GREEN BELT? FOR WALES??

There is a clear need for a Welsh Green belt across all of our country, to fringe our urban areas, to help focus out of town and fringe of town developments, not to mention helping to protect green spaces between and within some of our urban areas. It's worth noting that 'Green belt', if respected is a useful planning tool, originally introduced for London in 1938, it was then rolled out to England as a whole by a government circular in 1955 but interestingly enough not to Wales.

The original concept was to allow local councils to designate green belts when they wanted to restrict or control urban growth.  The idea worked and worked well, as by 2007, Green belt covered something like 13% of England (about one-and-a-half million hectares) despite the best efforts of previous Conservative, New Labour and Conservative–Liberal Democrat Governments it is still remains relatively well protected by normal planning controls against "inappropriate development".

Here in Wales we have one patch of notional green belt (or Green wedge) and that lies between Cardiff and Newport. Scotland has seven and Northern Ireland has 30 - each has its own policy guidance.  The preservation of green spaces aside, it comes down to planning permission, which can be a touchy subject, especially when a development (whether for commercial, housing or energy development) is controversial or the final decision is made against the wishes of local people.

It should be pretty clear to most dispassionate observers that in Wales, we lack a coherent national strategic development plan for Wales judging by the half-baked way local unitary development plans have been put together over the years. A number of which are focussed on housing developments, which have done (and will do) some pretty serious damage to our environment in the process without any necessary improvements in infrastructure e.g new railway stations with reasonably priced (or even free), adequate and secure park and ride facilities at Caerleon (closed as a result of the Beeching cuts in 1962, in the UDP since 1984) Llanwern and Magor.

In the south east, along the coastal belt and in and around Newport and Torfaen (not to mention Cardiff and Caerphilly) the last thirty years has seen a significant if not spectacular growth in the amount of housing, a significant percentage of which has never aimed to fulfil local housing needs. As a result the infrastructure along the coastal belt between Chepstow, Caldicot, Rogiet and Magor is struggling to cope with existing developments and this is well before the projected expansion of housing on and around the former Llanwern site really kicks in.

Northern Newport has now been linked to the south Cwmbran - something that has brought little material benefit to the residents of either urban area but has contributed much to traffic congestion. Similarly linking Cwmbran with Sebastopol will bring scant benefit to local residents. Even if eventually housing is built on the land just exactly how much of it will be affordable to local residents?

When the Severn Bridge tolls are reduced (rather than removed) after 2018, there will be a significant bump in house prices as people living in and around Bristol move cash in on cheaper housing over here.  This will impact on both affordable and available housing, developers will no doubt pitch their developments accordingly to cash in on perceived higher wages in the Bristol area and perceived cheaper housing over here (and no doubt our local authorities will fall over themselves to accommodate the developers wishes regardless how local people feel).

The National Assembly should know better and act accordingly, the institution when established was supposed to have sustainability enshrined in its actions, but, at times you really have to wonder, especially when it comes to the impact of some of the proposed developments on our communities. We need to protect the green wedges around and within our urban communities – because once developed they are gone for good.

The problem caused by a lack of protection to our Green wedges, etc is aggravated by the fact that what one generation of elected officials (and council officers) envisages as a green wedge, green lane, etc is often seen by later generations of elected officials (and council officers) as either prime land for development or a nice little earner to help balance out the books - this means that there is a real lack of stability and a long term vision for many of our urban areas and impacts on our quality of life. 

The National Assembly needs to act like the Welsh Parliament it should be and take the long view and create Welsh Green belt land with full legal and planning protections. This might go some way to calming things down when it comes to development planning and might introduce a more long-term sustainable democratic element into the process. This is something that could be accomplished by creating Welsh Green belt land, as part of the process we also need an urgent and open debate into the planning process in Wales - something that has been long overdue.

Successive Westminster government’s (in England) over the next few years will continue to talk about getting planning officers "off people's backs" with a relaxation of current rules. When they talk about ‘people’ they mean developers. In true Spiv fashion ‘for a limited period, people are able able to build larger extensions on houses (up to eight metres for detached homes and six for others). Shops and offices will also be able grow to the edges of their premises as Plan A (harsh Public Sector Cuts) continues to unravel and on the back of BREXIT a note of desperation may begin to creep into Westminster’s attempts to boost stabilise the economy.

These sounds good; it seems very reasonable save for the fact that somewhere amongst the smoke and mirrors the plan will reduce developer’s obligations to build proportional amounts of affordable housing and avoiding flood risk will go out the window. Not that long ago the previous Westminster government rewrote the entire planning framework (for England) despite some fierce resistance from countryside campaigners. No doubt Westminster ministers will want further changes to planning rules (in England) in an attempt to boost house building and revive the economy.

Not wanting to be left out (and bereft of any fresh ideas), a few years ago the previous Labour in Wales Government in Cardiff also pursued major changes to planning rules in Wales aiming to ‘tilt the balance in favour of economic growth over the environment and social factors’. This decision was in my opinion aimed quite specifically at overturning those few occasions when our Local Authorities have rejected developments (often at the behest of local residents) rather than putting economic needs ahead of economic and environmental benefits and will do little for sustainable, flood free development to deal with local housing needs let alone preserve our green spaces.

SHOW SOME AMBITION

The Labour in Wales Welsh Government needs to show some ambition and to strive to build a secure energy future for Wales. The devolution of energy powers to Wales can create a system of community beneficial renewable energy projects, and result in fairer energy prices for us - the customers. Our Government needs to be able to decide on energy projects for the whole of Wales to achieve long-term energy goals and to establish an arms-length, publicly owned not-for-distributable-profit energy company – Ynni Cymru.

Aside from our people, our country’s greatest asset is the potential of our natural resources. These need to be managed in a sustainable way that promotes fairness. Before we can develop a sustainable future for our country, the Welsh Government needs to make better use of its existing powers and achieve the devolution of powers over planning for renewable energy for Wales.

The Welsh Government needs to develop binding sustainable energy targets and to assume responsibility for delivering them. Our communities need to get a direct benefit from larger energy projects in their area and the opportunity to participate in and to develop small-scale community energy projects. All energy projects in Wales need to include community benefit clauses so that our communities get something back.

We need to urgently establish of an arms-length, publicly-owned, not-for-distributable-profit energy company – Ynni Cymru – something that should directly benefit Welsh energy customers by helping us to pay a fair price for their energy. Energy bills in Wales have risen three times faster than wages since 2008, and the establishment of Ynni Cymru can help to tackle this issue directly.

Once we were a world leader in carbon-based energy and we have the potential to be a world leader in developing sustainable energy projects. For this to happen then our Government needs to work to create the right environment so that everyone in Wales can benefit, rather than leaving it to disinterested Westminster based governments and the Big 6 energy cartel members. Our potential as a world leader in green industries needs to be unlocked and we need to create a stronger and more economically self-sufficient Wales.

COMPLACENCY OR COMPLICITY?

The latest GVA figures (released on 11^th December) don’t make pleasant reading, one interpretation is that the Labour in Wales Welsh Government and Con Dem Westminster Governments have allowed the Welsh economy to enter a spiral of decline and they continue to offer no meaningful route to recovery. The Chancellor's remains unhealthy fixated with obsessively investing in London and the South East, something that is reflected in the dire GVA figures which not unexpectedly reveal the vast wealth gap between the English capital and many other parts of the British State.

