Aberthaw Power Station £5m settlement 'blindsided' cllrs
Earlier this year a High Court judge declared the contract to demolish Aberthaw Power Station for the Cardiff Capital Region was awarded unlawfully but the size of the settlement was only revealed in June and a councillor said he only learnt about it from news reports.
Councillors who sit on the region's overview and scrutiny committee. who met this week, complained they hadn't been fully informed of the proceedings, and accepted they had failed to properly scrutinise the region's leadership and its executive.
Armand Watts, a Labour councillor from Monmouthshire council, told the meeting: 'There's nothing worse as councillors than the feeling of being blindsided. That is how we felt. The first I properly understood this was reading about it in the newspapers.'
Cllr Watts said it was 'embarrassing' for himself and Monmouthshire's Conservative representative on the committee, Cllr Jan Butler. He said: 'People were saying what's going on? And we didn't know as we hadn't discussed it.'
He added: 'We should fear our electorate, they are reading headlines in newspapers and asking how did it ever get to this point?'
Susan Lloyd-Selby, a Labour councillor for the Vale of Glamorgan which includes Aberthaw, said she wanted to know more about the independent review the region has commissioned and said there are also local concerns around the ongoing demolition work which she said were causing 'reputational issues' for the body.
Cardiff Labour councillor Peter Wong said he'd been unhappy from the start with how the region had handled the £38m purchase of the former coal fired power station, in 2022. It intends developing the site as a renewable energy park and is doing so through Cardiff Capital Region Energy a limited company in which the Cardiff Capital Region is the only shareholder.
Cllr Wong said: 'At the very first meeting at Aberthaw I asked can we see the business case and was told no, not even in confidence. That didn't help the level of transparency.
'I'm not saying that wouldn't have led to the issues at Aberthaw but that lack of transparency doesn't help. I genuinely think there needs to be more transparency and more effective scrutiny than we've currently been doing.'
Later in the meeting Cllr Wong criticised the draft annual report of the South East Wales Corporate Joint Committee, which is the formal name for the capital region as one of four joint committees established across Wales.
He compared it to the highly controlled decision making of the former Soviet Union and said: 'I don't think the report in front of us reflects what happened. It feels very much politburo stuff.'
During the meeting Monmouthshire County Council's Labour leader, Mary Ann Brocklesby, who is the chair of the capital region said the 'procurement issue around Aberthaw' was 'without question' the body's 'low point' of the year.
Chief executive Kellie Beirne said the independent review is being conducted by accountancy firm Deloitte and is about 'half way through' and is expected to be delivered in the early autumn. Ms Beirne also stated she isn't a board member of Cardiff Capital Region Energy and also reminded members the legal proceedings were against Cardiff council and said the region is bound by a confidentiality agreement.
