Politics

Conservatives accused of contempt for devolution

Published

4 years ago

August 14, 2020

THE WESTMINSTER Government is undermining the devolution settlements of each of the UK’s nations according to opposition parties.

Just before the parliamentary recess, the Conservative Government published a White Paper on the future of the UK’s internal market. The same day, July 16, it opened a brief consultation. The Consultation lasted 28 days and ended yesterday, Thursday, August 13.

White papers are policy documents produced by the Government that set out their proposals for future legislation. White Papers are often published as Command Papers and may include a draft version of a Bill that is being planned. This provides a basis for further consultation and discussion with interested or affected groups and allows final changes to be made before a Bill is formally presented to Parliament.

The UK’s devolved administrations have reserved powers for a range of issues, including agricultural and animal welfare standards and building regulations.

The proposals advanced by Westminster would see powers of those two areas of policy removed from the devolved administrations’ control. Building regulations in England are both differently focused and of a lower standard than those in Wales. For example, harmonising building regulations around England’s lowest common denominator could scrap the Welsh Government’s regulation requiring sprinklers to be fitted in new homes.

The UK Government did not consult with any of the UK’s devolved administrations about its proposed legislation before publishing the White Paper and announcing an unusually brief consultation on such an important policy.

POWER GRAB? WHAT POWER GRAB? THAT POWER GRAB
When The Herald put the White Paper’s content to Conservative Shadow External Affairs Minister, Darren Millar, and asked about the change in powers over building regulations and animal welfare standards.

We received a furious response.

“To suggest that this is a power grab is utter nonsense,” fulminated Mr Millar.

We suggested no such thing. We asked only about two regulatory areas covered in a 104-page policy document.

Darren Millar continued: “As a result of the UK’s exit from the European Union scores of new powers are set to be transferred to the Welsh Parliament – so far from being a power grab, this is actually a significant power gain for Wales.

“These powers have never been held before by the Welsh Government and this legislation will give the Welsh Parliament additional levers which can be used to help ensure that economy of Wales recovers from the impact of Covid-19 while ensuring seamless trade across the UK.”
As Mr Millar said that ‘scores of new powers’ are heading the Welsh Parliament’s way, we invited him to identify some of them.

He did not answer in time for our deadline.

The problem for Mr Millar is Government line in the debate on the EU Withdrawal Agreement set out that Westminster will take some powers from Wales, even as it provides additional powers over other areas of policy.

The position was set out by the current Minister of State at the Wales Office, David TC Davies.
In the Withdrawal Agreement debate, David TC Davies said the following: “The reality is that the change will be called a power grab. I did not hear the phrase used today, but it will be described as a power grab. Of course, it is a power grab, and what a wonderful power grab it is, too. We are grabbing powers from Brussels and bringing them back to London.”

He continued: “The Government’s whole purpose is to ensure there is a single market within the United Kingdom. We cannot have a situation where different nation-states within the United Kingdom go off and do their own thing.”

The powers being lost to Westminster over agriculture and building regulations are not examples of devolved administrations ‘going off to do their own thing’ in the future. They are examples of devolved administrations which had exercised their powers and face their policies roll-back.

WESTMINSTER CLAWINGBACK POWER FROM WALESOther Welsh parties are less impressed by the White Paper. Cllr William Powell, the Welsh Liberal Democrat Spokesperson on Agriculture and Rural Affairs, said: “In my view, the manner and content of this consultation demonstrate a lack of respect by the UK Government for the Welsh devolution settlement.

“Under the cloak of enabling Westminster to create a new UK internal market at the end of the Brexit transition period, this most ideological of governments is effectively putting to the sword decades of devolution, validated by the Welsh people in two referenda.”

William Powell continued: “The Bill would allow the UK Government to set out how the devolved administrations would interact with Westminster post-Brexit, compelling Scotland and Wales to accept whatever new standards – in the field of animal welfare, environment and food are built into trade agreements of the future.

“Whereas vital areas of policy, such as agriculture, food safety and the environment are currently overseen by the governments at Holyrood and Cardiff Bay, this UK government clearly wants to have ultimate control over issues previously determined by the EU. In other words, it represents a radical clawback of power, undermining Welsh democracy and giving Boris Johnson and his associates a free hand in post-Brexit negotiations with other countries.

“Welsh Liberal Democrats are committed to respecting the devolution settlement & the principle of Welsh Home Rule. Therefore we roundly condemn the UK Government’s cavalier tactics in this consultation.”

‘THIS IS A POWER GRAB’

For Plaid Cymru, Liz Saville Roberts MP said: “Four weeks and a series of loaded questions over the summer whilst Parliament isn’t sitting is all this Westminster Government has given people in terms of a consultation on a fundamental shift in the constitution of the UK.

“It is as if the Westminster Government cannot even hide its contempt for devolution.
“This is a power grab, plain and simple. From nakedly taking back competencies already held in Wales, to the fact that this legislation was not proposed jointly with the devolved administrations, the Westminster Government is chipping away at two decades of devolution.

