News

‘Investigation’ into grants begins

Published

12 years ago

January 31, 2014

ON MONDAY, January 20, what was scheduled as a review of controversial grants awarded to property developers in Pembroke Dock under the Town Heritage Initiative and Commercial Property Grants Scheme turned into a full-blown investigation into the activities of builders and property developers who have benefited under them.

Although the word “review” appeared on the meeting’s agenda, the word “investigation” featured prominently in addresses to the Council made by Council officers, Mark Lewis, Director of Finance and Leisure; Dr Steven Jones, Director of Development; Gwyn Evans, the authority’s European Manager; and Jonathan Haswell, the Council’s Head of Internal Audit.

The meeting began with a striking reversal of position; Monitoring Officer Lawrence Harding confirmed that ALL Councillors WOULD have confidential access to documents and financial information concerning claims submitted for works and payments made under the schemes.

WE CAN’T ACCOUNT FOR EVERY PENNY

IN A REMARKABLE address to the County Council’s Audit Committee on Monday, Director of Development Dr Steven Jones confirmed that the audit procedures used by the authority meant that he could not guarantee that every penny claimed under the Town Heritage and Commercial Property Grant Schemes in Pembroke Dock had been spent by the developers concerned.

Dr Jones prefaced his remarks by claiming that although the chain of command left him ultimately responsible for the schemes, he was not involved in their day-to-day management and was not involved in their detailed scrutiny. Dr Jones went on to announce that in circumstances where money had been claimed for works not done then the Council would seek to recover those monies from property developers.

KEY PROPERTIES NOT INSPECTED

COUNCIL OFFICERS adopted a bullish and confident tone in their presentations to the Audit Committee, each pointing out that they had complied with procedures applicable to their respective roles. Mr Gwyn Evans told Committee members that even if there were problems with the Commercial Property Grant Scheme “which there are not” the Council had sufficient powers to reclaim money incorrectly paid out.

Under questioning from East Williamston Cllr Jacob Williams and Independent Committee Chair John Evans it was confirmed that DESPITE the assurance to the contrary given to December’s Full Council by IPPG Cllrs Pugh, Adams, Hall and Allen-Mirehouse properties in Dimond Street had NOT been checked and inspected: at the time of a major inspection in May 2012 the projects had not begun. Council officers had no idea which properties were inspected in a further audit visit in October 2012. Cllr Guy Woodham followed up by establishing that the Old Coronation School in Meyrick Street, Pembroke Dock, had not been checked by external auditors, as it was a residential development funded by the Town Heritage Initiative.

Under further questioning from Cllr Woodham officers confirmed that the process used by the Council to provide information to external bodies depended upon the provision by Council officers of small samples of data relating to individual projects, instead of a detailed examination of the bills of quantities for all of them.

Officers also confirmed that the Town Heritage Initiative did not have a procedural manual available for inspection as none was in place.

COUNCIL’S “MARGIN” REVEALED

ONE PIECE of information provided to Audit Committee members was the revelation that for each £ paid out under the Commercial Property Grants Scheme, the County Council obtained 9p. The recovery of this 9% was explained by the Council’s European Manager, Gwyn Evans, as covering its administration costs for the grants scheme and funding other enhancement works.

Mr Evans went on to claim that enhancement works and Council street improvements, such as the Tudor Rose paving project in Pembroke, would have been impossible without the Council recovering money out of the grants scheme.

COUNCILLORS QUERY WORKS

AUDIT COMMITTEE members and officers travelled to Pembroke Dock to see the buildings for themselves.

Stopping first at the Old Coronation School, where questions were raised about the refurbishment of the roof and windows, they moved on to Commercial Row before moving on to Dimond Street.

Accompanied by Cllr Mike Stoddart and Labour Leader Paul Miller, the Committee and officers visited 29 Dimond Street to gauge the works done for which £21,000 had been claimed. Councillors expressed some astonishment at the condition of the shop’s interior in light of the claims made for its refurbishment and were told by a Council surveyor, Steve Owen how grant money had been spent:

“There has been a new kitchen, WC, staff room, new wiring and fire alarm system – that’s the kind of thing they had to do.”

Cllr David Simpson asked: “You mean don’t know what work has actually been done?”