The figures are the latest reminder that Westminster austerity isn't working for Wales and that a lethargic Labour in Wales Government in Cardiff is continuing to fail to protect Welsh people from the Coalition's damaging policies, let alone allegedly stand up for Wales. The GVA figures showing that parts of West London are a 12 times wealthier than parts of Wales.  Clearly Westminster austerity isn't working for Wales and the Labour in Wales Welsh Government's inertia and complacency are only making matters worse.

As long as the Chancellor still remains fixated with a recovery focused on London and the South East, what we increasingly urgently need is a Westminster Economic Fairness Bill to rebalance the economy and bring prosperity to other parts of the UK. Plaid Cymru has always argued that the only real route to recovery is investment in vital infrastructure projects such as schools, hospitals and railways that would generate jobs and growth. This is something that cannot be achieved in our country unless vital job-creating powers are transferred from Westminster to Wales.

We have reached the point where almost any progress on implementing the Silk Commission's recommendations should be welcomed but Labour in Wales must not back themselves into the anti-devolution corner by dragging their heels over the issue of an income-tax referendum. An income-tax sharing arrangement is necessary it is a vital tool which could be used to deliver  real and meaningful investment powers. The time for dithering and self induced inertia is past and the economic interests of the Welsh people need to come before narrow political self interest.

SHALE GAS INQUIRY

As the summer progresses the Welsh Affairs Committee is quietly holding a series of short inquiries on our countries energy issues – the first energy issues that they are looking is focusing on shale gas. Shale gas is natural gas (mostly methane) found in shale rocks.

Natural gas produced from shale is often referred to as unconventional because of the methods used to extract it from rock beds. Advances in technology, notably hydraulic fracturing or ‘fracking’ over the last decade have made shale gas development economically viable. Shale gas is making a significant contribution to US gas production — having risen from around 2% of US production in 2000, to 14% in 2009, and it is forecast to continue rising to more than 30% by 2020.

There are serious concerns over the environmental impact both of the gas itself and the methods used to extract it. Unconventional gas development in the UK is at an early stage. Planning permission has been given at a number of sites in Wales for exploratory drilling for shale gas. 

Further planning permission would be required for a full-scale extraction process. Concerns have been raised from environmental groups about the local environmental impact of shale gas extraction, including the risk of earthquakes and the contamination of groundwater.

The Welsh Affairs Committee has invited written submissions and requests observations on the following issues:

• the importance of gas to the UK’s overall energy needs and the potential role shale gas could play within it
• The potential for shale gas exploration and commercial level extraction in Wales
• The potential environmental and climate change impact of extraction and use of the gas
• Whether the current regulatory regime covering such activity is adequate; and
• The potential economic impact of shale gas production in Wales
• The role of the Wales Office and the Welsh Government in developing a policy framework for the exploration of shale gas

The Committee asks for written submissions on this issue in accordance with set guidelines, and the deadline for written submissions is noon on Wednesday 14^th August 2013.

Submissions for this inquiry should therefore be sent via the Welsh Affairs Committee website.

HOW BIG A 'NO' DO YOU WANT?

The Sainsbury’s Local supermarket in the village of Caerleon at the site of the Angel Hotel on Goldcroft Common will open before Christmas, and according to the developer will create up to 25 jobs. The demolition of the Angel Hotel is proceeding and construction work is due to begin shortly on the new supermarket, which will have  a footfall of some 385 square metres (with ten parking spaces to the rear).

A work in progress - the site of the Angel

Just after the City Council elections in May last year, the new Labour dominated quietly approved a request from council planning officials to recommend that Sainsbury’s plan to convert the Angel Hotel in Caerleon into a convenience store be approved. The proposals which had been put forward by Hillvale Properties who operated on behalf of Sainsbury’s prompted over 1,700 people to sign petitions against it, and 127 neighbours to write letters of objection.  

Local people told the council that the plan to turn the pub, located on Goldcroft Common, Caerleon, into a 385 square metre retailer with two flats on the first floor would “exacerbate an already dangerous and difficult traffic situation”. Concerns were raised that local shops – several independent retailers including a sandwich shop and a Spar are nearby – would close, while the petition said the historical character and sense of community in Caerleon would be tarnished.

There are also concerns about anti-social behaviour, noise to residents, and parking which is claimed is already at saturation point in the area. As someone who periodically travels on the bus to and from work past the Angel, parking can at times be grim in and around the area of the Angel and traffic congestion is a real  issue.

For reasons beholden unto themselves City planners noted that a new store opening would “enhance” the Caerleon district centre, add to its “retail floorspace” and suggested that the store was unlikely to harm the village centre’s viability. The planners duly noted that the Spar and Pipers News shops may lose trade, but “it is not the role of the planning system to restrict competition”.  This may well be a fair point but what about any real investigation into the economic impact of the development on the village?

The planner had also noted that traffic concerns were “understandable”, but had added “there is no robust evidence” that the proposal would result in “a significant and harmful increase in traffic.” Spaces for seven customer cars during deliveries would meet parking requirements, and Gwent Police had raised no objection to the proposal. The planners had also called for conditions imposing restricted delivery hours.

The recommendation was to proceed with the application, despite any local objections. One question that should be loudly asked is just who is the planning system serving, clearly not the expressed wishes of the residents of Caerleon. I have no doubt that if the City Councillors vote down the proposed development that they will be told that the developer will appeal and keep appealing until they get the result they want and that this will cost a small fortune.

Now, none of this is new, the larger food retailers are systematically targeting the small shopping areas across Wales and the rest of the UK as they aggressively seek every greater profits and a larger market share. If this development goes a head the medium to long term impact on Caerleon will be a loss of trade, jobs and customer choice.  This is not the first time that this has happened in Newport, and it will not be the last.

Back in June 2011  Tesco won their appeal against an initial decision to turn down planning permission for a new store.  Over 500 people had objected to Tesco plans to open an Express store in a dis-used pub, the Black Horse Inn on Somerton Road. The Council planning officers had on that occasion recommended that the application be refused over concerns about congestion and road safety issues and a lack of parking provision.

Local residents also objected on grounds of the impact of the development on existing shops. The Council's planning committee considered the application on 1st April 2009 and rejected the plans. The then planning committee recommended refusal on three grounds - that it would be detrimental to the vitality and viability of nearby retail centres; insufficient parking; substandard access.

The Planning Inspectorate however allowed Tesco to appeal to convert the former Black Horse Inn pub on Somerton Road into an Express store. The Tesco PR machine no doubt rolled out the usual claptrap about creating jobs and boosting the local economy , here should have been little doubt that the planned new Tesco Express store in Somerton, is part of an aggressive business strategy expressly targeting local shops and small businesses in local shopping areas, with a view to taking their trade. This is part of a recognised problem which is taking place across Wales and which does not just relate to Tesco but most of the other larger UK wide retail chains.

The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) has long noted that the UK loses approximately 2,000 local shops every year and should this continue then by 2015 there will be no independent retailers left in business, something that effects consumers and communities as they effectively lose any real choice in the marketplace. Over recent years across all of Wales, that particularly useful mix of local shops, small businesses and local suppliers have come under increasing pressure as the usual suspects in the shape of “identikit” chain stores have replicated themselves across our towns.

Our planning process has been fundamentally weakened and effectively undermined, as local authorities fear the cost implications of supermarket applications being taken to appeal after appeal if the original outline planning permission is refused. We are proceeding down a slippery slope, when Councillors end up being advised by their officers to grant planning permission less the potential costs of refusing a development proposal from a large company prove to damaging - so much for local democracy!

