Local Government

Clerk blasts Neyland councillors over lack of action in leaked email

Published

7 months ago

October 4, 2025

Leaked correspondence lays bare growing rift at Neyland Town Council

A LEAKED internal email has exposed deep divisions within Neyland Town Council, with the Town Clerk accusing councillors of failing to take responsibility for community projects and leaving her to shoulder the workload alone.

***Neyland’s town clerk: Libby Matthews***

The message, written by Town Clerk and Responsible Finance Officer Libby Matthews, was sent on September 30 ahead of the council’s October 6 meeting. It has since circulated among councillors and former members, prompting sharp criticism and renewed scrutiny of relations inside the authority.

‘An impossible standard’

In the leaked email, obtained by The Herald, Ms Matthews apologised if her tone seemed “harsh” but said there was “no other way to really say it”.

She wrote: “I find it quite disappointing that there have only been suggestions given from two Members of Council – being Councillors, there should be ideas flowing on how to help our community.”

“It is an impossible standard,” she continued, “to agree for multiple projects to be voted through and then landed on my desk to lead them all, on top of my already heavy workload and many projects, events, accounts, legal and training I am already undertaking.”

The clerk reminded members that by signing their Acceptance of Office “you are making a commitment to be proactive in our community.”

“A Clerk works in the background and completes management, legalities, administration, advertising, accounting, accountability etc,” she added. “It should not be expected of me to lead, handle and complete every project the Council agrees on, independently.”

Few ideas submitted

The email accompanied a document titled Council Suggestions for a 12-Month Plan, listing only six proposals — three from Cllr Mike Harry and three from Cllr Ashleigh Phelan.
Ideas included creating an allotments committee, improving social-media use, building stronger links with the police and county council, running a public priorities survey, improving signage, and reviving Neyland’s market day or Brunel Festival.

No other councillors had submitted contributions.

Ms Matthews contrasted Neyland’s approach with nearby councils.

She wrote: “Speaking to surrounding Clerks, Council members from neighbouring authorities are incredibly proactive within their communities. Examples being: Llanstadwell Councillors on rotation cleaning and maintaining their park equipment, Milford Haven Councillors maintaining the Rath pool, and Haverfordwest Town Councillors creating their own projects and leading with them.”

She added: “Thus far, as a whole (aside from Cllr Hay), all decisions are made within Council and then passed along to my desk, with no further input or assistance. I’m desperately trying to push Council forward, but I cannot do it alone.”

A history of conflict

Neyland Town Council has seen a steady stream of complaints, resignations and procedural rows in recent years.
Meetings are frequently described by attendees as tense and unproductive, with arguments over minutes, votes and code-of-conduct issues often overshadowing ordinary business.

One former councillor told The Herald: “Neyland has so many people who care deeply about the town, but the council’s reputation has been badly damaged. Everything seems to end in confrontation.”

The latest row follows years of tension and disciplinary issues within Neyland Town Council.

Earlier this year, The Herald reported that an Ombudsman investigation into alleged bullying of the clerk was discontinued after the councillor concerned resigned. The Ombudsman’s report cited “poor behaviour over a substantial period of time”.

Two other former councillors members – Cllr Brian Rothero and Cllr David Devauden – are currently before the Adjudication Panel for Wales over alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct, including failure to show respect and bringing the council into disrepute. A hearing date has not yet been confirmed.

Residents have repeatedly told The Herald they are concerned about “constant disputes” and a lack of progress on projects.

The clerk’s role

Under local-government law, a town-council clerk is the statutory officer responsible for implementing decisions, managing finances and ensuring legal compliance – but not normally expected to lead community projects.

Ms Matthews’ email suggests she believes councillors have blurred that line, leaving her to handle both administration and project leadership.

Her call for members to form working groups mirrors the approach taken by other town councils, where councillors themselves lead initiatives under the clerk’s guidance.

The Herald understands some councillors have privately suggested bringing in external mediation to rebuild trust.

One senior figure familiar with the situation said: “There’s been a breakdown on both sides. The clerk feels undermined; some councillors feel lectured. It’s not sustainable.”

The same source said the leak may prompt formal discussion about conduct and confidentiality.

Public frustration

Residents told The Herald they are weary of the infighting.

At last year’s public meeting about the town’s events calendar, several attendees asked why plans for new signage, environmental clean-ups and the Brunel Festival revival had stalled.

One resident said: “All we ever hear about are rows and resignations. What we want is a council that gets things done.”

While Neyland Town Council regularly posts community updates online, it provides little detail about internal disputes or ongoing investigations.

Neighbouring authorities such as Milford Haven and Haverfordwest routinely publish project reports and minutes within days of meetings – a contrast noted by Ms Matthews in her email.

