Scores of firms listed in court for non-payment of business rates

HUNDREDS of businesses across Pembrokeshire are facing court action for unpaid non-domestic rates (business rates), with a staggering number of cases listed at Haverfordwest Magistrates’ Court on Monday (Feb 17).

The court list reveals that Pembrokeshire County Council is seeking liability orders against an astonishing 686 defendants.

The hearings will determine whether the council can proceed with enforcement measures against those who have failed to pay their dues. The proceedings fall under Regulation 12 of the Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement) (Local Lists) Regulations 1989.

These liability orders, if granted, could result in enforcement action, which may include bailiff visits, seizure of goods, or other legal consequences for businesses struggling to meet their financial obligations.

The scale of the action highlights the financial strain faced by many local businesses, with concerns growing over the economic pressures forcing traders into arrears. The Herald understands that businesses across multiple sectors, including hospitality, retail, and services, are among those affected.

A local business owner, who wished to remain anonymous, told The Herald: “The cost of running a business has skyrocketed, and many of us are struggling to keep up. We want to pay our rates, but when you’re dealing with soaring costs and reduced footfall, it becomes a real challenge.”

As the Welsh Government considers levying a Tourism Tax, the court action underscores the difficulties facing Pembrokeshire’s business community, as economic conditions continue to tighten.

The Herald will continue to monitor the outcome of these proceedings and report on any further developments.

A DAIRY farmer managing a chronic bovine TB breakdown has eliminated a major disease threat to his herd by no longer buying in cattle.

Michael Williams is one of 15 farmers involved in the Pembrokeshire TB pilot, a Welsh Government initiative which aims to develop additional measures for bovine TB control, over and above the statutory actions currently being used.

Sharing his progress with other farmers at a recent Farming Connect event, Mr Williams said there is much that every farmer can do to protect their herds from TB.

He has introduced multiple biosecurity measures, including running a closed herd.

He milks 150 cows on a robot milking system at Fagwrfran East, Puncheston, and had sourced cattle from livestock markets but this came with the risk of importing TB.

“We had already stopped buying in cattle before becoming part of this project but we have since become a truly closed herd, we don’t even buy a stock bull,’’ Mr Williams explained.

Cameras were installed to establish if badgers were coming into contact with cattle in the yard and housing and with food and water sources.

None were detected but there were obvious physical signs of activity in fields and on cow tracks.

One and a half miles of badger-proof fencing has since been erected along a hedge with a high number of setts and latrines, to separate these from the stock.

Mr Williams has introduced other measures too:

Creating a remote fallen stock area

The fallen stock collection point had been situated on a part of the farm which compelled a vehicle to cross the yard to collect carcasses.

This facility is now located in a contained area of a building that sits closest to the road and can be completely sealed off from wildlife.

Erecting electric fencing along the maize clamp

Although the farm has no feed bins vulnerable to wildlife, its open maize clamp is a potential risk at feeding out.

Mr Williams erected a simple deterrent, filling two redundant 20-litre dairy chemical drums with sand, placing these at each end of the clamp face and running polywire from one to the other, hooked up to a solar-powered energiser.

“This cost about £20, took ten minutes of my time and prevents badgers from interfering with the feed,’’ he said.

Restricting visitor numbers

Unplanned visits by sales representatives and others are now discouraged.

Visits are by appointment only and a sign has been placed at the farm entrance advising of this policy.

Vehicles coming onto the farm must be clean.

Draining unused water troughs

In-field drinking water troughs that are not used in the winter when the herd and youngstock are housed are drained and remain empty until turnout.

Water troughs in use are cleaned weekly.

Reducing reliance on farm contractors

Investment has been made in slurry application equipment to remove the need for hiring contractors for this job.

Keeping cattle accommodation walkways clean

The frequency that feed passages in the cattle housing are cleaned has increased to minimise the period that slurry pools in these locations.

Adopting the highest level of hygiene at calving 

Matting similar to cubicle bed mattresses has been laid in a dedicated calving pen to allow the floor to be thoroughly pressure washed and disinfected between calvings.