MAKING LOCAL GOVERNMENT WORK FOR WALES

Let's be brutally honest many of our smaller communities, our small and large towns and our cities have suffered in the past from ill-thought out developments and questionable short term economic thinking. Our local small to medium retailers, local businesses and local consumers have suffered accordingly and we the consumers have paid the price with a loss of local services and choice.

Many people have real and serious concerns about the economic future and the character of their communities. We need to ask ourselves some serious questions about who these decisions in relation to redevelopment are being made for? And do our communities really benefit, locally or otherwise, certainly at times it is not us the customers? In the not so recent past local government has hindered economic growth and has damaged the economic vitality of our communities, but, it does not have to be this way.

One way that local government can help, rather than hinder, our small to medium sized enterprises and our communities is by improving procurement practice something that helps create and sustain local jobs. Plaid has called for legislation to be used to ensure that Welsh public sector contracts are allocated wisely to maximize job creation and investment opportunities here in Wales. The Welsh Government has previously announced a National Procurement Service, Plaid Cymru has rightly warned that unless further concrete action is taken then we in Wales will see savings but we will not see the full benefits.

The Party of Wales leader Leanne Wood said:

“Procurement is one of the successes of the National Assembly. By ensuring that Welsh public money is spend in the Welsh economy then we can create and support employment. A Plaid Cymru government would work towards achieving a target of 75% local procurement in Wales because we know that this could create 46,000 jobs here. That would make a huge dent in the unemployment figures.

“Spending that money with local companies in our local communities can also have a significant knock-on investment effect. By creating the demand we will also be improving the skills of our workforce, will be increasing the number of jobs, and will be supporting our local and national economies.

“Many businesses have told us that the process of bidding for work needs to be simplified, and for that reason, at a local government level in particular, we have argued for contracts to be unbundled. We have also worked to remove barriers to make it easier for small, local firms to apply for contracts. It’s about supporting our companies and sustaining our economy.

“Procurement is one way in which Plaid Cymru has made a real difference to employment levels and economic performance, and we will continue to make the case for ensuring that the money of Welsh taxpayers is used as wisely as possible, for the sake of our communities.”

AN INDEPENDENT THOUGHT?

Petrol prices have risen again (locally from 129.9 to 133.9 per litre) but as most of us will have noticed by now when it comes to fuel (energy) prices they mostly tend to go up and stay up over the longer term regardless of occasional short-term drops in price. Despite the recession related blips general longer term trend for hydrocarbon prices in much of the world appears to remain steadily upwards.

Partially this is unavoidable due to increasing demands for more energy (particularly from energy hungry India and China), the growing planetary population and the short term nature of our planet’s hydro carbon fuel reserves. This trend is relatively easy to plot (even in the short term) and the medium and long-term consequences of being dependent upon energy resources that you don't actually control should be pretty self evident to even the dimmest Westminster politician.

That said it’s worth noting that there are basically two types of energy resources primary and secondary. Primary energy is energy that is largely supplied without being transformed e.g. crude oil, natural gas, and coal and secondary energy that requires a transformative (often energy intensive and sometimes polluting) process to refine it before it can be used to produce energy.

As of March 2012 around two thirds of UK primary energy demand was met from domestic production. Coal accounted was barely 4% of final energy consumption by fuel in 2010. Almost all UK oil and gas production came from the seas that surround the UK. Peak oil (for the UK) happened in 1999, and Peak gas production took place back in 2000. Since then the UK has moved from a position of relative self-sufficiency to one of dependency on imported oil and gas.

By 2009, imported gas was around 32% of the total gas used. 58% came from Norway, 25% from liquefied natural gas (LNG) from various different countries, 16% came from the Netherlands, and 2% came via the Belgian interconnector pipeline. The increased reliance on imported oil and gas left the UK far more open to supply risks associated with global supply constraints and price volatility. The UK Government periodically punted plans to reduce the need for oil and gas imports, by pushing primary energy production, and by developing low-carbon alternatives such as electric vehicles, biofuels and fuel efficiency.

The writing is not so much on the wall as on TV, as last Tuesday saw the first airing of a Gazprom advert on UK domestic television advert – they sponsor the European Champions League.  Russia has periodically put the squeeze on gas exports to the Ukraine, (currently some 80 per cent of Russian gas exports to the EU flow through the Ukraine) so the real dangers of relying on imported energy from unreliable sources have been clearly highlighted.

Russia (with full coffers) has ridden out most of the consequences of fluctuating oil prices and appears to have managed to avoid any real consequences of declining cash reserves despite its economy being heavily reliant on oil and gas exports. While some countries subsidise their fuel prices (just how sustainable that is over the medium to longer term is open to debate), in the UK this does not happen, so everybody wins, Government gets more tax revenue, the oil companies get more profit, and us the ordinary punters get consistently fleeced.

As for gas, some states have made efforts to protect themselves against external shocks to their energy needs; France was able to store 122 days of gas and Germany able to store 99 days worth (2009 figures). Here in the UK the almost entirely market driven approach turned out to be entirely inadequate, in the UK had a storage capacity which would have lasted for only 15 days (2009 figures). Some countries discuss the issue of energy independence at the highest level here in the UK such talk is best avoided.

New Labour took the best part of a decade to recognise the need to increase storage capacity and the UK has been playing catch up ever since. One consequence of this lack of storage capacity is that UK had to sell gas during the summer and purchase gas again when it is needed in the winter. The Conservative’s headlong dash to gas in the 1980’s was accompanied by a complete failure in strategic energy planning. The situation has been made worse by the current Government's decision to somewhat half-heartedly look at developing diverse reliable alternative energy sources whilst pursing yet another dash for gas.  

The last New Labour Government and the current Con Dem Government largely ignored repeated warnings that the lack of sustainable energy has set the UK on a path towards higher domestic energy prices and potential power blackouts. Over the next four to six years almost all of our old nuclear reactors, along with nine major coal and oil-fired power stations, will be run down and closed, with nothing ready to replace them.

We are now in the situation where we will become even more dependent upon imported gas from either unstable regions or dubious suppliers. The Con Dem’s solution to was to rush to go Nuclear and to effectively hand the Nuclear industry lock stock and barrel over to French energy companies who are busy paying off large loans to the French government. Anyway that was the plan, although the wheels seem to be coming of that particular wagon.

Now Cameron (and Westminster’s) focus is on Shale Oil/Gas as the great panacea for the UK’s energy problems – the problem is unlike primary energy sources the extraction and preparation of shale oil/gas is energy intense and certainly based on the Canadian experience exceptionally polluting. Even if Europe chooses not to chase Shale then developments elsewhere in the world could mean that as had been said elsewhere we can effectively kiss goodbye to curbing climate chance for ever and bequeath rising sea levels, wild weather and pollution to our descendants.

Even if the environmental and pollution issues could be addressed (and we don’t appear to be anywhere close to doing that at the moment ) there are other significant issues. For one, Shale oil/gas is a finite resource, there is just like oil, coal and gas, there is little chance of extracting 100% of reserves. What we may be talking about extracting something like 40 or 50% of it – which might last around 10 years – the big question is what happens then? While we use the brief window of Shale based energy are we going to develop secure energy supplies for the future or is this merely short term fix?

What successive Westminster Governments (since 1997) should have done was to  work with the devolved governments and the Irish Government to make these islands entirely self sufficient via renewable non market driven energy resources run by not for profit companies. They should have developed a flexible self-sufficient energy development strategy that encourages decentralised microgeneration. This could create jobs, useful skills and bootstrap the economy out of the recession as well as helping consumers by delivering community beneficial energy schemes – significantly successive Westminster governments have chosen not to do this.