A local passer-by who knows the shop well, told Herald Assistant Editor Jon Coles, taking photographs of the visit, that he was amazed at the claims, saying that little or no work had been done in respect of the shop’s retail space. He said that the old fire alarms were still there, the partition and ceiling had not been removed and that apart from “perhaps a lick of paint” little had been done to change the shop’s interior.

On examination of the shop, Councillors noted that contrary to the expectations raised by the summary of works provided by the Council’s surveyor, a large hole in the toilet roof enabled them to see the underside of the floor above it and establish that the ceiling had not been insulated as stated or at all.

MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS

MIKE STODDART told the Herald that the visit raised more questions than answers about how the Council justified the grant given to the developer:

“It seems that part of the answer lies in some creative thinking by the officers involved in calculating these grants. What emerged during the site visit to 29 Dimond Street was that the cost of the Celotex insulation in the roof had been charged to retail space on the grounds that it would contribute to countering heat loss from the shop.

“You might think it would contribute a lot more to keeping warm the five bedsits on the upper two floors.

“These 40% retail refurbishment grants – financed by the Welsh Government – are designed to regenerate the shopping centres of places like Pembroke Dock. “Quite how this is achieved by turning former retail space into bedsits is not immediately obvious.”

INVESTIGATION TO TAKE TIME

ON RETURNING to County Hall, Committee Chair John Evans told members that there was a consensus that the site visit was a positive and worthwhile exercise Members of the Committee and all members of the Council now have the opportunity to look at the information about the scheme and satisfy themselves as to the claims submitted and payments made. It is anticipated that this process will take over several weeks in a room set aside for members to scrutinise the paper trail.

Mike Stoddart told The Pembrokeshire Herald:

“This is a big improvement on what I was trying to achieve at Full Council, where my Notice of Motion to allow members to inspect these documents with the all financial information redacted was defeated by the IPPG block vote. I have now withdrawn my call for an Extraordinary Meeting to enable the investigation to proceed.”

featured

St Davids lifeboat crews rescue damaged yacht and stranded kayaker

Published

11 minutes ago

June 7, 2026

Tom Sinclair

TWO St Davids RNLI lifeboats were launched within hours of each other after a yacht was left disabled in a thunderstorm and a kayaker capsized in a strong tide.

The first call came on Wednesday, May 27, after reports that a yacht in St Brides Bay had suffered rigging damage and lost its sails during a thunderstorm.

St Davids RNLI’s all-weather Tamar class lifeboat, Norah Wortley, was launched at 3:27pm and reached the vessel by 4:00pm.

When the crew arrived, they found the yacht had also lost engine power. A tow was established and the vessel was taken safely to a mooring at Dale.

The lifeboat returned to station and was ready for service again by 8:15pm.

***Storm rescue: The damaged yacht was towed to safety after losing power in St Brides Bay (Pic: RNLI/Rosie Rees)***

Kayaker rescued near Shoe Rock

While the all-weather lifeboat was still dealing with the yacht, St Davids RNLI received a second call for help after a kayaker capsized in the strong flooding tide.

The inshore lifeboat launched at 5:35pm and headed to the south end of Ramsey Sound, where the kayaker was found near Shoe Rock.

The casualty and kayak were safely taken back to Porthclais Harbour, before the inshore lifeboat returned to station and was made ready for service again by 8:00pm.

St Davids RNLI said the kayaker had been wearing a buoyancy aid and carrying a mobile phone, which allowed them to call 999 and ask for the Coastguard after becoming separated from their craft.

RNLI inshore lifeboat helm, Chris Limbert said: “This rescue was a brilliant example of why it’s so important to always wear a buoyancy aid and carry a means of contact.

“If the kayaker had been without a buoyancy aid, they may have struggled to stay afloat and get themselves safely onto the rock.

“They were also carrying a mobile phone which allowed them to call 999 and ask for the Coastguard.

“Our crew of volunteers are on call 24/7 to go to people’s aid. Never be afraid to call for help.”

Charity

Thousands of disadvantaged children to enjoy Rotary fun day

Published

1 hour ago

June 7, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Pembrokeshire children to enjoy special day out at Folly Farm as part of nationwide Rotary initiative supporting vulnerable young people

MORE than 25,000 children across the UK are set to enjoy a special day out this June as part of the 2026 Rotary Children’s Fun Day.

