News

Badger and the rule book

Published

11 years ago

March 4, 2015

badger84image IT IS an important principle of public life, readers, that citizens have certainty as to the meaning of the law. Even in private law it is well-established, for example, that where there is ambiguity in the words of a contract then the interpretation of the contract — provided it can be rectified — must be in favour of the party upon whom the burden of performance falls under its terms. Similarly, even statute law can be put to the test that words bear their normal meaning in the event that the law, regulations or guidance given under powers devolved to public txxlies (like Pembrokeshire County Council) are unclear.

The Pembrokeshire Herald has had cause to look at the Council’s European Manager, Gwyn Evans, before. He is the senior officer who was disciplined for rewriting the report of a meeting to make himself and other officers appear in a favourable light. He is also the senior officer, who Badger knows from his pal Moley in Cardiff, has claimed to WEFO that this newspaper had apologized to him for misreporting what he said to the Audit Committee in January. it seems that when it comes to rewriting history, Mr Evans knows no bounds. We did not apologize.

Mr Evans’ words to the Audit Committee speak for themselves and any gloss he wants to put on them on the basis of semantics and an after-the-fact realization of his mistake in saying -categorically — the Audit Committee would find nothing wrong with the grants schemes he administered and for which his department had responsibility — is a matter for his conscience and his employer’s judgement. in the light of his subsequent conduct in seeking to manipulate a public record, perhaps the weight given to his words by usually supine and tame Cabinet members should be tempered. Mr Evans clearly does not believe that words carry their normal meaning.

Rather like Humpty Dumpty and Jamie Adams, he believes that a word means what he means it say, neither anything more nor anything less. As an illustration of the above point, Badger noted a few words on Old Grumpy’s website about Mr Evans’ approach to how language should be interpreted. Grumpy reported that Mr Evans’ interpretation of the English language shows that he uses a very special dictionary indeed.

For example, guidance he prepared reads: “The specification should be agreed PRIOR to the applicant obtaining quotations [my emphasis] in order to avoid the need for revision. It MUST be sufficiently detailed to enable a full understanding of the proposed works and the methods and materials to be used. This level of detail will help contractors to quote accurately and prevent problems and misunderstandings occurring when the work is in progress. “Conditions in the offer letter should only be used to adjust minor omissions or details of the proposal and should never be relied upon to make substantial adjustments to a specification, therefore the specification should be agreed & approved PRIOR to going out to tender [my emphasis]. 5.3 Submission and agreement of specification and plans.

(a) An itemised and detailed specification should be submitted at this stage. Plans should also be submitted if these are required e.g. to show the details of lost features to be reinstated. (

(b) Carefully assess the specification and establish which items are eligible and which are ineligible.

(c) Agree the itemised specification with the applicant/agent and ask them to seek at least three independent itemised quotations…” It was pointed out by ClIr Jacob Williams that the procedure adopted to manage the grants process did not match the procedure. He asked the Council’s Monitoring Officer, Lawrence “brown envelope” Harding to explain the Council’s failure to follow its own policy manual.

Climbing astride his high horse, Gwyn Evans told Councillors “I shall answer your e-mail because AS THE AUTHOR of the Commercial Property Grant Scheme Procedure Manual I KNOW Bk. I I kR THAN ANYONE how it should be interpreted.” Before going on to claim that the words: “(b) Carefully assess the specification and establish which items are eligible and which are ineligible.” And ”

(d) Agree the itemised specification with the applicant/agent and ask them to seek at least three independent itemised quotations…” didn’t mean that there should be agreement PRIOR to going out to tender as to what is ineligible and what is not. Mr Evans can only mean that the word “prior” does not mean “BEFORE”. Badger has checked his dictionary, Readers. “Prior” damn well does mean “before”. Its opposite is “subsequent” (or “after”). If Badger is right, readers, when Gwyn Evans uses the words “CAREFULLY ASSESS” he cannot mean “cautiously evaluate”. Those words must bear another and entirely separate meaning known only to Mr Evans.

What Badger does know is that there have been major and substantial revisions to works attracting grants. The guidance is supposed to avoid that. It has failed miserably to ensure that end and the failure begins and ends with the person responsible for it. if you claim the credit, you have to bear the blame. It follows, therefore, that there are three plausible or possible interpretations of the position Mr Evans has adopted. Either:
• Mr Evans used the word “PRIOR” when what he meant to write was “WHEN YOU AND ME FEEL LIKE IT”: or • Mr Evans does not know what the word “PRIOR” means; or • Mr Evans is possessed of such arrogant certainty
that he will never be challenged by councillors or other officers that he just winged it.
Badger is quick to point out that he does not for a minute believe Mr Evans is arrogant. Ignorance is quite bad enough. And so we go back to the beginning, readers. Citizens are entitled to expect certainty when dealing with public authorities. They should not be obliged to guess what passed through a council officer’s mind while he sat on the privy scribbling on his note pad. If you were tendering on the basis of the procedure manual and followed it you would be at a disadvantage, all because you do not possess Evans Sensory Perception: the ability to read the mind of an officer who evidently believes the rules of language and its construction do not apply to him.

Crime

Four men fined over illegal cockle gathering on the Burry Inlet

Published

2 hours ago

March 27, 2026

Rieve Nesbitt-Marr

More than £36,000 in penalties after protected estuary targeted

FOUR men from Llanelli have been fined more than £36,000 after illegally gathering cockles from the protected Burry Inlet.

Natural Resources Wales (NRW) launched an investigation following a report of unlawful cockle harvesting in the Llanelli area on Thursday (June 12, 2025).

