No proposals as yet for Chepstow's Highbeech roundabout
Chepstow Castle and Larkfield councillor, and deputy leader of Monmouthshire County Council, Paul Griffiths said consultants are producing reports for the Welsh Government which it shares with him and council officers 'on occasions'.
'The work is ongoing and has not yet reached a stage where reports make proposals. When they reach that stage those proposals will be published and subject to public consultation,' said the Labour councillor.
He was responding to a question from Conservative councillor for the town's St Kingsmark ward, Christopher Edwards, who had asked for an update on the study.
Cllr Edwards said he understood a report had already been produced, which prompted more work to be undertaken, but said that hadn't been shared with local councillors and asked for a date when local councillors will be briefed on the study and provided with documents.
He said Cllr Griffiths had previously referred to that as a 'draft report' at the council's January meeting and is is referred to in the official minutes.
Cllr Griffiths said he didn't 'recall that phrase' and said: 'If I have previously mentioned a draft report my language would have been lose.'
New Chepstow housing to move closer to Highbeech roundabout
He said the 'WelTag' study requires 'all possible options to improve the movement of people and goods through Chepstow being identified and appraised.
'I anticipated it would be an elongated process but I've been taken aback at how long that process is.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
32 minutes ago
- BBC News
Worcestershire woman 'anxious' over government vote on welfare cuts
A Worcestershire woman said she felt as though she was living in a "little anxious void" as she waited for the government to vote on welfare Tuesday evening, the welfare reform bill passed by 75 votes after offering last-minute concessions to appease Labour Edwards, 21, from Pershore, claims £600 per month in welfare and said: "It has been an absolute emotional rollercoaster because the entire time I've not known what I can do with my life."But the prime minister said the welfare bill ends mandatory reassessment for those with severe disabilities, calling it the "right thing to do". Ms Edwards is unable to work due to her conditions, as she faints multiple times a day, is in "immense pain constantly" and suffers from severe at the House of Commons on Wednesday, Sir Keir Starmer said it also rebalanced universal credit, which he says is "long overdue" and sets out a pathway to reform original welfare reform bill, which would have affected Ms Edwards, included proposals to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) and cut the health-related element of universal changes made by the passed bill will now not include Pip, which will see no changes until a review has been under the plans, under-22s will also no longer qualify for the health element of universal credit. 'Incredibly stressful' The government initially announced its plans for a shake-up of the benefits system in her life since March, Ms Edwards said it had been "incredibly stressful"."I've not known what I can do with my life," she said."It's like I've had to put my life on pause in like anxious little bubble because I couldn't plan for university."I couldn't even apply for university because I didn't know if I had the financial stability to be able to go. "I was basically sat in this little anxious void waiting for an answer." Follow BBC Hereford & Worcester on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
The Independent
33 minutes ago
- The Independent
Labour urged to ‘have courage' to trigger vote on Chagos deal
Dame Priti Patel has urged ministers to 'have the courage' to trigger a vote on the Chagos Islands deal. The Government won a vote in the Lords on Monday, when 205 peers struck down a Tory bid to reject the treaty which cedes control of the archipelago to Mauritius. But the Conservative Party's shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti has called for a similar vote in the Commons. 'With the 21-day Crag (Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010) process about to conclude, it is a disgrace that Labour have breached the parliamentary conventions and denied this House a meaningful debate and vote on ratification,' she told MPs. To accompany the treaty, MPs will need to sign off on a Bill to wind up the current governance of the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). The treaty will only come into force once the legislation is 'in place', according to the Government. Dame Priti added: 'Having a vote on the Bill is not the same as voting on the treaty under Crag. Earlier this week, the House of Lords – the other place – had a debate and vote where the Lib Dems sided with Labour in backing this £30 billion surrender treaty, which is subsidising tax cuts in Mauritius. 'So, why can't we have a debate and vote in this House? What are ministers afraid of? 'Are they afraid that their backbenchers, now worried about benefit cuts and the impact of unpopular tax rises, will question why so much money is being handed over for a territory that we own and force them into another embarrassing U-turn?' Dame Priti urged ministers to 'scrap this treaty or at least have the courage to bring it here for a proper debate, full scrutiny, and finally, a vote in this House'. Treaties are laid before Parliament before they are ratified, but there is no requirement for a debate or vote. Peers in their vote, which Conservative shadow Foreign Office minister Lord Callanan triggered, agreed not to reject the treaty by 205 votes to 185, majority 20. Responding, Stephen Doughty told the Commons he was 'disappointed by the tone' of Dame Priti's comments. 'I don't know who writes this stuff,' the Foreign Office minister said. 'I don't know whether it's just performative politics or rhetoric, I don't know what. 'But I should point out that I have received and answered over 100 written parliamentary questions from (Dame Priti), I've answered over 250 questions on this deal and the process in total. 'We've had no less than six urgent questions in this House. We have had two statements from this Government by the Foreign Secretary (David Lammy) and the Defence Secretary (John Healey). 'I personally briefed (Dame Priti) and answered many of her questions in my office just a couple of weeks ago in good faith and in detail, and indeed, I was subjected – quite rightly – to robust scrutiny not only from the Foreign Affairs Committee of this House, but also from the International Relations and Defence Committee in the other House, and indeed the International Arrangements Committee in great detail on these issues.' Mr Doughty said a Bill would follow 'in due course' but added the deal with Mauritius, presented to Parliament in May, 'secures' the UK-US military base on Diego Garcia, 'secures our national security and that of our allies'.
