SIAN DAMON FOR DRYBRIDGE

Introducing your PLAID CYMRU candidate for Monmouthshire County Council and Town Council elections - Drybridge

Siân Damon

I was born and educated in Cardiff and have lived in Monmouth since 2008. I have teaching qualifications, teaching some of your own children in primary schools in the town. I’m passionate about working with you to make a town we’re proud of, council provision that serves this community and build a future based on your ideas.

It’s time to vote for Plaid - the only party working for Wales, its people, its future.

·      Supporting our schools to achieve the best education for our children

·      Ensuring our local NHS services are maintained and give care to all who need it.

·      Helping create quality employment, supporting local businesses

·      Making your council accountable, giving your voice a place in decisions made

Plaid Cymru believes in communities.

As your councillor, I want to hear your views, ideas and will work with 

the Drybridge community to see them happen.

Local development is accepted. I would make sure health, education and leisure

To contact Plaid: Email: post@plaid.cymru

http://www.plaid4monmouth.org   /  http://www.plaidcymru.org  

Plaid Cymru is the only party representing communities - your community. Change starts with YOU - vote Plaid for a better Monmouth.

Published and promoted by: Janet Davies, 33 Belgrave Road, Abergavenny NP7 7AH

PAM BELL FOR LLANELLY HILL

PAM BELL, Plaid Cymru - The Party of Wales Monmouthshire
County Council Candidate for Llanelly Hill Ward

Over the years, I have seen many changes imposed on our community.  Planning decisions that make no sense to the community, neglect and disruption of rural roads and paths, loss of local services, village school closures... 

All too often, our views seem to take second place to plans made elsewhere, to meet other priorities. 

Plaid Cymru believes in communities, and as your councillor I will strive to ensure that whatever the issue, decisions are taken transparently, with proper consultation, with residents’ views sought and taken into account.

I was born and brought up in London, and moved to Llanelly Hill in 1988.  I graduated in environmental sciences and worked in education, training and travel before becoming self-employed in activity tourism.  Alongside my career, I have always been involved in voluntary work, including social and youth programmes, conservation and public access to the countryside.

Spending your money wisely

Plaid Cymru secured an additional £25m for our councils in the 2016 Welsh Government budget, and our Councillors will scrutinise spending in terms of:

Fairness: closing the gap between those at the top and the bottom by protecting jobs and 

services while challenging excessive top-level pay.  

Ethical Investment of council reserves in local low-risk projects.

Local Businesses supported by appropriate bidding systems for council contracts, and 

‘Buy Local’ policies.

Schools to be accountable to the local community, doing what is best for pupils, not held 

back by red-tape.

Planning that works for People

It is unfair that small-scale sustainable developments are often refused while housing estates are imposed, against the wishes of the local residents. Plaid Cymru councillors will fight for sustainable development; affordable and rooted in the needs of the community.

http://www.facebook.com/pg/PamBell4Plaid

Twitter: @PamBell4Plaid

HERE WE GO AGAIN…

New plans to build 209 homes on the former paper mill site in Sudbrook have been submitted to Monmouthshire council’s planning department. Harrow Estates plc (who acquired the site in March 2011) now propose to build 209 homes on the 10.7 hectares of brownfield land. Harrow Estates Plc (part of the Redrow Group) which specialises in land acquisition) proposed the development of some 340 houses with new roads and infrastructure, public spaces and landscaping, etc.

After MCC rejected the planning application, Harrow Estates Plc appealed, something that resulted in a planning inquiry. The then Welsh Assembly’s housing and regeneration minister, Carl Sargeant, following a four-day public inquiry, dismissed a subsequent appeal against the decision in 2014. In the new application – the proposed houses will be a mixture of two, three, and four bedroom homes.

Sudbrook incidentally has around 150 houses with the nearest secondary school and shopping area being some 3 kilometres away in Caldicot. Sudbrook, without its paper mill (which closed in 2006) sits in the shadow of the Second Severn Crossing. The village has five buses a day and is about an hour’s walk away from the nearest railway station. 

The scale of the development moved Monmouthshire’s Planning Office to previously object because of the large number of houses in the proposed development. Now don’t get me wrong, there is room for well-planned and integrated (including affordable) housing development even on the increasingly crowded costal fringe of south Monmouthshire.

I question just exactly for whom these proposed houses are for? And how they will be marketed? No doubt (as has happened previously) all sorts of offers will be included with any purchase house (should the planning appeal be granted) including perhaps free bridge tools for a year, etc.  Just exactly what is in for local residents who happen not to work across the Severn Bridges?