It has previously said the £5.25m settlement has been funded from commercial returns on interest generated on balances it holds, and there was no requirement for further public funding.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
4 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Major update on future of River Island as 33 shops earmarked for closure with hundreds of jobs at risk
We reveal the full list of 33 branches that could close below RISKY BUSINESS Major update on future of River Island as 33 shops earmarked for closure with hundreds of jobs at risk Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THE future of 33 River Island shops earmarked for closure hangs in the balance after a major update. The fate of the branches and whether rents are cut at 71 shops will now have to be decided later this week after the retailer failed to secure enough support from landlords and lenders. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 1 The future of 33 River Island branches hangs in the balance Credit: Alamy The chain is currently going through a major restructuring plan looking at balancing its books, which also includes writing off debts. The plan was put to creditors on Friday, but did not reach a high enough backing to be approved. The plans will now be put before the High Court on Thursday for a formal decision on whether they can go ahead. A River Island spokesperson said: "River Island circulated its proposals for a Restructuring Plan to creditors on June 20. "In combination with the company's ongoing Transformation Strategy, the Plan is a proactive measure to place the company on a firm footing. "We have been having positive conversations with key stakeholders and are confident that we will achieve approval of the Plan in the coming days." It comes just days after River Island was said to be on the "brink of collapse" with hundreds of jobs at risk. The formal restructuring plan put in place by PwC states the chain will not be able to continue trading and would be "subject to administration or other insolvency proceedings if not approved. Insolvency is when a company cannot afford to pay off its debts. River Island stores and its online website remain open and trading as usual as the restructuring plan waits to be approved. River Island confirms which 33 stores are shutting as a further 70 at risk in huge shake-up – is your local going? It comes amid a challenging time for the brand, as a rise in ultra-cheap fast fashion and low consumer spending has hit retail businesses hard. In a statement issued in June, Ben Lewis, chief executive officer, said: "River Island is a much-loved retailer, with a decades-long history on the British high street. "However, the well-documented migration of shoppers from the high street to online has left the business with a large portfolio of stores that is no longer aligned to our customers' needs. "The sharp rise in the cost of doing business over the last few years has only added to the financial burden." Trouble at the fashion firm Accounts for River Island Clothing Co for the year ending December 30, 2023, showed the firm made a £33.2 million pre-tax loss. Then the turnover during the following 12 months fell by more than 19% to £578.1 million. The retailer's most recent accounts on Companies House also warned of worsening financial and operational risks. They said: "The key business risks for the group are the pressures of a highly competitive and changing retail environment combined with increased economic uncertainty. "A number of geopolitical events have resulted in continuing supply chain disruption as well as energy, labour and food price increases, driving inflation and interest rates higher and resulting in weaker disposable income and lower consumer confidence." In recent months, a number of stores have closed including in Corby, Banbury and Chesterfield. Which River Island stores face closure? River Island has already named the 33 stores that it plans to close as part of its restructuring This is the full list here: Beckton Bangor Bloomfield Wrexham Edinburgh Princes Street Hereford Surrey Quays Didcot Sutton Coldfield Aylesbury Burton-Upon-Trent Northwich Taunton Workington Falkirk Cumbernauld Kirkcaldy Gloucester Hartlepool Brighton Lisburn Norwich Oxford Poole Kilmarnock Hanley Barnstaple Grimsby Leeds Birstall Park Rochdale Great Yarmouth St Helens Stockton-on-Tees Perth Even if the plan to close these 33 stores are approved, they will stay open until January 2026 to make the most of peak trading. RETAIL PAIN IN 2025 The British Retail Consortium has predicted that the Treasury's hike to employer NICs will cost the retail sector £2.3billion. Research by the British Chambers of Commerce shows that more than half of companies plan to raise prices by early April. A survey of more than 4,800 firms found that 55% expect prices to increase in the next three months, up from 39% in a similar poll conducted in the latter half of 2024. Three-quarters of companies cited the cost of employing people as their primary financial pressure. The Centre for Retail Research (CRR) has also warned that around 17,350 retail sites are expected to shut down this year. It comes on the back of a tough 2024 when 13,000 shops closed their doors for good, already a 28% increase on the previous year. Professor Joshua Bamfield, director of the CRR said: "The results for 2024 show that although the outcomes for store closures overall were not as poor as in either 2020 or 2022, they are still disconcerting, with worse set to come in 2025." Professor Bamfield has also warned of a bleak outlook for 2025, predicting that as many as 202,000 jobs could be lost in the sector. "By increasing both the costs of running stores and the costs on each consumer's household it is highly likely that we will see retail job losses eclipse the height of the pandemic in 2020." Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing money-sm@ Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories
The Sun
5 minutes ago
- The Sun
Labour has ‘lost control of our borders' & ‘one in, one out' migrant deal ‘won't make any difference'
LABOUR'S "one-in-one-out" migrant deal is a hopeless "gimmick" that will "make no difference whatsoever", the Shadow Home Secretary blasted today. The trial, which starts today, sees up to 50 Channel migrants a week sent back to France while the UK will take in the same number via a legal route. 2 2 Detentions are expected to begin within days and removals could start in weeks. But the plan has already been slammed as "weak" and a "gimmick which won't work". Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: "The government's plan being signed today to return just 50 illegal channel immigrants a week, and probably less, will make no difference whatsoever. "This amounts to only 6 per cent of illegal arrivals. Allowing 94 per cent to stay in the UK will be no deterrent at all. "This is a gimmick which won't work." Mr Philp added: "Only removing all illegal immigrants upon arrival will provide the necessary deterrent to stop the crossings. "This is the Conservative plan, but Labour is too weak to implement it and as a result they have lost control of our borders." Under a wider attempted crackdown at illegal migration, charity visa routes are also being tightened as a Nigerian YouTuber boasted about using them to get into the UK. And ministers plan to stop universities taking foreign students if they do not prevent courses being used to claim asylum. The Home Secretary this morning refused to put a number on the overall amount of illegal arrivals who will be sent packing to France under the scheme. She said: "We are not putting an overall figure on this programme. "Of course, it will start will lower numbers and then build, but we want to be able to expand it. We want to be able to increase the number of people returned through this programme." She added: "We will provide regular updates, people will be able to see how many people are being detained, how many people are being returned, and it is right that we should be transparent around that. "But we're not setting the numbers in advance, firstly because there is no fixed number in terms of the overall number of people to come through this system, and secondly because we're not going to provide (gangs) with that operational information." The first small boat migrants set to be booted back to France under the new 'one in, one out' returns deal will be rounded up by the end of the week, the Home Office confirmed. The scheme, which has now been signed off by the European Commission, kicks in today and marks the first major returns agreement with an EU state since Brexit. Border Force officers are on standby to start picking out who'll be sent packing, with dozens of beds already cleared at immigration removal centres across the UK. Under the rules, any adult arriving illegally by small boat could face deportation. For every one sent back, Britain will take in a "genuine asylum seeker" from France — but only if they've got family ties here or come from a country with a high level of successful asylum claims, such as Afghanistan, Iran or Eritrea. The pilot will run for nearly a year. While the Home Office hasn't confirmed exact numbers, insiders say around 50 migrants a week will be deported. The figure equates to just one in 17 arrivals, based on current crossing levels. Top officials say the people smugglers' business model will only collapse if up to 85 per cent of crossings are stopped. The deal is part of Sir Keir Starmer's wider vow to 'smash the gangs'. But channel crossings have hit record highs, with a whopping 25,436 people making the journey this year alone, up nearly 50 per cent on 2024.
The Guardian
35 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Pushing airport expansion while rail travel languishes – so much for Labour's green agenda
August is peak flying time, and airports are on many minds. The government has signalled its support for colossal expansions, whose extra flights would bust its carbon pledges. The excuse is that supertechnology will magic away the extra CO2 pumped into the atmosphere, though it must know that clean, green flying is still futurology. Here's the pity of it: until now this government has rightly boasted of its green credentials, making massive investments in sustainable energy and retro-insulating cold homes. Expanding air travel is not on any green agenda. Heathrow has just submitted proposals for a £50bn third runway, as approved by Labour in 2009 and the Tories who voted it through parliament in 2018. Covid applied the brakes but now Heathrow is back with gold-plated, 'shovel-ready' plans. Its owners, including Qatar, Singapore and Saudi Arabia, expect the