Politics
Universal Income plans depend on Westminster
MARK DRAKEFORD’s announcement that the Welsh Government plans to trial Universal Basic Income in a few locations in Wales captured headlines in online media.
The First Minister was variously said to have ‘hinted’ at a trial or announced a trial would take place.
However, nobody should have been surprised by the First Minister’s announcement.
Not only was the policy contained in Labour’s Manifesto for May 6’s election – a bit more than ’a hint’ – but also the principle of holding a trial in Wales was enthusiastically passed by the last Welsh Parliament in September last year. It was a policy in Plaid Cymru’s election manifesto and Labour’s; so, whether Labour went it alone in Government or was in partnership with Plaid Cymru, a trial was on the cards.
WG KNOWS WESTMINSTER HAS THE FINAL WORD
However, whether the Welsh Government can carry out a trial is beyond its immediate control.
Headlines that said the Welsh Government WILL carry out even limited Universal Basic Income trials are also jumping the gun.
When the Senedd debated a motion brought forward by Jack Sargeant MS on September 30, 2020, here is what the Finance Minister Rebecca Evans had to say about it: “The Welsh Government would be open to such a trial taking place in Wales, but we have to be realistic that such a trial would not be possible without the active cooperation of the UK Government, and this is because of the interaction of universal basic income with the tax and benefit system.
“If such a trial were offered, we would also require that conditions were met to ensure that the Welsh Government and this Senedd were able to play a significant role in the design, governance and accountability of any scheme.
“Were the Welsh Government to make payments to individuals without the cooperation of the UK Government, this could simply result in them being ineligible for existing benefits or paying more in tax.
“Aside from the fact that this would not then be a proper test of the effect of an unconditional payment, it would result in the transfer of resources from the Welsh Government to the UK Government.
“And, sadly, our recent experience of the UK Government’s approach to the taxation of our payments to social care workers doesn’t suggest that we should expect their active cooperation.”
In short, the Welsh Government needs Westminster’s ‘active cooperation’ to make a trial possible.
Without Westminster’s cooperation, those who get the Universal Basic Income could (are almost certain to) lose all of their entitlements to other benefits, tax credits, and other means-tested benefits. They could also have to pay tax on it.
WHAT IS UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME?
Universal Basic Income is not a new idea. Its long history stretches back to antiquity and has been a feature of both romantic and progressive political theory for centuries.
At its simplest, Universal Basic Income does away with a raft of welfare benefits. It substitutes them with a single payment of a fixed amount.
Schemes that guarantee a basic income, short of enough to live on, exist in a few US states and a handful of national economies. However, those are more of an income floor for those who are otherwise dependent on welfare benefits. They are not an actual Universal Basic Income.
A national trial in Finland ended after two years with no definitive finding of better outcomes for those who received UBI over those who did not.
The Covid pandemic increased interest in the idea of UBI in continental Europe. At the same time, the US used a series of relatively modest income replacement initiatives to stop people’s descent into poverty (or into deeper poverty).
The UK’s furlough scheme was – essentially – a basic income guarantee but not genuinely universal in nature.
A major multi-national academic study published in 2017 found that UBI probably improved some health outcomes and increased the likelihood of children attending school.
However, the same report also concluded the evidence for positive outcomes from UBI-type schemes was ‘very uncertain’.
THE COST TO WALES
The main deterrent to a truly Universal Basic Income is cost.
• If a full universal basic income were paid in Wales to all working-age adults and set at the level of the official living wage, the cost would be around £35 billion a year.
• If set at the level of the real living wage, the cost would be around £40 billion.
• For illustration, those figures are around twice the size of the Welsh Government’s budget. As a further comparison, income tax in Wales raises in total just over £5 billion.
• Of course, the costs could be much reduced if universal basic income were paid at a lower rate. However, payment at a lower rate would reduce its attractiveness.
Those last four points are not our own words. They are the Welsh Government’s position as set out in 2020 by its own Finance Minister.
Nothing has changed those figures since September 30, 2020.
They demonstrate the prohibitive and unsupportable cost of UBI to Wales without massive and systemic change across the whole UK.
SCOTCH MIST
As an illustrative example of the timescales and complexity of introducing even a pilot scheme, we only need to look at Scotland.