This is part of the failure of the Unitary Development Plan based system of planning – which does not fit with devolution as it has developed. Simply building houses in south Monmouthshire, Newport or Torfaen to cash in on the projected housing shortage in the Bristol area is not acceptable; it fails to solve the local housing shortage. Local residents are being effectively priced out of the market as any proposed houses are often priced to maximise profits and effectively marketed and sold in Bristol (as has happened in the past).

It is clear is that we need a sensible properly planned housing strategy, not just for south Monmouthshire and the rest of Gwent, but for all of Wales. Our planning appeal system, historically favours the developers at the expense of local people and local communities. The planning process in Wales is pretty much designed to work in a non-devolved planning environment.

There appears to be no joined up housing plan or housing strategy for Wales, other than to carry on mostly rubber stamping and approving housing developments that bring little benefit to local people and local communities, certainly not affordable housing.

Local democracy has been undermined, as developers (and here we are not just talking about housing) simply appear to carry on appealing until they get their way or get their development retrospectively approved at a higher level. Or the process of land acquisition literally begins before the proposal even goes to inquiry almost as if the decision has already been made.

Local government officers will (and do) advise local councillors not to turn down developments (whatever the grounds) because the developers will simply appeal until the cows come home and that local government just does not have the finances to cope with this situation.

Westminster ministers during the heady days of the Con Dem coalition were in favour of changing the planning rules (in England) to boost house-building to revive the economy. The Labour in Wales Government in Cardiff similarly favoured changing to planning rules in Wales to ‘tilt the balance in favour of economic growth over the environment and social factors’.

Ironically that sentiment was perhaps aimed specifically at overturning those few occasions of late when our Local Authorities have rejected some developments (often at the behest of concerned local residents) rather than simply putting economic needs ahead of economic, environmental benefits and community cohesion.

Over the medium to long term this is fundamentally bad news for those residents of south Monmouthshire, or residents of Torfaen, who have fought the plan and the good citizens of Abergavenny who fought to retain the livestock market. Not to mention the concerned residents of Carmarthen who have worries about the impact of over large housing developments or the residents of Holyhead who opposed a planned new marina development.

Over the years our communities have been ill-served by the planning system, by our local authorities (via the flawed system of Unitary Development Plans) and more recently by our own Labour in Wales Welsh Government in Cardiff. With increasing pressure for development community cohesion is under threat, along with increased demand on overstretched local amenities, our NHS and our green spaces.

Perhaps before constructing large numbers of new houses which fail to tackle local housing needs we should take a long hard look at the number of empty properties – something that remains largely unaddressed in many of our communities. We need a planning system that takes account of local housing needs, the environment (and develops protected green belt land) and looks sustainability at the whole of Wales – and we need it now…

TIME FOR A HOUSING PLAN FOR WALES

Monmouthshire County Council (MCC) refused outline planning permission for 340 houses in Sudbrook (in South Monmouthshire) because of concerns about the scale of the development which would triple the size of the village. The proposed development put forward by Harrow Estates Plc (a part of the Redrow Group) which specialises in land acquisition) proposed the development of some 340 houses with new roads and infrastructure, public spaces and landscaping, etc.

After MCC throughout the planning application, Harrow Estates Plc naturally appealed, hence the ongoing (4 day) Planning inquiry. Sudbrook it should be noted has around 150 houses with the nearest secondary school and shopping area being some 3 kilometres away in Caldicot. Sudbrook, now without its paper mill (which closed in 2006) sits pretty much in the shadow of the Second Severn Crossing. The village has five buses a day and is about an hour’s walk away from the nearest railway station. 

The scale of the development managed to motivate Monmouthshire’s Planning Office to object because of the large number of houses in the proposed development. Now don’t get me wrong, there is room for well planned and integrated (and affordable) housing development along the increasingly crowded costal fringe of south Monmouthshire. I question just exactly who these proposed houses are for? and how they will be marketed?

No doubt (as has happened previously) all sorts of offers will be included with any purchase house (should the planning appeal be granted) including perhaps free bridge tools for a year, etc.  Just exactly what is in for local residents who happen not to work across the Severn Bridges for one thing?

Simply building houses in south Monmouthshire to cash in on the projected housing shortage in the Bristol area is not acceptable, it fails to solve the local housing shortage. I have no doubt that local residents will be effectively priced out of the market. As any proposed houses will be priced to maximise profits and effectively marketed and sold in Bristol (as has happened in the past).