planning bill to prevent newts or judicial reviews blocking the runway. Their pitch to an investment-hungry government is that expanding Europe's busiest airport would create 100,000 new jobs, propelling growth with 750 extra daily flights. Flying gets a green light from the transport secretary, Heidi Alexander: she agreed to double the size of Luton airport, favours Gatwick's second runway for 100,000 more flights and gives Stansted's expansion a fair wind. These allow a 70% increase in flights above 2018 levels, and cancel out all the carbon savings from the government's clean power plan. Rachel Reeves promised to be 'Britain's first green chancellor', but her plans live or die on growth, so billions in private investment is hard to resist. But beyond construction, the growth-potential claims for extra flights look highly dubious. The promised global 'connectivity' imagines business people zipping into Britain with briefcases full of contracts. But that's not who these extra flyers will be. Most will be frequent flyers flying more frequently, not for business but for leisure, according to the New Economics Foundation and Possible, the climate campaign. National Travel and Civil Aviation Authority passenger surveys show only one in 14 UK passengers are business travellers. The pandemic showed that meeting online saves money and time; business travel has already peaked. Would extra flights bring in tourist income? No, 70% of flights are British tourists off abroad to spend vastly more than foreigners spend here. Of extra flights in 20 years, 83% were taken by already frequent flyers, mostly for leisure. Growth will not be from more families taking an annual holiday: half the population doesn't fly in any year, while just 15% consume 70% of flights. Nearly a third are 'ultra-frequent flyers' taking six or more journeys a year. Instead of these heaviest users paying more for their pollution, airlines reward frequent flyers. The Flying Fair report from the New Economics Foundation suggests imposing a high levy on those flying six or more times a year, not added to ticket prices but raised in tax returns. That makes the cost of their excessive air travel highly visible, and could raise £6bn a year, while cutting aviation CO2 by 28%. Newly nationalised trains would gain from disincentivising flight. But UK prices are a bizarre deterrent. I'm planning to go to Edinburgh next week – a train journey I love. Checking prices, I found a £29.99 flight each way, while LNER costs £181.69 return. France has banned domestic flights where trains can do the journey in less than two and a half hours and so should we: start by banning airlines charging less than rail. Switch the 39m domestic journeys being made annually by plane to train. The good news is the extra potential capacity in the Channel tunnel, which could be realised with a little investment. Twelve trains an hour run each way, but the tunnel could run 2.5 times more, and prices would fall. That's where investment should go, instead of to airports, as new European routes open up. Yes, it takes longer. It means adding train time to the concept of a holiday. But if it were cheaper, what luxury it would be compared with the hell of holiday airports and flights that don't land you in city centres. Climate damage is the real cost of avoidable flying. The chancellor says: 'Expansion must be delivered in line with UK's legal, environmental and climate obligations.' But the Climate Change Committee (CCC), the government's statutory adviser, warns that airport expansion would breach UK carbon budgets for net zero emissions by 2050. The aviation industry and government claim that wonder technology will deliver carbon-free flying with electric planes, sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs) and carbon capture. None is anywhere near available, says the CCC, which expects 17% SAFs by 2040. It advises no extra flying before 2030, and only 2% more by 2035, to allow time for new technology to be developed. Let's hope clean flight arrives soon, but it's not here yet: currently, suppliers must only guarantee that SAFs comprises 2% of the total. Here's the honesty test for those claiming carbon-neutral flight is imminent: agree to no extra flying until it arrives. The government's mood music is all pro-flying, not urging climate-conscious travel. To change habits and attitudes, it should start by banning frequent flyer bonuses. Why allow private jets? Seat for seat they are 30 times more polluting, paying less tax as a proportion of ticket price, as was exposed by Possible's Jetting away with it report. The government's airport policy will reveal its seriousness on the climate crisis. Politically, it shows whether Labour is sufficiently alarmed by serious threats from the left, from Greens, Liberal Democrats and Jeremy Corbyn revivalists pledged to invest in trains, not airports. But refusing airport expansion allows Tories and Faragistes to add those lost foreign billions to their dishonest tally of net zero costs. A YouGov poll found that 61% of people regard airport expansion as the wrong priority, alongside mayors Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan. But the Treasury's dilemma is obvious: climate or cash? Its answer should also be clear: just call a moratorium until green flying arrives. Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist
