Politics

Welsh Health Minister defends retail restrictions

Published

4 years ago

October 26, 2020

THE WELSH Health Minister, Vaughan Gething, faced stiff today (Monday, Oct 26) questioning over retail restrictions during the current ‘firebreak lockdown’.

The Minister ducked a question from ITV Wales’ Adrian Masters.

That question asked whether trust in the Welsh Government’s handling of COVID-19 had been harmed by the row over supermarket chains sectioning off areas of ‘non-essential’ goods in their stores.

Instead of answering directly, Mr Gething carefully set out what he termed ‘a balance of harms’.

Vaughan Gething explained that the Welsh Government accepted the lockdown would cause some harm to Wales, to Welsh businesses, and individuals. However, he said, those harms had to be offset against the harm to public health and longer-term more adverse economic outcomes if the Welsh Government did nothing.

The BBC’s Dan Davies tackled Vaughan Gething again on the topic. In response, Mr Gething claimed that ending the rules on non-essential retail would both penalise small retailers and lead to greater community transmission of the virus.

Asked about remarks made by Lee Waters MS, Wales’ Deputy Economy Minister, that a further lockdown was ‘likely’ in the New Year, Mr Gething could not guarantee that one would not happen.

He said: “Measures are possible for the future but that depends on how successful we are in coming together as a nation to act in a way which means coronavirus is less likely to spread in the future.”

The Minister next received direct questions about the Government’s communications and messaging following a row over what were essential and non-essential goods.

This morning, Andrew RT Davies capitalised on a mistake by Tesco, which claimed the Welsh Government classified period products as non-essential. By the time Mr Davies tweeted his outrage and released a statement to the media, Tesco confirmed it was in the wrong and deleted its tweet. As Tesco has since acknowledged, period products – which are for sale in pharmacies – are classed as essential goods.

However, by then the damage had been done to the Welsh Government’s image.

Mr Gething said meetings had taken place with major retailers last Thursday, between ministers over the weekend, and there would be a further meeting this afternoon.

“The conversation we’re having with supermarkets today [about non-essential retail],” said the Minister, “will discuss limited circumstances [in which sales can take place].”

However, Vaughan Gething continued: “Much of what we have seen over the weekend is about the ‘what-if scenarios’ unlikely to come up over the next two weeks.”

Mr Gething continued to try and get the message over about a balance of harms and tried to explain why the Welsh Government imposed the retail restrictions it chose.

He stressed the Welsh Government decided to stop supermarkets selling goods otherwise available in small retailers who were compelled to close during the current lockdown.

The Welsh Conservative Shadow Economy Minister, Russell George AM, asked Mark Drakeford for a specific reassurance on that point – to protect small businesses compelled to close – last Thursday (Oct 22).

Loud Conservative voices, particularly those of Simon Hart and Andrew RT Davies, have condemned the Welsh Government for doing what their own Shadow Economy Minister asked.

The impression, however – of a ban on the sale of books and baby clothes – does not look good for the Welsh Government.

And neither does the confusion among large retailers.

That criticism was the subject of further direct questioning by journalists who asked Mr Gething how, if major businesses could misinterpret the guidance, how the public could possibly interpret it.

Vaughan Gething remained adamant guidance was clear but would be further clarified with major retailers.

Plaid Cymru Leader Adam Price MS said: “The important thing for the Welsh Government to acknowledge is that they have made a complete mess of the messaging. Humility is important in admitting that you have got it wrong. They should have focused very clearly and very simply on the public health message.

“The objective of closing non-essential retail for this period is to try to limit the number of contacts so they can limit the number of infections – and that’s somehow got completely lost in the messaging which has then eroded public trust over the weekend.”

News

Community asked for views on allocation of new St Davids homes

Published

15 hours ago

July 26, 2024

Tom Sinclair

THE FIRST phase of Pembrokeshire County Council’s Glasfryn housing development in St Davids is progressing well with the second phase also underway.

The development being built by GRD Homes Ltd, began in November 2023, with a first phase completion date of Winter 2024 looking hopeful, ahead of the scheduled plans.

The first phase consists of seven properties, including a mixture of one and two bedroom bungalows

As completion draws closer the properties will be advertised via Pembrokeshire Choice Homes.

Ahead of this, the Council’s housing team will be holding community engagement on the 13th August 2024 at the Ty’r Pererin Centres, Quickwell Hill, St Davids, SA62 6PD, 5pm-7pm.

This will be a chance for officers to liaise with the local community about the allocation process for these properties.

Glasfryn’s second phase is well underway, with the initial groundwork already completed. This phase includes a further 11 two bedroom bungalows, with a completion date in late 2025.

These bungalows will meet the latest Welsh Government’s Development Quality Requirement, and will be energy efficient, built to EPC A specification and include solar panels to help tenants with running costs.

The Glasfryn development is funded in partnership with Welsh Government.