The council is due to meet on Monday (Oct 6) to discuss the 12-month plan and members’ responsibilities.
The Herald understands the agenda includes an item titled Council Work Plan and Member Responsibilities, reflecting the clerk’s request for councillors to take ownership of projects.

It remains unclear whether the email leak itself will be addressed.

A pattern of strained relations

This is not the first controversy to hit Neyland Town Council. In 2023, members clashed over communications policy and community-hub bookings, leading to a temporary halt on events. The clerk also took a period of stress-related leave that year before returning to post.

Observers say the repeated disputes have left the small authority struggling to maintain focus.

Under the Local Government Act 1972 and the Model Code of Conduct for Wales, councillors must treat others with respect and uphold the reputation of their office. Clerks, meanwhile, must ensure proper governance and provide impartial advice.

Guidance from One Voice Wales urges councils to “foster a culture of shared ownership” where elected members and staff “work collaboratively, recognising distinct but complementary responsibilities.”

What happens next

The outcome of Monday’s meeting may determine whether Neyland Town Council can move forward or faces further instability.

If councillors back the clerk’s call for more engagement, attention will turn to whether members deliver on their promises. If not, there could be renewed calls for external oversight.

Either way, the leak has reignited debate about transparency, accountability, and leadership in Neyland’s local government.

While the correspondence was intended as an internal management note, its contents highlight long-standing concerns about the council’s effectiveness and culture.

Repeated conduct complaints, resignations and the absence of a clear long-term plan suggest deeper governance issues.

As one observer told The Herald: “Neyland deserves better. The town needs leadership, not another row about who’s to blame.”

For now, the question posed by the clerk still stands: who will take responsibility for getting things done?

Local Government

Dog beach restrictions return across Pembrokeshire from Friday

Published

6 hours ago

April 29, 2026

Tom Sinclair

DOG owners are being reminded that seasonal restrictions on some of Pembrokeshire’s most popular beaches come back into force from Friday (May 1).

The restrictions run each year from May 1 until September 30 and apply to a number of beaches across the county during the busiest months of the visitor season.

Pembrokeshire County Council’s current guidance states that some beaches are subject to either full or partial dog bans during the summer period. Maps showing where dogs can and cannot be walked are available online and are also displayed at the affected beaches.

The council says the restrictions are in place primarily to protect the interests of bathers and other beach users during the summer season, when beaches are at their busiest.

There are only two beaches in Pembrokeshire where a total summer dog ban applies.

From Friday (May 1), dogs are not allowed on Tenby North Beach or Whitesands, St Davids, until the restrictions are lifted again on October 1.

Partial bans are in place at Lydstep, Newgale beach and promenade, Saundersfoot beach and promenade, Tenby Castle and South Beach, Amroth beach and promenade, Poppit Sands, Broad Haven North, and Dale.

Visit Pembrokeshire also lists dog restriction maps for Coppet Hall, which has previously been described by the council as a voluntary restriction area.

Check signs before walking

THE restrictions do not mean dogs are banned from the whole of every beach listed under the partial ban.

In many cases, parts of the beach remain available for dog walking, but owners are urged to check the signs and maps before heading onto the sand.

The signs at each location show the areas where dogs are banned, areas where dogs are allowed, and areas where dogs must be kept on leads.

At Tenby, the rules affect several beach areas. Tenby North Beach is subject to a full seasonal ban, while Tenby South Beach and Castle Beach are covered by partial restrictions.

At Newgale, the restriction also includes the promenade and pebble bank. At Saundersfoot and Amroth, the restrictions include the promenade areas.

Poppit Sands, Broad Haven North, Dale and Lydstep are also covered by partial seasonal restrictions, with mapped areas showing where dogs are allowed.

Majority of beaches still dog-friendly

DOG owners are also being reminded that the majority of Pembrokeshire’s beaches remain dog-friendly throughout the year.

Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority says dogs are welcome on more than 50 beaches in the county, although some have seasonal restrictions or restricted areas between May and the end of September.

Guide dogs are exempt from the restrictions.

The current council list of affected beaches is:

Total dog bans from May 1 to September 30

Tenby North Beach
Whitesands, St Davids

Partial dog bans from May 1 to September 30

Lydstep
Newgale beach and promenade
Saundersfoot beach and promenade
Tenby Castle and South Beach
Amroth beach and promenade
Poppit Sands
Broad Haven North
Dale

Additional mapped restriction

Coppet Hall — listed by Visit Pembrokeshire among the dog restriction beach maps and previously described by the council as voluntary.

Enforcement over summer

Pembrokeshire County Council says leisure staff enforce the bans throughout the summer months.

Breaches of the byelaws can lead to enforcement action, and the council has previously said the maximum penalty is £500.

The council has also reminded dog owners that they must clean up after their pets on all Pembrokeshire beaches, whether or not a seasonal restriction applies.