In September 2017, the Scottish Government announced it would support local authority areas to explore a Citizen’s Basic Income Scheme by establishing a fund to help regions to develop their proposals further and establish appropriate testing.
The funding offered was £250,000 over the two financial years 2018/19 and 2019/20.
Four local authority areas: Fife Council, City of Edinburgh Council, Glasgow City Council and North Ayrshire Council, worked together to research and explore the feasibility of local pilots of Basic Income in Scotland.
Notlaunch a basic income. Explore its feasibility.
Over three and a half years since the Scottish Government’s announcement, there is still no UBI trial in Scotland.
Putting such a scheme in place depends, yet again, on Westminster’s cooperation.
A report on the progress of the feasibility study notes’ any pilot [must] have the necessary support to influence the future of national policy and the role of Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC), HM Treasury and the NHS will be vital in the design and implementation of a Basic Income pilot.’
Three years to design and complete a feasibility study into a limited trial in four local authority areas in Scotland combined with the need to wait for Westminster approval does not suggest a quick fix.
And if it’s not a rapid process in Scotland, it will scarcely be quicker in Wales.
Business
Cwm Deri Vineyard Martletwy holiday lets plans deferred
CALLS to convert a former vineyard restaurant in rural Pembrokeshire which had been recommended for refusal has been given a breathing space by planners.
In an application recommended for refusal at the December meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council’s planning committee, Barry Cadogan sought permission for a farm diversification and expansion of an existing holiday operation through the conversion of the redundant former Cwm Deri vineyard production base and restaurant to three holiday lets at Oaklea, Martletwy.
It was recommended for refusal on the grounds of the open countryside location being contrary to planning policy and there was no evidence submitted that the application would not increase foul flows and that nutrient neutrality in the Pembrokeshire Marine SAC would be achieved within this catchment.
An officer report said that, while the scheme was suggested as a form of farm diversification, no detail had been provided in the form of a business case.
Speaking at the meeting, agent Andrew Vaughan-Harries of Hayston Developments & Planning Ltd, after the committee had enjoyed a seasonal break for mince pies, said of the recommendation for refusal: “I’m a bit grumpy over this one; the client has done everything right, he has talked with the authority and it’s not in retrospect but has had a negative report from your officers.”

He said the former Cwm Deri vineyard had been a very successful business, with a shop and a restaurant catering for ‘100 covers’ before it closed two three years ago when the original owner relocated to Carmarthenshire.
He said Mr Cadogan then bought the site, farming over 36 acres and running a small campsite of 20 spaces, but didn’t wish to run a café or a wine shop; arguing the “beautiful kitchen” and facilities would easily convert to holiday let use.
He said a “common sense approach” showed a septic tank that could cope with a restaurant of “100 covers” could cope with three holiday lets, describing the nitrates issue as “a red herring”.
He suggested a deferral for further information to be provided by the applicant, adding: “This is a big, missed opportunity if we just kick this out today, there’s a building sitting there not creating any jobs.”
On the ‘open countryside’ argument, he said that while many viewed Martletwy as “a little bit in the sticks” there was already permission for the campsite, and the restaurant, and the Bluestone holiday park and the Wild Lakes water park were roughly a mile or so away.
He said converting the former restaurant would “be an asset to bring it over to tourism,” adding: “We don’t all want to stay in Tenby or the Ty Hotel in Milford Haven.”
While Cllr Nick Neuman felt the nutrients issue could be overcome, Cllr Michael Williams warned the application was “clearly outside policy,” recommending it be refused.
A counter-proposal, by Cllr Tony Wilcox, called for a site visit before any decision was made, the application returning to a future committee; members voting seven to three in favour of that.
Climate
Fishguard ‘battery box’ scheme near school refused
PLANNERS have refused a Pembrokeshire ‘battery box’ electricity storage unit near a Pembrokeshire town school, which has seen local objections including fears of a potential risk to nearby school children.
In an application recommended for approval at the December meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council’s planning committee, AMP Clean Energy sought permission for a micro energy storage project on land at Fishguard Leisure Centre Car Park, near Ysgol Bro Gwaun.
The application had previously been recommended for approval at the November meeting, but a decision was deferred pending a site visit.