In Pembrokeshire, the Rotary Club of Milford Haven will take 133 children to Folly Farm Adventure Park on or around Wednesday, June 10.

The children will be able to enjoy the farm park, fairground rides, animal encounters and zoo attractions, with meal vouchers also provided as part of the day.

The event, organised by Rotary clubs across Great Britain and Ireland, has been running for more than a decade and is designed to give disabled, disadvantaged and vulnerable children a carefree and memorable experience.

Rotary says the day is aimed at young people facing difficult circumstances, including poverty, disability, domestic abuse and other life challenges.

For more than 30 years, Rotary Great Britain and Ireland has helped children and young people enjoy special days out and activities through the programme. Since it began, more than one million children have taken part.

The initiative is also supported by the children’s charity Kids in Mind, which provides mental health and wellbeing support for children and families affected by domestic abuse.

Amanda Watkin, Chief Executive of Rotary GB&I, said: “One of Rotary’s core commitments is supporting young people from all backgrounds and helping them reach their full potential.

“The Rotary Children’s Fun Day focuses on children who may not ordinarily have access to these opportunities but who arguably need them most.

“It is about much more than a day of fun and entertainment. It is about creating positive experiences, building confidence and showing children that their future can be full of hope, opportunity and possibility.”

Alongside the summer programme, Rotary GB&I also runs the Rotary Christmas Toy Boxes Appeal, which provides individual toy boxes to children living in domestic abuse refuges across Great Britain and Ireland.

In 2025, the appeal raised more than £97,000 and delivered more than 3,200 toy boxes, with support from Kids in Mind and Rotary members nationwide.

Anyone wishing to find out more about their local Rotary club or support the Rotary Children’s Fun Day 2027 can visit www.rotarygbi.org/funday.

Local Government

Ombudsman confirms Woodham complaint still live after Cllr Dennison’s suspension

Published

3 hours ago

June 7, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Imperial Hall director Lee Bridges questions consistency after standards case linked to same Milford Haven planning dispute

THE PUBLIC SERVICES OMBUDSMAN FOR WALES has confirmed that a complaint concerning Cllr Guy Woodham remains under investigation following fresh questions raised by Imperial Hall director Lee Bridges.

The development follows last week’s Standards Committee hearing in which Cllr Alan Dennison was found to have breached the Members’ Code of Conduct and suspended for four months.

Same planning dispute

The Dennison case centred on the long-running planning dispute involving the former Masonic Hall, also known commercially as the Imperial Hall, in Hamilton Terrace, Milford Haven.

The original planning row related to retrospective engineering works for an external dining area at the venue. The works had started in 2021 and later became the subject of a disputed planning process involving officers, councillors, the Planning Delegation Panel, and eventually the Ombudsman.

Cllr Dennison’s involvement arose when Cllr Terry Davies, the local member, sought help completing documentation to ask for the matter to be considered by elected councillors rather than determined by officers.

Cllr Dennison said he signed the referral form “pp” — per procurationem — on behalf of Cllr Davies, with his authority.

The call to send the application to committee was considered by the Planning Delegation Panel on February 25, 2025, but was unsuccessful. Officers later refused the application in June 2025 on heritage and conservation grounds, citing concerns over the historic environment.

The Standards Committee later found that Cllr Dennison had failed to declare personal and prejudicial interests, had no dispensation from the Standards Committee, and had made a written representation in relation to the matter.

Complaint remains live

Mr Bridges has now written to the Ombudsman asking for clarification about consistency and proportionality in the way complaints arising from the same planning dispute are being handled.

In his email, sent on June 3, Mr Bridges said the Dennison case involved a councillor who had assisted another elected member in completing paperwork, and who was not the decision-maker in respect of the planning application itself.

He contrasted that with his complaint concerning Cllr Woodham, which he says involves alleged undeclared interests while chairing and participating in the Planning Delegation Panel meeting connected to the Imperial Hall application.

Mr Bridges wrote: “Unlike the circumstances considered in the Dennison case, this concerns not simply the completion of paperwork but the alleged failure to declare interests whilst actively participating in, and chairing, a meeting directly connected to the matter in question and directly negatively affecting its outcome.”