Wales needs direction not Carwyn’s platitudes when it comes to the development of safe and secure energy resources. The renewable energy sector can play a key role in creating sustainable green energy jobs for local people, not damage the environment and provide our communities with a long-term viable economic energy future, that’s should be the real future dividend for our communities rather than the shareholders in the City or provide well paid jobs on the board for former Westminster politicians. 

ABERGAVENNY LIVESTOCK MARKET

KALM’s legal battle to prevent the closure of Abergavenny Livestock market and its removal from the town has drawn a blank as a High Court judge has rejected claims that Monmouthshire County Council (MCC) has acted unlawfully. MCC aim to replace the one hundred and fifty year old livestock market with a new market near Raglan they have already agreed to sell the old site with planning permission for a supermarket and library. The judicial review heard KALM had many complaints about Monmouthshire council's decision to grant planning permission in June last year to Optimisation Developments Ltd.

The market which covers a 1.9-hectare site is surrounded by the Abergavenny Conservation Area on three sides. KALM arguments included the claims that demolition would seriously affect the local economy and threaten to contaminate the River Usk. All the  complaints were rejected by Mrs Justice Nicola Davies, who said the council had take all conservation, environmental and socio-economic issues properly into account when reaching its decision.

MCC deputy leader Bob Greenland made much of the suggestion that the supermarket scheme could potentially bring in over of 200 jobs for local people. Interestingly enough a study by the National Retail Planning Forum (in 1998) of 93 new superstores found that each one resulted in a net loss of 270 local jobs per development. The opening a large supermarket can lead to a loss of jobs as local businesses close. Supermarket domination of the retail trade puts the local food infrastructure at risk threatening the viability of local abattoirs, wholesalers and small farms and the associated jobs.

This effect was spotted by the Campaign for the Preservation of Rural England who noted that following the opening of a large supermarket there was a loss of choice as it becomes harder to buy local foods. 64% of the local shops in Fakenham, Norfolk, and 75% of those in Warminster, Wiltshire, closed when new superstores were built in those towns. Most supermarkets sell very little locally sourced produce, with only 1-2% of their turnover coming from local foods, so, when local shops close, the outlet for local produce disappears with them.

As has already been noted by the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) our local retail traders are in trouble, The UK is losing approximately 2,000 local shops every year and that of this continues then by 2015 there will be no independent retailers left in business, something that effects consumers and communities as they effectively lose any real choice in the marketplace.

I think that Government and elected representatives at almost every level (and from almost every political party) have failed the good people of Abergavenny and for small farmers from the surrounding area. MCC has been allowed to act as judge, jury (not to mention jury sector), executioner and main financial beneficiary, from the closure of Abergavenny Livestock market, which if nothing else should focus minds on the farcical planning process.

WORKING FOR SCOTLAND

There are clear signs that the Scottish Government is delivering for Scotland, one example of this took place yesterday when the responsibility for delivering a rail route from the Borders to Edinburgh was been officially passed to Network Rail. Scottish Government Transport Secretary Keith Brown signed the agreement at a ceremony at Newtongrange in Midlothian. The agreement passed responsibility for completing the Borders line, with 30 miles of new track and seven new stations, from Transport Scotland to Network Rail.

Visible progress on the Borders Rail Project

Scottish Government Ministers hope that the £294 million pound project will be completed by the end of 2014, although the contract sets a final deadline of summer 2015. One visible measure of progress is the preparatory work to clear clearing vegetation and removal of buildings and bridges, has already been carried out along the line. Once the project is completed trains return to the Borders for the first time in more than 40 years.

When it comes to the Welsh Government visibly delivering for Wales I struggle to find significant concrete evidence beyond some the transport infrastructure projects brought in by the One Wales Government. Unfortunately for us here in Wales, the Con Dem Westminster Government and the Labour in Wales Government in Cardiff are nominally running the shop. They are not really interested in developing an integrated public transport across the valleys, across the south east and the rest of our country.

Plaid in Monmouth has regularly called for improvements to existing rail services and facilities and a series of feasibility studies to investigate re-opening previously closed railways as has happened in Scotland. In the south east, we need Abergavenny and Chepstow railway stations to be real gateways, with fully integrated local bus services. We need better facilities at Severn Tunnel Junction and Caldicot railway stations and the provision of adequate safe secure parking facilities. We need feasibility studies into the development of a Parkway Station at Little Mill and the possibilities of re-opening the railway line from Little Mill to Usk and the development of a new railway station at Usk.

Driver Training on Gaer Spur in 2009 (Photo: Ian Brewer)

The Welsh Government needs to commit to reopening the final stage of the rail-link from Ebbw Vale to Newport along with new railway stations at Caerleon and Magor which would help to reduce road congestion. Such developments would provide a regular rail service to local residents and reduce the ever increasing traffic burden from already overcrowded roads. The re-opening of Pontrilas Railway station (in south Herefordshire) for passenger traffic (and timber shipments) would also help, as would a feasibility study into developing regional rail freight services, removing heavy Lorries from local roads.

Buying our heads in the sand is not an option, as we face a future where cheap fuel is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. We need to ensure that all our communities have reasonable access to a reliable cheap system of integrated public transport, at the heart of which should be our long neglected rail network. The old excuses about a lack of funding are not acceptable, as even when times were good, there was little evidence of any real commitment or action to improve things here in Wales from Westminster.

A devolutionary half-way house won't work anymore; it will not deliver or even give us the chance to deliver, even with legislative powers. We make up 5% of the population of the UK, and have made (and continue to make) significant contributions to the exchequer.  If Unionists want to the Union to work then we need 5% of the UK transport spend, and full control of our transport planning and our transport budget.

The changes and reforms that are necessary to fix the problems in our country means that we need the tools to do the job. The botched and complicated LCO system for creating legislation barely worked and was consigned to the dustbin of history. The old system did not work with a nominally Labour Government and was never going to work with a Conservative dominated Government which is indifferent to any concept of devolution in particular and the needs of Wales in particular.

Even with legislative powers, we are still in some sort of half devolved limbo state of governance, lacking a fair financial settlement. With all the good wishes in the world this is not going to work well, even with an inert visionless former New Labour government in Cardiff. The governance of Wales if it is to be cost effective can no more be half devolved anymore than someone can be half free.

Wales needs a fair financial settlement so we can finance the construction of a decent system of integrated public transport after years of indifference. In Scotland, significant strides have been made to reopen, redevelop and build a coherent and integrated public transport system. In Wales over the last thirteen years there have been two successful railway re-openings carried out by Network Rail at the request of the National Assembly; the Vale of Glamorgan Railway Line (re-opened on Friday 10th June 2005) and the Ebbw Valley Railway Line (which was partially re-opened on Wednesday 6th February 2008).

Unlike in Scotland there was not real political dynamism at work here, these were administrative rather than legislative projects. In Scotland things were different, bills to reopen old railways were vigorously discussed, debated, scrutinised, amended and duly passed by the Scottish Parliament. If we are serious about integrated public transport then we are going to have to get serious about how we are going to develop and redevelop our public transport infrastructure.

The Transport (Wales) Act (effective from February 2006) gave the National Assembly the power to plan and co-ordinate an integrated transport system, how much longer do we have to wait to see some vision let alone any action? Meanwhile the rail companies are busy ramping up rail fares, and trying to reduce services, all with the tacit co-operation of Westminster Government (of various political hues) and the Department for transport.

Such blatant duplicity is not acceptable - it’s time for our government in Cardiff to take the long view and actually put its money where its mouth. The Welsh Government in Cardiff needs to work to redevelop our rail services, boost the development of rail freight and to co-ordinate rail and bus services – because Westminster even with a Labour Government will not deliver for Wales.

Wales needs to have full control of its transport policy and transport budget devolved as quickly as possible and the franchise when it is renewed in 2017 should be run on a not for profit basis.  The time for excuses has passed, ending years of neglect and indifference to our needs won’t be cheap and it won’t be easy as there is no quick fix.

We need to plan for our future but it can be done if the political will is there, as has happened in Scotland. Much can be accomplished by a combination of the will, the funding and interested private and community partners. If the Governments in London and Cardiff are really serious about cutting carbon emissions, reducing road congestion and building sustainable communities then they need to work to get people and heavy goods back onto our railways and revitalise our communities.

TAKING THE LONG VIEW?

When it comes to economic development (sustainable or otherwise) I am no longer sure that the Westminster system of Government is capable of taking, let alone sticking to any long term decisions, they take. I have my doubts about the current development model being considered by the Labour in Wales Government (‘pushed’ is far too dynamic a word to be associated with this inert government) in Cardiff Bay. Despite the rhetoric and the speech making I suspect that we have reached that point where there are no new ideas, merely recycled old ones.

With the government in Cardiff bay effectively passing itself off as the old Welsh Office in drag, I would not be surprised if we see a new ‘Welsh Development Agency’ launched in the relatively near future. Following old flawed models of economic development planning for Wales (‘one egg, one basket’) just won’t wash anymore, and neither will simply waiting for a Labour victory in Westminster which might (from a Labour in Wales perspective) start the largesse flowing down the M4 again.

When it comes to economic development and regeneration providing the best conditions to enable our communities to grow and flourish, a sound planning policy is a key component. We should favour local small to medium sized enterprises and need to have much better thought out and far more consistent planning policies for in, out and edge of town retail developments, before our communities are damaged beyond repair.

One, but, not the only, potentially key area for economic activity is that of our town centres. Over the years regeneration scheme has followed regeneration scheme yet with a few exceptions we have failed to find a way of creating the right conditions for sustainable prosperity in most but not all of our towns. Regeneration has become one of those words that has no real meaning anymore. It is often perceived (and sometimes it is) as being driven from the top down i.e. by elected bodies as a process that merely consults after the plans have been drawn up rather than before, during and after - any process run this way runs the risk of becoming deeply flawed.

Our communities, towns and cities have over the years has been the recipient of much grant aid, development and redevelopment schemes and initiatives - how can we measure success? This is something that should be a key factor in the regeneration process. This is the question that needs to be asked - after the cement and the paint has dried, after the regeneration professionals have moved on (having vacuumed up significant funds to distant bank accounts) have the various schemes made a difference?

I suspect that ‘regeneration’ is now an industry in itself and a pretty well paid one at that. Beyond any immediate physical improvements to the locality and the local environment, do many of the regeneration schemes make a real difference when it comes to wealth generation in the area affected by the regeneration scheme? If the end result is in reality a makeover, and the targeted community is no better off, save for being bereft of the 'regeneration funds' that have been effectively siphoned off by professional regeneration companies - is this success?

We need to think beyond the tick box list of the regeneration schemes managers? One key component that is often ignored or marginalised is the community’s greatest resource – is ironically its people. So rather than regeneration and redevelopment professionals moving in and engaging in a token consultation process they should directly talk to local people and find out what they would like to be done, what they actually want for their community and their town.

Regeneration schemes and projects should be bottom up rather than the top down. The bottom line should be when spending public money, work it extra hard and squeeze out every single possible benefit and maximise the impact locally of the regeneration process and build local benefits into the tendering process - whether by employing local people, using local resources, local skills and local input.

If you are reusing or renovating old buildings then any regeneration scheme needs to ensure that old buildings can make a living after the regeneration scheme is finished. If we do this rather than merely making a token gesture towards public consultation then any regeneration schemes will, with hard work really begin to deliver tangible benefits to our communities. As had been said elsewhere, regeneration should be a process rather than an event.

Over the last thirty years, we have all seen the commercial hearts of many of our communities have been seriously damaged as a result of a combination of aggressive policies pursued by the larger retail chains and exceptionally poor decision making on the part of local government and central government indifference. The result of the abject failure or indifference of local and central government when it comes to developing realistic local economic plans leads to a failure to create a level playing field for local businesses and suppliers. This when combined with some very questionable planning decisions over the last thirty years, has directly lead to many of our town centre's being "regenerated" to death.

The rise in the number of shops owned by larger retail chains damages the local economy, drains profit out of the area to remote corporate headquarters and reduces local job opportunities. Ten pound spent in a local business circulates in the local economy three times longer than if it is spent in a non local business. A real side effect of this is a real loss of a sense of community, a loss of local character as our high streets has lead to our high streets losing lost their distinctive local shops which have been replaced by “micro-format” supermarket or chain store branches and any real loss of choice for the customers.

Now the National Assembly Government is now looking to simplify the planningprocess to held railroad through large developments potentially overturning logical planning decisions and local opposition. Yes, the planning system needs overhauling, but, not at the expense of fundamentally damaging democratic control of the planning process – already weakened by years of National Assembly / Welsh Office indifference to local needs. Any plans to speed up the planning process should not at the cost of creating unsustainable developments that further damage the regional economy, our high streets and our communities.

Oddly enough, poor regulation, stupidity and greed and a desire by Government’s (of all political hues) to look the other way as long as things appeared (on the surface at least) to be working all contributed to drop us all in it economically. Now here in Wales, our local authorities, certainly not the best guardian of the public interest and our environment have been bluntly told, by the Welsh Government, that they should recognise that ‘there will be occasions when the economic benefits will outweigh social and environmental considerations’. 

It is one thing to have ‘a Government of Spivs, by Spivs and for Spivs’ in Westminster, quite another to have a government of the inert and the inept in Cardiff Bay allegedly standing up for Wales.  Sadly neither government appear to have any real interest in sorting out our economic problems.  The rules and regulations are now blamed for the lack of economic growth rather than it being a combination of the banking crash, the bankers recklessness and years of stupidly allowing the so called ‘free market’ to drive economic policy and economic planning. 

A GOVERNANCE OF SPIVS...

The Westminster government is promising (in England) to get planning officers "off people's backs" with a relaxation of current rules. In true Spiv fashion ‘ for a limited period, people will be allowed to build larger extensions on houses (up to eight metres for detached homes and six for others). Shops and offices will also be able grow to the edges of their premises as Plan A (harsh Public Sector Cuts) fails and a note of desperation creeps in Westminster ministers seek to boost the economy.

On the surface it sounds good; it seems reasonable, save for the fact that somewhere amidst the smoke and mirrors is a plan to reduce developer’s obligations to build proportional amounts of affordable housing. Not that long ago, a matter of a few months, the Westminster government rewrote the entire planning framework (for England) despite some fierce resistance from countryside campaigners. Now Westminster ministers want further changes to planning rules (in England) in an attempt to boost house-building and revive the economy.

Meanwhile this side of the bridge a major change in planning rules in Wales aims to ‘tilt the balance in favour of economic growth over the environment and social factors’. This decision may be aimed quite specifically at overturning those few occasions when our Local Authorities have rejected some developments (often at the behest of local residents) rather than putting economic needs ahead of economic and environmental benefits.

The Labour in Wales run Welsh government will formally announce this controversial move sometime next month. The problem lies not with the planning system, which is far too weak, and has proved itself to be more than capable of blatantly ignoring expressed local concerns, with few real consequences for the decision makers. Any meaningful supervision of the planning process by the Welsh Assembly Government has proved to be pretty minimal.

