaic panels”.

Receiving the recent Get Licensed award, the White Hart Inn received a top score of five on Tripadvisor, and 66.67 per cent of its reviews highlighted the pub’s ‘friendly’ and ‘welcoming’ atmosphere.

SENEDD Members torpedoed Conservative calls to exempt yachts and other boats from plans for a £1.30 a night tourism tax in Wales.

Sam Rowlands, the Tory shadow finance secretary, introduced an amendment to the tourism tax bill to remove powers for ministers to extend the levy to berths and moorings in future.

He argued extending the bill to marinas would be unnecessarily complicated and burdensome, adding that boating is a leisure and sporting activity.

He said: “To be clear, those that provide berths and moorings are not providing visitor accommodation in any real sense. By their nature, those vessels… move around.”

Mr Rowlands told Senedd Members: “It’s quite clear that boaters have a minimal… impact on local services because they are self-contained within the berth or mooring area.”

But Senedd Members voted 3-1 against the Conservative’s proposal as the finance committee considered nearly 160 amendments to the bill.

Mike Hedges, who represents Swansea East, said: “As I tell people quite regularly, we’ve got a marina there and I can tell you now – when people come in by boat into that marina, they don’t stay in the marina… they go into the city centre and they use the services there.”

Mr Hedges said: “The council taxpayer of Swansea is covering those costs,” as he argued marinas should have been included in the bill from the outset.

His Labour colleague Mark Drakeford agreed: “It is right that [for] a yacht arriving at Swansea or Cardiff marina… the yacht owner should pay the levy just as somebody staying in a nearby hotel or the Cardiff council campsite in Pontcanna will be.”

The First Minister-turned-finance secretary said: “I can see no case in principle why those visiting in boats and yachts should find themselves not captured by the levy.”

Prof Drakeford explained: “The bill, as the [Welsh] Government presents it, doesn’t have a worked-up scheme for berths and moorings as Mike Hedges would have wished.

“But the complexity of it is real and was beyond our ability to resolve all that complexity in the bill itself. So, what the bill provides is a power to return to this issue in future when some of those practical challenges can have been more fully discussed.”

Mr Rowlands responded: “It does feel like an afterthought… for me, without the proper revision and understanding of this in the first instance, it shouldn’t be in here at all.”

If the bill completes its passage through the Welsh Parliament, £1.30 a person before VAT could be charged on overnight stays in hotels, B&Bs and self-catering accommodation.

A lower rate of 80p would apply to hostels and campsites, with the 22 Welsh councils given powers to decide whether to introduce a local levy from 2027 at the earliest.

The committee also rejected Tory calls for a ten-night cap on the levy as well as exemptions for educational trips, charities, members of the armed forces and veterans. A Plaid Cymru amendment to exempt all under 16s was also defeated.

But Senedd Members were able to agree other amendments, including an exemption for under-18s from the lower rate, during the “stage-two” meeting on May 15.

Prof Drakeford described the Welsh Government’s approach as more progressive and targeted, removing a large proportion of educational stays from the levy.

He said: “If you’re going to narrow the [tax] base, the only way to compensate in terms of revenue… is by raising the levy charge on those who remain within the scope.”

Members voted to raise the lower and higher rates by 5p to 80p and £1.30 respectively.

The bill now moves to the third step: consideration of amendments by the whole Senedd: before a crunch vote on the final version at stage four.

FRESH plans for a Pembrokeshire holiday park extension have been submitted after a high court judgement overturned a council approval against repeated officer recommendations for refusal.

In late 2023 councillors approved a contentious application by Heritage Leisure Development (Wales) Ltd for works including the installation of 48 bases for holiday lodges, a spa facility at a former pub, holiday apartments, a café and cycle hire, equestrian stables, a manège and an associated office at Heritage Park, Pleasant Valley/Stepaside.

It was said the scheme, next to the historic remains of the 19th century Stepaside ironworks and colliery, would create 44 jobs.

The final decision was made at full council after members of the planning committee had twice supported the scheme against officer recommendations of refusal, based on the Local Development Plan, included the site being outside a settlement area.

Approval was given, by 37 votes to 16, with two abstentions, as it was considered that greater weight should be afforded to economic benefits of the scheme rather than policy.

Since that approval, a successful legal challenge was launched by Stepaside & Pleasant Valley Residents’ Group (SPVRG Ltd), who had objected to the original application.

A March High Court hearing presided by Judge Jarman KC recently ruled against the council decision, quashing that approval, and saying “the reason given by the council did not deal adequately with the important principal issues of development in the countryside, sustainability and precedent”.

It added: “Nor did it deal adequately with the important principal issue of the extent to which detrimental impact on existing sites was or should be taken into account when weighing the economic benefit of the proposed development. The economic assessment of the interested party expressly dealt with the latter, but not the former.”

It said the “major departure from countryside and sustainability policies is likely to have a lasting relevance for the question of policy in future cases,” and the “council’s resolution [was] simply to endorse the resolution of the planning committee, which predated the fuller report of the head of planning to the council.”

A fresh application has now been submitted by Heritage Leisure Development (Wales) Ltd, through agent Lichfields, which is identical to that previously approved, aimed at addressing issues raised in the recent judgement.

In its lengthy submissions, Lichfields says “it is clear that members can reach a decision that is contrary to the development plan without setting a precedent”.

It adds: “However, given that there remains a conflict with the plan policies, there is also a need to consider the nature of the 2024 scheme that comprise unique circumstances that mean that the decision would not set a precedent.”

Listing a long list of ‘unique circumstances’ reasons, it says: “Together the application offers a unique development which, when considered in its entirety, is a bespoke offering that means that there are specific reasons why the proposed development at Heritage Park should be granted and that in doing so, this will not be setting a precedent for future decisions.”

It finishes: “The council has already granted planning permission for the development with members having grappled with many of the issues raised in the judgment. We would welcome the council reaching the same decision while also setting out the requirements raised in the judgment as part of the reasons for granting planning permission.

“This will ensure that there can be no further delays to the delivery of the proposed development and investment being made at Heritage Park while supporting the wider economic development and community offer for the local area and Pembrokeshire as a whole.”

Amroth Community Council has once again objected; councillors proposing the scheme be ‘called in’ for decision by Welsh Government organisation Planning and Environment Decisions Wales (PEDW).

The latest application will be considered by county planners at a later date.