Enforcement officers attended and found that Ethan Thomas, Brogan Phillips, Finley Harvey Jones, all from Llanelli, and Korey Kathrens, from Burry Port, had driven 4×4 vehicles more than one kilometre out into the estuary to collect cockles without permission.

The group was intercepted as they attempted to leave the scene. During the incident, two of the vehicles became stuck in the estuary and had to be towed to safety.

Officers seized a large quantity of cockles along with equipment used in the operation.

All four men denied the charges but were found guilty following a trial at Llanelli Magistrates’ Court on Monday (Mar 23, 2026).

Each defendant was fined £4,000, ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £1,600, and prosecution costs of £3,546—bringing the total penalty per person to £9,146. The court ordered payments at a rate of £200 per month.

Huwel Manley, Head of South West Wales Operations at NRW, said: “This case highlights the seriousness of illegal cockle gathering, which can damage fragile ecosystems and undermine licensed fisheries operating within the estuary.

“Natural Resources Wales is committed to protecting our shellfisheries and wider fisheries from illegal activity.

“We welcome the court’s decision and hope it sends a clear message that fishery and shellfish-related crime will not be tolerated. We will continue to take appropriate enforcement action against those who break the law.”

Education

Ysgol Henry Tudor reassures parents over Sikh ceremonial kirpan

Published

3 hours ago

March 27, 2026

Tom Sinclair

School says religious item worn by pupil is secured, symbolic and non-functional

YSGOL HENRY TUDOR has moved to reassure parents after confirming that a pupil is wearing a ceremonial kirpan as part of their Sikh faith.

The development comes after around a dozen parents with children at the school contacted The Herald expressing concern about the situation.

In a letter sent to parents on Wednesday (Mar 25), the school explained that a Sikh family had recently joined the school community, and that the pupil is an Amritdhari Sikh — meaning they are required to wear certain articles of faith.

One of these is the kirpan, a small ceremonial blade which holds deep religious significance within Sikhism.

The school stressed that in this case the kirpan is “small, sheathed and secured,” and cannot be unsheathed. It added that the item is worn purely as a symbol of faith and “not as a functional item.”

Parents raise concerns

Around a dozen parents have contacted The Herald expressing concern about the situation, with some questioning both safety and how the decision was communicated.

Posts on local social media groups also reflect unease among some parents. One parent wrote that they were “not at all comfortable” with their child returning to school until the issue was resolved, while others questioned whether enough notice had been given before the decision was implemented.

Another commenter raised concerns about safety, suggesting that allowing any form of blade on school premises could set a precedent.

However, some claims circulating online — including suggestions that similar cases have led to violent incidents without prosecution — have not been substantiated.

Reassurance over safety

The letter made clear that appropriate steps have been taken to ensure the situation is managed safely and in line with safeguarding responsibilities and UK law.

School leaders said they remain committed to respecting the religious beliefs of all pupils while maintaining a safe environment, adding that the matter will continue to be monitored “sensitively and appropriately.”

In some settings, schools may agree adjustments to how a kirpan is worn — such as ensuring it is very small, secured, or sealed — so that religious requirements are respected while maintaining safety.

Understanding the kirpan

The kirpan is one of the five articles of faith — known as the Five Ks — observed by initiated Sikhs. It symbolises a duty to stand up against injustice and to protect others.

Under UK law, Sikhs are permitted to carry a kirpan for religious reasons. In schools, these are typically very small, kept in a sheath, and often secured so they cannot be drawn.

Across the UK, many schools have policies in place to accommodate the wearing of the kirpan while ensuring appropriate safeguards are followed.

Promoting inclusion

The school’s letter reflects a wider approach across education settings in Wales and the UK, where inclusivity and respect for different faiths are balanced with clear safety measures.

Pembrokeshire County Council has since confirmed it was aware of the situation and had provided guidance to Ysgol Henry Tudor when the matter was raised. A spokesperson said the authority is satisfied that appropriate safeguarding measures are in place, and that the school is following its procedures as outlined to parents in its communication. The update comes amid some concern from parents, including comments shared with The Herald and on social media, although no incidents relating to the matter have been reported.

Crime

Teen jailed after starting fire while others slept

Published

20 hours ago

March 26, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Fire set in shared home left sleeping residents at risk and caused £130,000 damage

A TEENAGER who started a fire in his bedroom while other residents slept has been jailed for four years.

Jack Gornall, aged 18, of no fixed abode, was sentenced at Swansea Crown Court after admitting a series of offences including arson, threats with a knife, assault, and sending malicious communications.

The court heard that in the early hours of Sunday (Nov 17), Gornall deliberately started a fire inside his room at a shared property on Mansel Street, Carmarthen.

He then barricaded the door before climbing out of a first-floor window, leaving others inside the building at risk.

One resident was asleep at the time and had to be rescued by police. Two officers were later treated for smoke inhalation after tackling the incident before firefighters brought the blaze under control.

The fire caused extensive damage to the property, estimated at around £130,000.

Prosecutor Dean Pulling told the court that Gornall had earlier gone out to buy cigarettes and a lighter, and had carried out internet searches relating to accelerants in the days leading up to the fire.

The court also heard details of other offences.

In October 2024, Gornall repeatedly contacted his sister after being blocked, including calling her child’s phone. When she answered, he became abusive and threatened to report her to social services.

On another occasion in January 2025, he approached a car in Llandysul and produced a kitchen knife, waving it at occupants through an open window. The driver sped away and alerted police.

He also admitted stealing alcohol from a supermarket in Carmarthen, during which he became aggressive and assaulted a member of staff.

Gornall pleaded guilty to all offences at an early stage.