Quietly in Westminster we are moving towards having ‘a Government of Spivs, by Spivs and for Spivs’. The rules and regulations are blamed for the lack of economic growth rather than it being a direct consequence of the banking crash, the bankers recklessness and years of allowing the so called ‘free market’ to drive economic policy and economic planning. Oddly enough, overregulation and red tape did not cause the financial crash – the banks did.

Poor regulation, stupidity and greed and a desire by Government’s (of all political hues) to look the other way as long as things appeared (on the surface at least) to be working all contributed. Now here in Wales, our local authorities, certainly not the best guardian of the public interest and our environment have been bluntly told, by the Welsh Government, that they should recognise that ‘there will be occasions when the economic benefits will outweigh social and environmental considerations’.

Tell that to the residents of Torfaen, who have been fighting the plan and the good citizens of Abergavenny who have been fighting to retain the livestock market in the town. Or perhaps the concerned residents of Carmarthen who are worried about the impact of over large housing developments or the concerned residents of Holyhead who are opposed to new marina development. All these people (and all of us) have been ill-served by the planning system, by our local authorities and our own Government in Cardiff – why should we expect the Westminster Government to be any different...

PUB = SUPERMARKET

Newport City Councillors have delayed making a decision on the controversial plan to convert a Caerleon pub into a convenience store (Sainsbury's) so that councillors to make a site visit. Planning Committee members mirrored hundreds of residents concerns about proposals to turn the Angel Hotel into a Sainsbury’s would create traffic and air pollution problems. The site visit will take place in June and any difficult decision will be made after the council elections on May 3rd.

WHEN A COMMUNITY SAYS ‘NO’ ?

Newport council planning officials have recommend that Sainsbury’s plan to convert the Angel Hotel in Caerleon into a convenience store be approved with conditions by the city’s planning committee when it meets on Wednesday (25th April). The proposals (put forward by Hillvale Properties who are operating on behalf of Sainsbury’s) have prompted over 1,700 people to sign petitions against it, and 127 neighbours have written letters of objection.

Local people have told the council that the plan to turn the pub, located on Goldcroft Common, Caerleon, into a 385 square metre retailer with two flats on the first floor would “exacerbate an already dangerous and difficult traffic situation”. Concerns were raised that local shops – several independent retailers including a sandwich shop and a Spar are nearby – would close, while the petition said the historical character and sense of community in Caerleon would be tarnished.

There are also concerns about anti-social behaviour, noise to residents, and parking which is claimed is already at saturation point in the area. As someone who travels on the bus to and from work past the Angel and parking is grim in and around the area of the Angel and traffic congestion a real issues, at least from where I am sat on bus.

City planners however, noted that a new store opening would “enhance” the Caerleon district centre, adding to its “retail floorspace”, and the store is unlikely to harm the centre’s viability. The planners noted that the Spar and Pipers News shops may lose trade, but “it is not the role of the planning system to restrict competition”. A fair point but what about the investigation into the economic impact of the development on the village?

Planners noted that traffic concerns were “understandable”, but adds “there is no robust evidence” that the proposal will result in “a significant and harmful increase in traffic.” Spaces for seven customer cars during deliveries would meet parking requirements, and Gwent Police had raised no objection to the proposal. Planners have called for conditions imposing restricted delivery hours.

The recommendation is to proceed with the application, despite local objections. One question that should be loudly asked is just who is the planning system serving, clearly not the expressed wishes of the residents of Caerleon. I have no doubt that if the City Councillors vote down the proposed development that they will be told that the developer will appeal and keep appealing until they get the result they want and that this will cost a small fortune.

Now, none of this is new, the larger food retailers are systematically targeting the small shopping areas across the UK as they seek every greater profits and a larger market share. If this development goes a head the medium to long term impact on Caerleon will be a loss of trade, jobs and customer choice. This is not the first time that this has happened in Newport, and it will not be the last.

Back in June 2011 Tesco won their appeal against an initial decision to turn down planning permission for a new store. Over 500 people had objected to Tesco plans to open an Express store in a dis-used pub, the Black Horse Inn on Somerton Road. The Council planning officers had on that occasion recommended that the application be refused over concerns about congestion and road safety issues and a lack of parking provision.

Local residents also objected on grounds of the impact of the development on existing shops. The Council's planning committee considered the application on 1st April 2009 and rejected the plans. The committee recommended refusal on three grounds - that it would be detrimental to the vitality and viability of nearby retail centres; insufficient parking; substandard access.

The Planning Inspectorate however allowed Tesco to appeal to convert the former Black Horse Inn pub on Somerton Road into an Express store. The Tesco PR machine no doubt rolled out the usual claptrap about creating jobs and boosting the local economy, here should have been little doubt that the planned new Tesco Express store in Somerton, is part of an aggressive business strategy expressly targeting local shops and small businesses in local shopping areas, with a view to taking their trade. This is part of a recognised problem which is taking place across Wales and which does not just relate to Tesco but most of the other larger UK wide retail chains.

The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) has noted that the UK loses approximately 2,000 local shops every year and should this continue then by 2015 there will be no independent retailers left in business, something that effects consumers and communities as they effectively lose any real choice in the marketplace. Over recent years across all of Wales, that particularly useful mix of local shops, small businesses and local suppliers have come under increasing pressure as the usual suspects in the shape of “identikit” chain stores have replicated themselves across our towns.

Our planning process has been fundamentally weakened and undermined, as local authorities fear the cost implications of supermarket applications being taken to appeal after appeal if the original outline planning permission is refused. We are on a slippery slope, when Councillors may be advised by their officers to grant planning permission less the potential costs of refusing a development proposal from a large company prove to damaging - so much for local democracy!

PEAK WHAT?

Over recent years there has been much talk of peak this and peak that, one thing that may have slipped by is the possibility that we may be less than 30 years away from reaching peak Phosphorus. So what people might say, what's that to do with me... a lot is the answer.

As the population of our planet comes close to the 8 billion mark around 2025 (9 billion by 2050) the struggle to feed everyone is going to become more intense. Food itself is only one aspect of what is going to become (if it is not already) an increasingly complicated problem.

So far, largely out of sight and out of mind, a quiet struggle is going on to secure control of the worlds phosphorous reserves. While some countries such as India are entirely dependent upon imported phosphorous supplies all of us in the first world and elsewhere have become very dependent on relatively cheap fertilizers of which phosphorus is a vital component.

At the moment it takes around one tonne of phosphate to produce around 130 tonnes of grain. Not to mention that around 170 million tonnes of phosphate are mined every year (in 2011 (so far)) and the fact that there has been a 30 percent increase in the mining of phosphate. Geologically it is estimated that there are around 65 billion tonnes of phosphate rocks on the planet, but only around 16 billion tonnes of which can be mined economically.

Now obviously the word 'economically' is a variable and market price, demand, desperation and hunger will all have impact on the mining process so the margins will change. Interestingly enough 80% of the planets reserves can be found in Morocco and much oppressed Western Sahara.

In 2009, there was a 14.2% increase in the amount of phosphate fertiliser produced in the Peoples Republic of China - 15.8 million tonnes. The PRC itself may have phosphate reserves of around 18 billion tonnes. The PRC Government has added phosphorus to a list of around 20 minerals that China will be unable to source from inside China in anticipation of economic demand in the next 20 years.

One major problem that we all face from increased use of phosphate based or phosphate rich fertilizers is run-off. It has been estimated that around 37 million tonnes of phosphorus is leaked into the environment every year, washed into rivers, lakes and the oceans helping to fuel toxic algae and bacteria.

Food security is going to become a key issue in the first fifty years of this century along with energy security. Gradually weaning ourselves of phosphate and chemically based fertilizers might be the wise course. Not to mention significantly investing in plant breeding stations to tailor crops on a non genetic level to make best use of our soils, but, of course that would get in the way of profits.

A PETITION WORTH SIGNING

’We call upon the National Assembly for Wales to urge the Welsh government to recall all Local Development Plans across Wales and to scrap the use of population projections issued by the Statistical Directorate that are used to inflate housing numbers in local development plans.


We call for all LDPs at whatever stage of development to be halted immediately in order to bring the level of housing growth in line with genuine local needs.We the undersigned view all LDPs guided by the Welsh Government’s population projections as ill thought out, fundamentally flawed and detrimental to the communities of Wales.This type of planning is not sustainable, is not needed and is not wanted by the people of Wales. In order to halt the damage that is already being done and to prevent further irreversible damage and devastation to our communities, environment and identity across Wales, we appeal to the Welsh Government to intervene immediately.’


e-Petition: Recall LDP’s

PROSIECT GWYRDD

News that the National Assembly for Wales’ petitions committee have agreed to examine Prosiect Gwyrdd on the request of objectors from all over south east Wales is good news. The committee has decided to examine the scheme which was set up by five councils, including Newport, Monmouthshire, Caerphilly, Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan. Local campaigners against the plan have pointed out that the project directly contradicts the Welsh Government’s policy of having localised facilities, and councils’ ability to choose their own waste technology and management.

The National Assembly petitions committee also needs to examine the Wales waste survey, which as campaigners have pointed out is flawed because it only gave people a stark set of choices for waste disposal bury it or burn it. We, in Wales and elsewhere can do better than that. If we are serious about recycling and sustainability then we need to look at legally preventing the burning of waste that's recyclable, this is something that would encourage actively councils and waste producers to better promote recycling.

TOO LITTLE TOO LATE?

While the Welsh Government's decision to allow ordinary people a say on whether or not the Abergavenny Improvement Acts, which ensure the presence of a livestock market in Abergavenny, is welcome, this is is very close to a case of being too little too late and its not good enough. Before Monmouthshire County Council (MCC) can, acting as judge, jury, executioners and beneficiary, financially benefit from the closure of Abergavenny Livestock market the three Abergavenny Improvement Acts must be repealed.

Originally MCC's consultation process was limited to market users and the town council. Now local people can put forward their views, but, only in relation the repeal of the acts, they cannot make any reference of the proposed plans for the site or plans to move the livestock market from Abergavenny to a new site in Raglan.

The Welsh Government (under Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) has the power to call in any applications for planning permission for their own determination, something that clearly should have been done in this specific case - so far they have chosen not to do this. They have looked the other way, using the old excuse that development proposals are best dealt with by planning authorities that know their area, its needs and sensitivities. In this case it is pretty clear that MCC's involvement in the proposed redevelopment of Abergavenny and its cattle market is more than a tad iffy.

The Welsh Government has ignored the real and pressing need to call in this proposed development. Even when MCC changed the composition of the Planning Committee because it returned the wrong verdict (against rather than in favour of the development), there was barely a murmur from Cardiff. This planning application should have been called in as it has raised issues of more than local importance, issues which are in conflict with national planning policies; issues which could have wide effects beyond their immediate locality; and give rise to substantial controversy beyond the immediate locality.

The application to redevelop the livestock market in Abergavenny will affect sites of scientific, nature conservation and / or historic interest as well as areas of landscape importance in the town. It is nonsense that the Welsh Government has acted to open consultation on the real of the Abergavenny Improvement Acts, yet refuses to take evidence in relation the planning application, its impact and its affects on the town, local farmers and the surrounding area. Quite honestly this is stuff and nonsense if not a duplicitous act on the part of the Welsh Government.

JUDGE, JURY, EXECUTIONER AND BENEFICIARY

Conservative dominated Monmouthshire County Council (MCC) desire to dispose of the cattle market site (and the Cattle Market) in Abergavenny to temporarily boost the local authorities coffers is well known and well documented. Now MCC to fulfil it's development plans has to persuade the National Assembly to repeal the original parliamentary legislation (dating for the 19th century) which gives Abergavenny the legal right to hold a market within the town - as part of one of three Abergavenny Improvement Acts.

MCC has long struggled to balance the books for many years, suffering from a poor financial settlement, which has driven the Authority to dispose of its assets for relative short term financial gain. The harsh reality is that MCC, along with many local authorities across Wales, is far too small to be viable in terms of finances, delivery of services and economies of scale. What has effectively happened is that local residents in Monmouthshire (and elsewhere) have ended up paying the price for the demise of Gwent.

Most people can see, with the exception of MCC and its planners; that the public, given a choice, are more than happy to buy local produce and to support local retailers. Most people don't want to see a local high street entirely dominated by national chains. A successful dynamic and diverse local economy has a place for the larger retailer and the supermarket chain, but, not at the expense of everything else and particularly when it will lead to the destruction of our small town high streets.

Over a number of years there have been various ongoing campaigns to retain the livestock market (n Abergavenny and to preserve the unique character of Abergavenny as a traditional market town shows. There have been detailed surveys (of residents, visitors and local small farmers have been undertaken), petitions raised and research commissioned and conducted over the years - all showing that both local residents, visitors and many local farmers wish to retain an active Cattle Market in Abergavenny.

Now MCC should have made the most of these real opportunities to get things right when it came to planning the long term economic future of Abergavenny - they did not. They repeatedly failed to grasp opportunities to begin the whole sorry process afresh, working hand in hand with concerned local residents, farmers and small businesses to ensure that Abergavenny retains its Cattle Market and it's fundamentally unique character as a market town - yet for reasons of short term financial gain they chose not too.

Across Monmouthshire (and elsewhere in England and Wales) we have to often in the past seen ill-thought out unsympathetic redevelopments that have had a detrimental effect on the local economies in both Chepstow and Monmouth and elsewhere. The retention of the cattle market in Abergavenny presents a real opportunity to do something fundamentally different, something that should be able to address both environmental and economic concerns and contribute to the retention of the unique character of the market town that is Abergavenny.

Oddly enough the National Assembly Ministers has to repeal the nineteenth century Abergavenny Improvement Acts before any development of the cattle market site can actually take place. Additionally under Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the National Assembly has the power to call in any applications for planning permission for their own determination, something that clearly should have been done in this specific case - so far they have chosen not to do this.

While there is often a tendency to consider that development proposals are best dealt with by planning authorities that know their area, its needs and sensitivities, it is pretty obvious that with regard to MCC, and the redevelopment of Abergavenny and its cattle market this is clearly not the case, hence a real a pressing need to call in this proposed development. Even when MCC changed the composition of the Planning Committee because it returned the wrong verdict (against rather than in favour of the development), there was barely a peep from the National Assembly.

Even at the eleventh hour, planning applications can be called in when they raise issues of more than local importance, issues which are in conflict with national planning policies; could have wide effects beyond their immediate locality; may give rise to substantial controversy beyond the immediate locality and are likely significantly to affect sites of scientific, nature conservation or historic interest or areas of landscape importance which covers almost every single aspect of MCC's proposed redevelopment of Abergavenny cattle market.

Most people can see that Abergavenny needs to retain its unique, attractive features and not join the sterile trend towards large retail and supermarket-dominated clone town centre deserts – save for MCC and the National Assembly that is. In the not so recent past a whole range of suppliers, traders and small businesses who sell to consumers and too each other have along with whole communities suffered from this increasingly well recognised but misguided model of retailing and economic development. Elsewhere in Monmouthshire, the damage done to Monmouth and Chepstow by ill-thought out retail chain dominated economic redevelopment - no one in their right mind would want to damage Abergavenny's economy and unique character as a market town - save for MCC that is.

EVERY LITTLE HELPS (NOT)

As Tesco begins a whole sale roll down of prices, to (they say) benefit consumers some serious concerns are being expressed about the consequences for our farmers and suppliers. Welsh farmers and food suppliers are concerned that the prices they receive for their produce are going to get driven down, as Tesco will make efforts to avoid cutting its profits.

With Tesco dropping some of its prices and effectively declaring a Price War on its commercial rivals and competitors, the question is whose going to pay for it? The £500 million pound 'Big Price Drop' is an attempt to maintain Tesco’s share of the market rather than grow it. The real question is will the Tesco shareholders or management be the ones who absorb the pain of the cuts? Or the farmers and suppliers?

The National Farmers Union (NFU) Cymru and the Farmers Union of Wales have serious concerns is about the prices farmers get paid for their produce. Their experience tells them that the larger food retailers often expect their suppliers to share the pain of any cut in retail pricing.

Tesco already has what could be described as a fraught relationship with some of the farmers it uses to source its products. The National Farmers Union has talked openly about a ‘Climate of fear’ in the (monopoly) world of modern food retail, where the small producers are too scared to speak out about the abuses that are impoverishing them because they may run the risk of reprisals and lose the only customers there are for their produce.

The Con Dem Government, just like it's New Labour predecessor, has been dragging its feet about the prospect of legislation to create a supermarket watchdog to investigate alleged breaches of the Grocery Suppliers Code of Practice. The code was introduced after the Competition Commission found large retailers were passing on excessive risks and unexpected costs to their suppliers.

Part of the problem may be that the Political parties may have readily got used to some of the perks of having a close relationship with the Supermarkets (or power companies, etc) with their glossy adverts in conference brochures, free food at funded functions, etc. One very old rule is that once you sell your virtue it stays sold, and once you sell your principles they stay bought and the end result is that the fabric of our democracy is damaged or tainted, and nothing in this life is free.

Perhaps a more pertinent question to ask would be what do they (the Supermarkets) get for their money? Or at least what are they seeking in lieu of their donations? Or even when do they get it? The answer may well be a weak and watered down Supermarket Ombudsman - which is the last thing any of us needs, whether as a customer, a supplier or a farmer.

THE TIME FOR EXCUSES IS PAST...

When it comes to railways in Wales, we tend to focus on anniversaries of rail closures rather than anniversaries of openings. This may well be because transport policy was something that was done to us rather than done for us. I mention this, because I noticed that a plaque has been unveiled marking the 150th anniversary of the arrival of the railway in Knighton (Powys).

The spectaular 22-mile section of the Heart of Wales line from Craven Arms, Shropshire, to Knighton was constructed in 1861, and manged to avoid being closed in the 1950's and 1960's.  A £5m project which upgraded parts of this rural railway was finished last year, reinstating five passing loops at Knighton, Llandrindod Wells and Llanwrtyd Wells in Powys, and at Llandovery and Llandeilo in Carmarthenshire. This is a small but positive step which could, with extra services lead to more regular and better used trains.

The Con Dem Westminster Government and the New Labour Government in Cardiff need to get serious about developing integrated public transport across the valleys and the south east in Monmouth constituency and beyond. For more than a few years Plaid in Monmouth has called for improvements to existing services and facilities and a series of feasibility studies to investigate re-opening previously closed railways as has happened in Scotland.

We face a future where cheap fuel will be a thing of the past, so we need to ensure that all our communities have reasonable access to a reliable cheap system of integrated public transport, at the heart of which needs to be our long neglected rail network. The old excuses about a lack of funding (despite the banking related financial crisis) are no longer acceptable; Wales making up 5% of the population of the UK, and makes significant contributions to the exchequer over the years - so we need 5% of the UK transport spend, and full control of our transport planning and our transport budget.

A devolutionary half-way house won't work anymore, it will not deliver or even give us the chance to deliver, even with legislative powers. The changes and reforms that are necessary to fix the problems in our country means that we need the tools to do the job. The botched and over complicated LCO system for creating legislation barely worked and has thankfully been consigned to the dustbin of history.

It didn't work with a nominally Labour Government and was never going to work with a Conservative dominated Government which is indifferent to any concept of devolution in particular and the needs of Wales in particular. Even with legislative powers, we are still in some sort of half devolved limbo state of governance, lacking a fair financial settlement. Let's be honest, with all the best will in the world this is not going to work well, even with an inert visionless New Labour government in Cardiff. Governance can no more be half devolved anymore than someone can be half free.

Wales needs a fair financial settlement so we can construct a decent system of integrated public transport. This is what has happened in Scotland, where significant strides have been made to reopen, redevelop and build a coherent and integrated public transport system. In the last twelve years in Wales there have been two successful railway re-openings carried out by Network Rail at the request of the National Assembly; the Vale of Glamorgan Railway Line (re-opened on Friday 10th June 2005) and the Ebbw Valley Railway Line (partially re-opened on Wednesday 6th February 2008).

Being brutally honest these were administrative rather than legislative projects, this has not been thye case in Scotland, where bills to reopen old railways were vigorously debated, scrutinised, amended and passed by the Scottish Parliament. If we are serious about integrated public transport then we are going to have to get serious about how we are going to develop and redevelop our public transport infrastructure.

The Transport (Wales) Act which came into effect in February 2006 gave the National Assembly powers to plan and co-ordinate an integrated transport system, how much longer do we have to wait to see some vision? In the meantime the rail companies have been busy ramping up rail fares, attempting to reduce rail services, all with the tacit co-operation of the Westminster Labour Government and the Department for transport (in London).

Such duplicity has never been acceptable - it’s time for our government in Cardiff to take the long term view, to bite the bullet and actually put its money where its mouth is and work to redevelop our rail services, boost the development of rail freight and to co-ordinate rail and bus services across the whole of Wales. To do this effectively Wales needs to have full control of it's transport policy and transport budget devolved as quickly as possible and the franchise when it is renewed in 2017 needs to be run on a not for profit basis.

In the south east , we need Abergavenny and Chepstow railway stations to be real gateways, with fully integrated local bus services. We need better facilities at Severn Tunnel Junction and Caldicot railway stations and the provision of adequate safe secure parking facilities. We need feasibility studies into the development of a Parkway Station at Little Mill and the possibilities of re-opening the railway line from Little Mill to Usk and the development of a new railway station at Usk.

The final stage of the rail-link from Ebbw Vale to Newport needs to be completed and railway stations at Caerleon and Magor would help to reduce road congestion. Such developments would provide a regular rail service to local residents and reduce the ever increasing traffic burden from already overcrowded roads. The re-opening of Pontrilas Railway station (in south Herefordshire) for passenger traffic (and timber shipments) would also help, as would a feasibility study into developing regional rail freight services, removing heavy Lorries from local roads.

If the Governments in London and Cardiff are really serious about cutting carbon emissions and reducing road congestion then we need work to get heavy goods back onto our railways. There is no quick fix, but, the time for excuses is over, we need to plan for the future. This may not be cheap but it can be done if the political will is there, as has happened in Scotland, where there is a useful combination of the will, the funding and interested private partners.