The scheme is one of a number of similar applications by AMP, either registered or approved under delegated planning powers by officers.
The battery boxes import electricity from the local electricity network when demand for electricity is low or when there are high levels of renewable energy available, exporting it back during periods of high demand to help address grid reliability issues; each giving the potential to power 200 homes for four hours.
The Fishguard scheme, which has seen objections from the town council and members of the public, was before committee at the request of the local member, Cllr Pat Davies.
Fishguard and Goodwick Town Council objected to the proposal on grounds including visual impact, and the location being near the school.
An officer report said the scheme would be well screened by a Paladin Fence, with a need to be sited close to an existing substation.
Speaking at the December meeting, Ben Wallace of AMP Clean Energy conceded the boxes were “not things of beauty” before addressing previously raised concerns of any potential fire risk, saying that “in the incredibly unlikely” event of a fire, the system would contain it for up to two hours, giving “plenty of time” for it to be extinguished, an alarm immediately sounding, with the fire service raising no concerns.
“These are fundamentally safe, the technology is not new,” he said, comparing them to such batteries in phones and laptops.
One of the three objectors at the meeting raised concerns of the proximity to homes and the school, describing it as “an unsafe, unsustainable and unnecessary location,” with Cllr Jim Morgan of Fishguard Town Council, who had previously raised concerns of the “nightmare scenario” of a fire as children were leaving the school, also voicing similar issues.
Local county councillor Pat Davies, who had spoken at the previous meeting stressing she was not against the technology, just the location and the potential risk to pupils, said the siting would be “a visual intrusion,” with the school having many concerns about the scheme, adding it had been “brought forward without any dialogue of consultation with the school”.
Cllr Davies added: “It is unacceptable that a micro-storage unit should be proposed in this area; someone somewhere has got it wrong.”
Following a lengthy debate, committee chair Cllr Mark Carter proposed going against officers in refusing the scheme; members unanimously refusing the application.
Climate
Fears Sageston wind turbine scheme could affect bats
AN APPLICATION for a wind turbine nearly 250 foot high on the road to Tenby, recommended to be turned down due to a lack of information on how it could affect bats, has been put on hold.
In an application recommended for refusal at the December meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council’s planning committee, Constantine Wind Energy Ltd sought permission for a 76-metre-high wind turbine at Summerton Farm, Sageston.
Back in 2024, an application to replace a current 60.5m high turbine on the site with one up to 90 metres, or just under 300 foot, at the site was refused on the grounds its height and scale would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the locality, with the additional clause of failing to comply with supplementary guidance.
A report for committee members on the latest application says the smaller turbine than previously proposed, representing a 16-metre increase in height from a previously granted turbine “would not be sufficient for it to become an overbearing feature in the landscape,” with no objections from either the Council Landscape Officer or Natural Resources Wales.
However, concerns were raised by the council ecologist that the applicant’s Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Report was incomplete.
“The Council Ecologist questions why the response received in relation to myotis bat records were not included within the initial PEA. As such, he considers that the PEA does not present enough information on the possible presence of bats within the application site area.
“Whilst there may be negligible foraging and commuting potential, there are records of foraging on grassland within two kilometres which have positive identification of myotis bat foraging, along with greater and lesser horseshoe bat foraging. He also notes that the application site is in close proximity to a wooded area.”
It was recommended for refusal on the grounds that appraisal report, and technical note, “do not adequately address the impact of the proposed wind turbine on bat activity in the area”.
At the committee meeting, members heard the scheme had been temporarily withdrawn to deal with issues raised, the application expected to return to a future meeting.
-
Crime6 days agoMan denies causing baby’s injuries as police interviews read to jury
-
Crime2 days agoDefendant denies using Sudocrem-covered finger to assault two-month-old baby
-
Crime22 hours agoPembroke rape investigation dropped – one suspect now facing deportation
-
News22 hours agoBaby C trial: Mother breaks down in tears in the witness box
-
Crime7 days agoMan denies injuring baby as jury hears police interview in ongoing abuse trial
-
Crime2 days agoDefendant denies causing injuries to two-month-old baby
-
Crime2 days agoLifeboat crew member forced to stand down after being assaulted at Milford pub
-
Crime7 days agoMilford Haven man jailed after online paedophile sting