Providing footwear disinfection points

Containers of disinfectant solution are positioned around the yard to allow footwear to be disinfected in between contact with different classes of stock

Increasing intervals between slurry application and silage harvesting

Although Mr Williams operates a multi-cut silage system, he has increased cutting intervals from four weeks to five and applies slurry to the aftermath at the very earliest opportunity, the day after the grass has been collected from the field.

Other measures

In addition to rolling out biosecurity measures, Mr Williams has been culling animals which have been identified as at high risk of contracting or spreading TB, flagged up on a ‘risk rating’ list through an app developed for the Pembrokeshire TB pilot.

Any cow in the two highest risk categories – in this case red or amber – is sold as barren.

“Being more proactive with culling, choosing when an animal leaves the farm rather than being in a forced situation as a result of a TB test, is a better option in many ways,’’ said Mr Williams.

If an animal falls into a ‘yellow’ band, the lowest of the three risk categories, but is nonetheless a risk, she is bred to a terminal sire to ensure that no female replacements enter the herd.

In 2024, 35 of Mr Williams’ cows exited the herd based on risk rating results.

“There is short term pain in getting on top of the residual disease but I am confident that we will reap the rewards a few years down the line,’’ he maintains.

“If we can get down to two or three per cent risk rating, we will be in the realms of being on top of the disease rather than the disease being on top of the herd.’’

He believes this system is working.

“In December 2024 the risk rating was 7% compared to 11% in January 2024 so this is a start, we think culling is working.’’

Mr Williams also emphasised the importance of making time to discuss biosecurity and disease risks with the farm vet.

“Don’t do this while the vet is TB testing or on the farm for another reason, set aside a dedicated time to have a proper discussion,’’ he advised.

He credits his vet, Rhiannon Lewis, of Gwaun Vets, with supporting him through this process. “We have worked together on this,’’ he said.

PANEL

The Farming Connect event was hosted by Rhys Lougher at Ty Tanglwyst, a dairy farm near Pyle.

Mr Lougher’s 120-cow herd of pedigree Holsteins has been free of TB for many years.

He too has high levels of biosecurity and benefits from his farm being largely remote from cattle on other holdings and protected by hard boundaries including roads and limestone quarries.

Only sexed semen is used for breeding and no cattle have been bought in for 40 years.

Mr Lougher has his own slurry tanker and muck spreader to avoid use of contractors.

“A big part of our business is selling high health status, freshly calved, pedigree Holstein heifers to other dairy farms, the wish to continue to do this is our main driver for wanting to keep TB out of our farm,’’ he said.

THE WALES TOURISM ALLIANCE has strongly criticised comments made by Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Mark Drakeford, during his evidence session to the Welsh Government Finance Committee regarding the proposed Welsh Visitor Levy. The WTA argues that Drakeford’s remarks misrepresent the scale of the tourism industry and downplay the potential economic consequences of the levy.

What is the visitor levy?

The proposed Visitor Levy, commonly referred to as the “tourism tax,” would allow local authorities in Wales to introduce a charge on visitors staying in overnight accommodation. The Welsh Government argues that this levy would help support local infrastructure and services used by tourists. However, industry representatives and local businesses fear that it will deter visitors, particularly in key tourism-dependent areas such as Pembrokeshire.

Pembrokeshire, home to one of Wales’ most popular tourist destinations, Tenby, relies heavily on tourism revenue. Business owners, accommodation providers, and tourism operators in the county have expressed significant concerns that the levy could put off visitors, leading to reduced spending in local shops, restaurants, and attractions. Many have pointed out that, with the cost-of-living crisis already squeezing holiday budgets, an additional charge could push visitors to choose alternative destinations outside Wales.

Employment figures disputed

Drakeford claimed that the tourism and hospitality sector in Wales employs “a million” people and would not struggle to absorb the loss of several hundred jobs due to the levy. He also suggested that many tourism jobs are seasonal, have flexible hours, and are high-churn, implying that job losses would be manageable.

However, the WTA strongly disputes these figures, citing Welsh Government data that places the number of people employed in the sector at approximately 159,000. Given this significantly lower number, the loss of even a few hundred jobs would be far more impactful than Drakeford suggests. Furthermore, the WTA argues that seasonal and part-time jobs play a crucial role in providing employment opportunities, particularly for young people and those with caregiving responsibilities, such as parents and carers—groups that may struggle to find work in other sectors.

Concerns over data reliability

Drakeford also accused industry representatives, including the WTA, of selectively using worst-case scenario data in their evidence to the committee. The WTA rejects this claim, arguing that the data underpinning the Visitor Levy’s economic impact assessment is flawed and unreliable.

This concern was echoed by Professor Calvin Jones, the author of the Welsh Government’s own Visitor Levy Economic Impact Assessment. In his evidence to the Finance Committee, Jones stated: “We know very little about how the tourism economy in Wales works… we know very little about what drives visitors to come to Wales; we know almost nothing about how much they’re spending when they’re here… there isn’t even any data anymore on… how much is spent on accommodation… it should be a very uncomfortable place for Senedd Members to be when they’re trying to make policy or audit policy on tourism.”

Impact on families and educational visits

Drakeford defended the inclusion of children in the Visitor Levy by comparing it to VAT on sweets, arguing that children are not generally exempt from taxation. However, the WTA points out that this analogy is flawed, as children’s clothing, shoes, and books are zero-rated for VAT in the UK. The WTA also highlights that many other countries with tourism taxes exclude under-18s from such charges.

The per-person nature of the levy means that families will be disproportionately affected. For instance, two adults staying in accommodation for a week would pay a levy of £21, whereas a family of six would pay £63 for the same stay. Moreover, the WTA raises concerns that the levy will also apply to children on school trips and educational visits, adding an extra financial burden on families and schools.

Impact on Pembrokeshire’s tourism sector

Pembrokeshire businesses, particularly those in coastal tourist hotspots like Tenby, Saundersfoot, and St Davids, are among those voicing the strongest opposition to the levy. Many fear that it will discourage visitors from choosing Welsh destinations, instead opting for other parts of the UK or even holidaying abroad.

Tourism plays a vital role in Pembrokeshire’s economy, providing employment for thousands and sustaining local businesses. According to industry figures, over 4 million visitors come to Pembrokeshire each year, contributing hundreds of millions to the local economy. Hospitality providers in the region have warned that the levy could have serious repercussions, particularly for independent hotels, B&Bs, and campsites that rely on high occupancy levels during peak season to remain viable year-round.

A local B&B owner in Tenby, speaking to The Herald, said: “We are already seeing the effects of rising costs on bookings. If people are being asked to pay extra on top of accommodation prices, they will simply look elsewhere. We rely on repeat visitors and families who come year after year—this levy could drive them away.”

Wider economic impact

Drakeford dismissed the idea that the Visitor Levy would contribute to the cumulative challenges faced by the tourism and hospitality sector, stating that these issues “do not collide on all of the sector.”

The WTA strongly disagrees, asserting that tourism is a holistic industry where changes in one area inevitably impact others. They highlight several pressures already affecting tourism businesses, including:

• The 182-day rule for self-catering properties.
• National Insurance increases.
• The removal of furnished holiday let tax relief.

According to the WTA, these combined factors are already forcing many small, locally-run self-catering businesses to close, further weakening the sector and putting more jobs at risk.

WTA’s final response

Rowland Rees-Evans, Chair of the WTA, criticised Drakeford’s approach, stating: “We are disappointed that Mr Drakeford is dismissing the valid concerns raised by industry experts and academics and making claims that are factually incorrect.

Many people in Wales are unaware that the Visitor Levy will apply to anyone staying in ‘Visitor Accommodation’—including children on educational visits and people working away from home, even if they already live in Wales.

The bottom line is that the Visitor Levy will cost people in Wales money and jobs—even in the best-case scenario presented by the Welsh Government. Mr Drakeford seems content to push through a policy that is poorly conceived, offers no guaranteed financial benefit to Wales, and threatens hundreds of jobs in an industry that employs over 20% of the workforce in some parts of the country.

Given the current economic climate, it is difficult to understand why the person responsible for managing the Welsh budget would consider imposing such a levy at this time.”

The debate over the proposed Visitor Levy continues, with industry representatives calling for more robust data, a clearer assessment of economic consequences, and a reconsideration of its implementation before the policy is finalised.