He said he accepted that every case must be considered on its own facts, but asked whether his complaint was being afforded “the same level of scrutiny and investigative rigour” as the Dennison matter.

He also asked whether allegations involving undeclared interests and participation in decision-making processes were considered serious enough to warrant the same level of resource, legal support and enforcement action.

The Ombudsman’s confirmed that the Woodham complaint remains live and has not been dismissed.

The issue is likely to attract significant local attention because both complaints arise from the same planning dispute, but involve very different alleged conduct.

Dennison vows appeal

Cllr Dennison has strongly rejected the Standards Committee’s decision and says he intends to challenge the four-month suspension.

In a statement to residents of the North Ward, he said: “I wish to reaffirm my role as your County Councillor and to address what I believe to be a misinterpretation by the recent Standards Committee, a decision I plan to challenge vigorously.”

He said he had been approached in December 2024 by Cllr Terry Davies, who asked for help completing documentation due to personal circumstances limiting his availability.

Cllr Dennison said: “The application was correctly completed, received and accepted by the Head of Planning in this format, was placed before the planning delegation committee and ultimately, it was denied thereby concluding the matter.”

He said the complaint against him had been lodged by Cllr Jacob Williams, Cabinet member for Planning, because of Dennison’s prior interactions with Mr Bridges.

He described the complaint as containing “false accusations” and “vexatious comments”, although he said the Monitoring Officer did not agree with his observations.

Cllr Dennison said the Ombudsman was represented at the hearing by a barrister, while he had no legal representation.

He said: “As constituents, you might reasonably perceive a bias from the council, especially considering it was their own Assistant Chief Executive who reported me to the Ombudsman.”

‘PP’ signature defence

Cllr Dennison said his defence was based on the legal meaning of “pp”, arguing that when someone signs with authority on behalf of another person, the named person remains the principal and owner of the document.

He said: “The application was correctly completed, received and accepted by the Head of Planning in this format.”

Cllr Dennison also said part of the evidence against him related to his attendance at the Planning Delegation Panel meeting.

He said he was in the public gallery, responded to a question from Cllr Woodham, and did not otherwise participate.

He added: “I was surprised when the Chair solicited the Ombudsman’s barrister for a recommendation on an appropriate penalty, disregarding my legal arguments based on case law.”

Fresh conflict claims

Cllr Dennison also raised further concerns about possible conflicts elsewhere in the process.

He said: “Ironically, the Assistant Chief Executive who reported me to the Ombudsman has responsibility for Scolton Manor, a PCC-owned wedding venue which could potentially benefit financially should other wedding venues fail.

“Similarly, Cllr Woodham, who chaired the Planning Delegation Committee and exercised his casting vote with full awareness of the potential repercussions for Mr Bridges, served as Treasurer and is married to the Chair of a competing wedding venue located less than a mile from Mr Bridges’ establishment.

“It appears that I am not the only one neglecting to declare a conflict of interest in this situation. It’s a funny old world.”

Those remain allegations made by Cllr Dennison.

Bridges criticises process

Mr Bridges has also strongly criticised the handling of the planning matter and the standards process.

In his statement, he said the matter “stems entirely” from his request for Cllr Terry Davies to submit an appeal as the elected member for the ward in which his business is located.

He said Cllr Davies was unable to complete paperwork within the deadline due to family circumstances and sought help from Cllr Dennison.

Mr Bridges said: “Councillor Dennison simply assisted in completing the paperwork and signed it on behalf of Councillor Davis with his authority.

“At no stage did Councillor Dennison have any involvement whatsoever in the decision-making process relating to the outcome of the matter in question. Consequently, there was no declarable interest requiring disclosure.”

Mr Bridges said it was “deeply concerning” that the issue appeared to be “being used as part of what can only be perceived as a personal campaign against Councillor Dennison”.

He also criticised what he described as “excessive bureaucracy, inconsistency” and “serious concerns about transparency and fairness within County Hall.”

When previously asked Cllr Guy Woodham, who recently stepped down from the Cabinet due to ill health, said he was unable to comment whilst the matter was under investigation.