What is clear is that we badly need a sensible properly planned housing strategy, not just for south Monmouthshire and the rest of Gwent, but for the rest of our country. Based on previous observations, I can pretty much predict what will happen next. If the planning inquiry come out against the proposed development then there will be another appeal to Cardiff – where I have little doubt that the proposal will be rubber stamped by the Government in Cardiff.

Our planning appeal system, appears to favour the developers at the expense of local people and local communities. The planning process in Wales is pretty much  designed to work as far as I can see in a non-devolved planning environment. There appears to be no joined up housing plan or strategy for Wales, other than to carry on rubber stamping and approving housing developments that bring little benefit to local people and local communities, certainly not affordable housing.

Local democracy on a county borough level has been undermined, as developers (and here we are not just talking about housing) simply appear to carry on appealing until they get their way or get their development retrospectively approved at a higher level. Local government officers will (and do) advise local councillors not to turn down developments (whatever the grounds) because the developers will simply appeal until the cows come home and that local government just does not have the finances to cope with this situation.

Westminster ministers are in favour of changing the planning rules (in England) to boost house-building to revive the economy. The Labour in Wales Government in Cardiff also favours changing to planning rules in Wales 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 of late 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.

Fundamentally this is bad news for those residents of south Monmouthshire, and the residents of Torfaen, who have fought the plan and the good citizens of Abergavenny who fought to retain the livestock market. Not to mention the concerned residents of Carmarthen who have worries about the impact of over large housing developments or the residents of Holyhead who have opposed a planned new marina development.

The bottom line is that over the years our communities have been ill-served by the planning system, by our local authorities (and the system of Unitary Development Plans) and more recently by our own Government in Cardiff. I think that we need a planning system that takes account of local housing needs, the environment and looks sustainability at the whole of Wales. 

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.

KEEP(ING) ABERGAVENNY LIVESTOCK MARKET

This October is going to be busy month for Monmouth County Council (MCC) one way or another with two judicial reviews pending in relation to Abergavenny Livestock Market. To be fair one is in relation to the Welsh government for its decision to repeal the Abergavenny Improvement Acts and the second one is in relation to the Monmouthshire County Council (MCC) giving permission to sell the land upon which the livestock market sits. Both will be held at the High court in Cardiff on October 3rd.

Observation of MCC’s behaviour over recent years might suggest that it’s solely to boost the local authorities coffers. It’s a matter of public record that the County Council has long struggled to balance the books, suffering from a combination of historic poor financial settlements and poor decision making, which has driven the Authority to dispose of its assets for short term financial gain and actively pursue a policy of robbing Peter to pay Paul. What makes this interesting is that earlier this year a report commissioned by the Abergavenny Civic Society pointed out that re-developing the existing market site would cost approximately half of the council's new site. The report stated that redevelopment would cost about £2.25m, with MCC's plan would cost closer to £5m.

I (and no doubt many other people) have long been puzzled by Conservative dominated MCC’s obsessive desire (let alone their motivation or heaven forbid any incentive), to press for the disposal of the livestock market site (and the livestock Market) and its replacement with yet another supermarket, in Abergavenny. MCC has partially succeeded in its aim by persuading the Labour in Wales administered National Assembly to repeal the original parliamentary legislation (which dated from the 19th century) which gave Abergavenny the legal right to hold a market within the town - as part of one of three Abergavenny Improvement Acts.

This was nominally one step further than previous assembly governments which failed to call in (for review) the planning applications for the livestock market site despite plenty of opportunities to do so if only on grounds of its economic impact and sustainability. The Labour in Wales,administered Welsh Government, went one step further, in allowing people a say on whether or not the Abergavenny Improvement Acts should be repealed.  The acts had ensured the presence of a livestock market in or in close proximity to Abergavenny, hence MCC’s desire to remove them.

The consultation process was a case of being too little too late, it was not good enough, and the scope for the consultation and review was far too narrow being limited to the repeal of the Abergavenny Improvement Acts, rather than why they were being repealed. It’s grimly ironic that one of the main reasons for Abergavenny’s existence is the livestock market which still works despite the fact that it needs modernisation. Local farmers were surveyed by KALM and they expressed a preference for retaining the livestock market where it is because it is the centre of an area where they have access to agricultural traders, dealers and other facilities. Thousands of letters were delivered to the National Assembly (in Cardiff) calling for the retention of the livestock market, to next to no effect.

From where I am sat it is clear 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 famers from the surrounding area. MCC has been allowed to act as judge, jury, executioners and main financial beneficiary, from the closure of Abergavenny Livestock market. The silence of locally elected representatives from Monmouth constituency, who happen to be members of the same political party, as those trying to remove the livestock market from the town, has been as eloquent as it has been telling.