In recent years, the council has said officers would focus on education in the first instance, with warnings issued for first offences before fixed penalty notices were considered for repeat breaches or failure to leave a restricted area when asked.

Owners are being urged to check the beach signs, follow the marked zones, keep dogs under control, and clean up after them.

The restrictions will remain in place until Wednesday, September 30. Dogs will be welcome back on the restricted beaches from Thursday, October 1.

Local Government

Fishguard children’s home application is a ‘legal test’, not planning merits decision

Published

16 hours ago

April 28, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Town council objected over highway safety and parking, but PCC says policy issues are not part of the certificate process

CONCERNS raised by Fishguard and Goodwick Town Council over a proposed children’s home at Bryn Delyn, Y Fraich, may not be considered in the same way as objections to a normal planning application, Pembrokeshire County Council has confirmed.

The town council’s planning committee discussed application 25/0948/CL on Monday (Apr 20), relating to the proposed use of Bryn Delyn as a children’s home.

Members are understood to have objected on highway safety and parking grounds, amid concerns about the suitability of the site and surrounding roads.

However, Pembrokeshire County Council has clarified that the application has been submitted under section 192 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

This means the applicant is seeking a Certificate of Lawfulness to determine whether the proposed use of the property would be lawful and would not require planning permission.

A council spokesperson said the purpose of the submission was to determine whether the proposed use of Bryn Delyn, as described in the documents, would be lawful.

They said: “The onus lies with the applicant to provide sufficient evidence for the Local Planning Authority to determine the application on the balance of probabilities.

“Adopted planning policy and the planning merits of the proposed use/development are not for consideration by the LPA.”

The council also confirmed that, unlike ordinary planning applications, there is no statutory duty for the Local Planning Authority to publicise or consult on submissions made under section 192.

No formal consultation has been carried out with the council’s Highways Department.

However, the council said it had used its discretion to advertise the certificate of lawful development submission by displaying a site notice.

The spokesperson added that this was done in case members of the public had their own evidence to present which could be of value when determining the submission.

The clarification means the council’s decision will focus on the legal position and the facts of the proposed use, rather than wider planning policy, parking concerns or highway safety issues in the usual planning sense.

The application remains under consideration.

Cover image is a rough artists impression created by The Pembrokeshire Herald

Community

Tenby Brynhir estate will not home ‘illegal immigrants’

Published

1 day ago

April 28, 2026

Bruce Sinclair - Local Democracy Reporter

CLAIMS Tenby’s Brynhir housing development will house “illegal immigrants” through purchases by an English council have been refuted by Pembrokeshire County Council.

Back in 2024, the scheme, with nearly 100 “local houses for local people” was approved by national park planners.

In 2018, Pembrokeshire County Council, which already owned the 15-acre Brynhir site on the edge of Tenby, ‘bought’ the land for £4million using its Housing Revenue Account.

Campaigners fought a two-year battle against the use of the land for housing, calling for protection for ‘Tenby’s last green space’ and fearing it would become a ‘concrete jungle’.

The county council was granted outline planning permission by the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority for the development of 144 properties – including up to 102 affordable units – in 2020.

The later 2024 scheme proposed that only 125 houses be built, 93 of them affordable, and, of the 32 open market dwellings, 16 are shared ownership properties.

Tenby Civic Society has raised numerous concerns to the scheme and 20 objections were also received from members of the public, raising concerns including loss of green space, traffic issues, privacy, design, visual impacts and the scale of the development, sewage capacity, the site being no longer allocated for housing, potential antisocial behaviour within the play area, and a limitation on second homes/holiday lets being required.

At the September meeting, concerns about the proposal were raised by Jane Merrony of 1,100-member Tenby Green Space Preservation Society, who said it was inappropriate in its proposed location and “a visual intrusion which will be seen from Caldey Island”.

Since that approval, initial construction for the site started late last year.

The full development is set to be finished by 2029.

However, fears have been raised that some of the site will house “illegal immigrants” via an English council.

A member of the public raised their concerns saying: “Unconfirmed rumours have it that Liverpool City Council has bought houses in the development as their waiting list is so long due to illegal immigrants being housed in their stock, making it a 10-year waiting list to get local housing in Liverpool.

“Does this mean that Liverpool City Council will be offloading illegals onto the Tenby social housing?”

They added: “When the planning permission was going through, we were informed that all the housing would be mixed council, open-market and association houses with a covenant saying that you had to live, work or have links to the area to be considered for any of the units.”

Responding, a Pembrokeshire County Council spokesperson said: “These rumours are untrue. This site is owned and managed by the local authority. Allocations will be made to those from our Choice Homes register in accordance with a local connection lettings policy that will be developed in conjunction with the local town and community councils, and local community, in due course.”