Cabinet Member for Housing Cllr Michelle Bateman said: “We are really keen to work with the community on a local lettings policy for these new properties, as we have done for our developments in other parts of the County.”

If you have any queries please email the Customer Liaison Team on [email protected], phone them on 01437 764551, or visit Housing’s Facebook page.

Business

Legal call to stop £6m expansion of holiday park still ongoing

Published

1 day ago

July 25, 2024

Bruce Sinclair - Local Democracy Reporter

A LEGAL request to overturn a Pembrokeshire County Council-granted approval for a £6m expansion of a south Pembrokeshire holiday park is still ongoing despite a previous announcement it had been turned down, county planners heard.

Back in February, Pembrokeshire planners were informed a legal challenge to a November 2023-granted application for works at Heritage Park, Pleasant Valley/Stepaside had been launched.

The holiday park scheme had previously been backed twice by county planners after a ‘minded to approve’ cooling-off period was invoked as it was against repeated officer recommendations to refuse.

The controversial scheme by Heritage Leisure Development (Wales) Ltd includes the installation of 48 bases for holiday lodges, a spa facility at a former pub, holiday apartments, a café and cycle hire, equestrian stables, a manège and associated office, and associated works.

It is said the scheme, next to the historic remains of the 19th century Stepaside ironworks and colliery, will create 44 jobs.

Officer grounds for refusal, based on the Local Development Plan, included the site being outside a settlement area.

Along with 245 objections to the current scheme, Stepaside & Pleasant Valley Residents’ Group (SPVRG Ltd) – formed to object to an earlier 2019 application which was later withdrawn – also raised a 38-page objection, with a long list of concerns.

A failed legal challenge to try and overturn a council decision to approve three separate planning applications at Heritage Park was launched in 2021 by SPVRG Ltd, which failed in early 2022; the council awarded costs of £10,000 despite external legal fees paid totalled £34,000 plus VAT.

At the June meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council’s planning committee members were told the recent judicial review call by SPVRG Ltd had been refused by the high court, the grounds put forward “not considered to be reasonably arguable”.

Committee chair Cllr Simon Hancock said a council request for SPVRG Ltd to pay costs incurred by the county council in defending the claim had now been submitted.

Following that, at the July planning meeting, in his chair’s announcement, Dr Hancock gave a clarification on the position.

“I can advise that whilst the application for judicial review was refused by the High Court Judge on May 31, 2024, the appellants have challenged this decision.

“This matter is listed for a renewal hearing, and accordingly the legal challenge is still in progress; I’m hoping that’s a clarification from the announcements I made back in June.”

Responding to the clarification, Trish Cormack of SPVRG Ltd pointed out it was not “an appeal,” adding: “Firstly, we are ‘requesting the decision to be reconsidered at a hearing,’ which is a bit less dramatic than ‘challenging the decision’.

“Secondly, the claim remains open for seven days after the decision on the papers in expectance of you requesting the hearing, and the form 86B comes attached to the decision with the case number already filled in for you. This is just part of the process for a judicial review. If the Judge really thought there were no merits to the case, he was free to issue a ‘without merits refusal’.

“That would have ended the claim there and then. The only way to resurrect it would have been to take it to the appeal court. But he didn’t.

“Thirdly, the announcement makes it sound like our ‘challenge’ had happened after their previous announcement, whereas in fact we only had seven days from May 31 in which to make the request, so they knew the moment we did (June 7) because we had to simultaneously email it to the court, PCC and the developer’s agent. So, they knew full well that there would be a renewal hearing.”

Farming

Farm building scheme near Lawrenny given go-ahead by planners

Published

1 day ago

July 25, 2024

Bruce Sinclair - Local Democracy Reporter

AN APPLICATION for a storage building at a south Pembrokeshire farm, made by a family member of an officer on Pembrokeshire County Council’s planning service, has been given the go-ahead by the authority’s planning committee.

In an application recommended for approval at the July 23 meeting of the authority’s planning committee, Laura Elliot sought permission for the erection of an agricultural storage building at Tedion Farm, a dairy farm near Lawrenny.

The application had been brought to committee, rather than being delegated to planning officers, due to the family connection.

The farm, near to the Pembrokeshire coast National Park border, comprises 270 milking cows and dairy heifer replacements kept on the farm comprising land over 138 hectares. The farm is mainly down to grass and the cows are paddock grazed in order to utilise grass efficiency.

No objections had been received from local community council Martletwy.

A report for members said: “The application seeks consent for the erection of agricultural storage building. The erection of an agricultural building will be used to store stay, hay and farm machinery.

“The building would be located within the existing farm complex, to the north-east of the site, adjacent to the main farm dwelling. The building will measure 18 metres in length by 13.6 metres in width, with a pitched roof height of 5.71 metres.”

Approval was moved by Cllr Alistair Cameron, seconded by Cllr Brian Hall.