“People will not fall for the Westminster double-speak of adding to devolution, these changes will only diminish Wales’s ability to carve its own path.”

NO DISCUSSIONS WITH WESTMINSTER
A Welsh Government spokesperson said: “We support having rules across the UK to regulate the internal market, but these rules must be agreed between the four Governments in the UK, each of which has their own responsibility for economic development. Any new system must have independent oversight and dispute resolution.

“Unfortunately, the UK Government did not manage to share the Paper with us, and Welsh Ministers have had no recent discussions with the UK Government on these issues. Any attempt to unilaterally impose a system will be deeply damaging.”

News

Neyland Town Council conflict deepens as Extraordinary Meeting called

Published

3 hours ago

January 18, 2025

Tom Sinclair

THE DIVISIONS within Neyland Town Council are set to come under further scrutiny at an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) scheduled for Wednesday (Jan 22) at 7:00pm in Neyland Community Hub. This follows weeks of escalating tensions between councillors and public discontent over the council’s operations.

Petition demands resignation

Central to the conflict is Cllr Mike Harry, who is facing calls for his resignation after a petition, organised by Mrs P Percival-Maxwell, accused him of making inappropriate remarks and creating division within the council. The petition was presented during a recent council meeting on Monday (Jan 13).

Cllr Harry has rejected the allegations, describing the petition as “factually incorrect” and part of a targeted effort to undermine his position. In a previous statement to The Herald, he clarified his use of the term “degenerates” in an email, stating it referred specifically to three councillors—Brian Rothero, David Devauden, and Steve Thomas—who he accuses of bullying the Town Clerk and causing dysfunction within the council.

Agenda highlights serious divisions

The EGM agenda, jointly issued by Cllrs Rothero and Devauden, reflects the extent of the discord. Key points include:

Addressing public complaints and the petition calling for Cllr Harry’s resignation.
Allegations of abuse of council social media powers and bringing the council into disrepute.
Concerns over Neyland CIC’s financial losses, which reportedly total £82,000, and their potential impact on the council.
A motion to remove the Mayor and Deputy Mayor from office.

The agenda has been described by Cllr Harry as a “list of items designed to rabble-rouse and cause maximum trouble within the council.” He claims the ongoing actions of Cllrs Rothero and Devauden are an attempt to disrupt proceedings for personal agendas, making it difficult for the council to function effectively.

Questions of lawfulness

The lawfulness of the EGM has become a point of contention. According to Cllrs Rothero and Devauden, the meeting was called in strict compliance with the council’s standing orders, including the required three clear days’ notice. However, the agenda also mentions the possibility of a forced change of venue due to challenges in booking the Neyland Community Hub, raising concerns about whether such a change would meet procedural requirements. For the meeting to remain lawful, any venue change must be communicated effectively and within the legal framework governing local council meetings.

Another potential issue lies in the authority to call the meeting. Cllrs Rothero and Devauden assert that their actions align with standing orders, but any procedural irregularities, such as failing to involve the Town Clerk in booking arrangements or properly distributing the agenda, could open the meeting to legal challenges. The involvement of the Monitoring Officer in correspondence suggests an effort to ensure compliance, but whether this will be sufficient remains to be seen.

Cllr Harry, meanwhile, has described the meeting as a “personal agenda” by his opponents, further questioning its legitimacy. If the meeting proceeds and results in significant decisions, such as the removal of the Mayor or Deputy Mayor, any procedural flaws could later be cited to contest these outcomes.

Social media row adds fuel to fire

A recent post on Neyland Town Council’s Facebook page by Cllr Harry has added to the controversy. In his email to fellow councillors, Cllr Harry admitted the post was “possibly questionable” but justified it as a response to years of attacks from certain councillors and their allies. The post has reportedly drawn threats of legal action and complaints to the Monitoring Officer.

Cllrs Rothero and Devauden have accused Cllr Harry of misusing his position and the council’s social media channels to target opponents, further eroding trust within the council.

Community concerns and financial risks

Beyond personal disputes, the financial state of Neyland CIC, a community interest company, has emerged as a pressing issue. With reported losses of £82,000, concerns are mounting about the potential impact on the town council’s budget and its ability to deliver essential services.

A council divided

As the date for the EGM approaches, opinions within Neyland remain divided. Some residents have voiced support for Cllr Harry, citing his nearly 20 years of service and commitment to the community. Others back the petition, viewing his actions as detrimental to the council’s reputation and functionality.

The Herald understands that the outcome of the EGM could mark a turning point for the council, potentially reshaping its leadership and future direction. With accusations and counter-accusations flying, the meeting promises to be a pivotal moment in addressing the dysfunction that has gripped Neyland Town Council.

News

Neyland councillor defends actions following petition for resignation

Published

20 hours ago

January 17, 2025

Tom Sinclair

A STATEMENT has been issued by Cllr Mike Harry in response to a petition calling for his resignation, which was handed in during the Neyland Town Council meeting on Monday (Jan 13). The petition, organised by Mrs P Percival-Maxwell, accuses Cllr Harry of making inappropriate remarks and creating division within the council.

In his detailed statement, Cllr Harry rejected the allegations, describing the petition as “factually incorrect” and part of a targeted effort to discredit him and further destabilise the council.

Cllr Harry explained that his email, which is at the centre of the controversy, was a response to what he described as “insulting and threatening” messages from fellow councillors Brian Rothero, Steve Thomas, and David Devauden. He clarified that the term “degenerates” referred specifically to those individuals, who he accuses of relentless bullying and harassment of the Town Clerk, not Neyland residents.

He also pointed out that the “constituents” referred to in the petition are, in fact, a group of five individuals who attended an unauthorised meeting and whom he alleges are regulars at a local pub owned by Cllr Rothero.

Cllr Harry claimed that the ongoing behaviour of Cllrs Rothero, Thomas, and Devauden has rendered the council dysfunctional and unable to serve the people of Neyland effectively. He described their actions as consistently disruptive, highlighting the negative impact on the Town Clerk and the council’s ability to progress key matters.

“I’d simply had enough and had to finally call it out for what it is,” he stated, noting that his email was directed at a total of eight individuals who, in his view, show no interest in the council’s proper functioning.

Cllr Harry, who has served on Neyland Town Council for nearly 20 years, emphasised his dedication to the community and its residents. “The interests of the residents of Neyland have always been paramount to me,” he said. He expressed frustration over the current tensions within the council, calling the situation “particularly difficult and insulting” and not reflective of why he became a councillor.

The petition has deepened divisions within Neyland, with some residents supporting Cllr Harry’s defence and others standing by the petition’s call for his resignation. The issue highlights broader concerns about the council’s internal dynamics and its ability to address key issues for the community.

News

New holiday lodges at Pembrokeshire deer park get approval

Published

1 day ago

January 17, 2025

Bruce Sinclair - Local Democracy Reporter

PLANS for disability-friendly holiday lodges at a Pembrokeshire deer park attraction which could be a Wales tourism “benchmark” have been backed, but a final decision is likely to rest with full council.

In an application recommended for refusal at the January 14 meeting of Pembrokeshire County council’s planning committee, Mr and Mrs Evans are seeking permission for 15 lodges at Great Wedlock, Gumfreston, near Tenby, the site of a 176-acre deer farm attraction, which includes animals from the late Queen’s estate, and a more recently-granted market traders’ barn.

An earlier application for the lodges was recommended for refusal by officers at last July’s planning meeting, but, at the start of that meeting, members heard the application had been withdrawn at the agent’s behest.

Reasons for refusal given to members included it was outside of an identified settlement boundary in a countryside location, it was considered to have an adverse impact on visual amenity and did not include a Green Infrastructure statement.

The applicants have previously said build costs to complete the development would be circa £2m.

Following the withdrawal, amended proposals have been submitted by the applicants through agent Atriarc Planning, following a consultation recently held with St Florence Community Council.

St Florence Community Council did not support the previous application, but has supported the latest scheme.

Speaking at the January meeting, Alan Jones, on behalf of the community council, said it was now supporting the “much-improved design” which, amongst other concerns, now addressed the issue of a much wider range of disabilities – including the blind and deaf and hard of hearing – rather than just wheelchair use.

Applicant Andrew Evans told the meeting the proposals would support a whole raft of people with varying disabilities, Great Wedlock already taking a “head-on” approach supporting people with disabilities through special vehicles at the deer park, and encouraging people with disabilities to apply for staff vacancies.

“This is not an application for yet another holiday park, it is a well thought out one for those who have a disability, which will make them a majority rather than a minority; it will make us at the forefront for people in Wales to visit with a disability.”

Local member, Cllr Rhys Jordan moved the application be supported in spite of an officer recommendation for refusal, saying it was “an opportunity to address a clear shortage [for disability-friendly accommodation] and a chance for Pembrokeshire to lead the way in accessible tourism,” adding: “Most importantly the lodges will be 100 per cent accessible and set a benchmark, positioning Pembrokeshire as a leader in accessible tourism.”

He finished: “Approve this forward-thinking proposal today.”

Officers have recommended planners refuse the scheme, for similar reasons to previously, saying the material considerations put forward in the agent’s supporting planning statement “are not sufficient to overcome the conflict with relevant Development Plan policies”.

Members voted 11 in favour to two against supporting the scheme.

The committee’s backing of the proposal takes the form of a ‘minded to’ support, meaning the proposal will return to a future meeting as it is against an officer recommendation, and, if supported a second time, will ultimately have to be decided by full council, in this case potentially at the March meeting.

The applicants’ previous scheme for the trading barn took an identical route, being decided by full council after repeatedly being recommended for refusal.