BBC News
38 minutes ago
- BBC News
Kuenssberg: Starmer's first year ends in shambles. What now?
"Who the hell thought this was a good idea?" a Labour insider spluttered, incredulous, even two weeks ago, that No 10 would schedule a vote to take benefits from the disabled as the anniversary of their election victory approached. "What genius!" they predicted drama, although not a disaster like gory consequences of the decision to try and change the law on welfare this week are there for all to see. No 10 might have been hanging out the bunting, preparing to celebrate a year in office. Instead, for a few days Parliament has looked just as much of a shambles as during the head-spinning days of incessant Tory has been failing its basic mission, to look like a capable government. And the prime minister's authority has been given a hefty kick. Westminster has rushed to its default of recent years - salivating over spats and splits, chaos and confusion. But whether that enrages or entertains you, the bald facts here matter to everyone: a government that can't pass laws in Parliament can't effectively wield power. Prime ministers that can't effectively wield power can't get things can Labour move on from this almighty mess? A year of 'unintended consequences' The welfare vote fiasco is far from the first thing that has gone wrong. "They can fix it," one Whitehall source says, but "they have to realise they have caused it and smarten up how they make decisions".But Labour has had a whole "year of unintended consequences", as one MP described it. That's a diplomatic way of saying it has made plenty of mistakes and a lot has gone wrong during its first year back in No nothing else, this Government has lost the chance to make a good first impression. And some of the events have been baffling at best, and worrying at worst - Starmer tripping over leaving No 10 today, the Chancellor having tears running down her for the welfare row, one member of the government tells me that this nodded to a far broader issue within the party: it has been a "coming together of so many things that have been simmering". It is, they add, self inflicted.A senior government source says the situation "is disappointing but not overly concerning". You might wonder if they ought to sound a bit more worried. What has been illustrated this week is that the leadership has not understood what its rank and file are willing to tolerate. And management of the party has been found sorely lacking, spectacularly one of the reasons some MPs have been so cross, even before this week, is because "the mismanagement creates a fog and a funk", where potentially punter-friendly measures, like providing more free school meals and increasing the minimum wage, are drowned out. No 10 versus the backbenches What there is, in the wake of the this week's humiliation, is an acknowledgement that things will have to be different. A senior source in government says "we can't leave as much of a gap between ministers and backbenchers", admitting "we'll have to be better at bringing them in".The prime minister "now realises he'll have to be more into the detail", one minister says. Many insiders believe that there still needs to be a much better functioning "centre", in other words Starmer's own power base in No is no longer the "spectacularly ineffective, 70s farce" of the early weeks in No 10 that one senior figure describes, when it took days to work out exactly who was to do what; when Sue Gray and Morgan McSweeney were vying for authority; and when there was near mutiny over pay. But the source says "the legacy of these things takes time to catch up". Inside No 10, there has been acknowledgement it needs to run better, to improve the way decisions are made across Whitehall, well before this week's way power is spread across SW1 and No 10 makes it "an incredibly weak centre of government, and that was a real surprise for us", say those insiders. "If we accept that No 10 will never be a White House then you need to empower other people to make better government decisions", they others say there is a fundamental need in No 10 for the prime minister and his top team to be more concerned with "the absolute basics" of politics, warning sometimes there is a tone of being "sanctimonious" not wanting to "do the actual business of politics, even if its grubby". In other words, they can complain about the structures of Whitehall, or the difficulties of what they inherited, but, some argue, they struggle to look in the mirror."Everyone needs to do better" including the political team, one MP argues. That might include doing fewer things, but much more effectively. One minister argues "there'll have to be far fewer priorities – small boats, the NHS, welfare and the cost of living … everything else will have to wait". Reasons to be optimistic Starmer has been reminded, painfully this week, that the normal activity of politics – charming, cajoling, even sometimes menacing your party, still has to be done even if a party has hordes of MPs.A majority of this scale is an insurance policy, not free rein. Governments of any flavour are in trouble if the relationship between those at the top and those at the bottom break down. If links inside the party are frayed it becomes harder to present a compelling front to the 10 must develop "more emotional intelligence", and fast, one MP argues. They believe that Starmer's "human instincts need to get much sharper in year two because of what has happened in year one".Labour's vast, not so new ranks, are not willing to be bossed many MPs, advisors, ministers and party insiders I've spoken to can find reasons to be optimistic, even as the embarrassment of the last seven days stings. Spin forward to the summer of 2026 and they predict that the party will be in a much better place. "People will start to notice," as one MP puts adviser says "there is hope" – progress in the NHS will "take on more potency". "We have set in train a whole bunch of things, the planning changes, big visible projects, and money for the NHS," says another MP - and voters will see, "maybe there is more going on than we thought".Another source enthuses that Labour is stacking up progress towards its target of building 1.5 million homes by 2029; that there will be new laws on the statute books rather than in the debating chamber, that protect renters; and that new rights will be given to this spring and summer has seen a flurry of announcements that set a quicker tempo. Downing Street is now "making better, more political decisions – on industry, on investment", according to one senior senior MP hopes "we have now passed a tipping point where there is suddenly a lot happening".But the question now is, will anybody notice? Starmer has never been a showman It's accepted that ministers failed to make their arguments properly to their own party when it came to the welfare mess this week. One minister told me that if they had made a better case, earlier on, they would have been able to get the plans through and avoid all the the government's story better to the public is absolutely vital if Starmer is to make any progress towards restoring even a fraction of Labour's popularity from this time last year. This is not a revelation to Starmer's inner have always been aware that he is not a showman or a politician who can always smoothly adapt to the public situation he finds himself in, choose he right words, or convey empathy or warmth. There is a determination to tell the story better, to define the incredibly broad "change" message that won the election, to move to more specifics, perhaps even spelling out a new "social contract" – a rhetorical tool used by both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, during their time in power. To do this, MPs tell me that Starmer needs to not only work out exactly how to explain his project but to care deeply about getting it across."Where's the hope?" says one MP. "He needs to want it from his team, to tell the story. If he doesn't see the value in it, and they don't hire for it, then they're not going to get it." The world wreaking havoc There is a scenario where Labour uses its 12 months of turmoil and learns from it. Starmer's allies say he has so often been underestimated. When the party lost the 2021 Hartlepool by-election, he considered quitting, but instead, he fought they could cross their fingers and hope that signs of progress on the NHS turn into a convincing trend. That the big building blocks the government has put in place in the hope of giving the economy a kick start to come good. And that the situation in the Middle East doesn't spiral into anything even more dangerous, and potentially costly to the would you bet on it?Looking at the mess over the welfare plans you might not be confident, yet it would be ludicrous to conclude that the first year in office has been so bad, and the circumstances so tough, that they're a busted many MPs and Labour figures worry about what is going on in the rest of the world. "World War Three?" one of them says - they're not quite joking. The US going into recession, further spikes in the oil price, cyber attacks on this country from adversaries like Iran and Russia - there are all sorts of pressures outside the government's control that could wreak havoc with the economy. Don't forget there will be a budget in the Autumn, with a broad expectation that more tax rises could be on the way – partly because of the costs of international turmoil, partly because of long term stubborn problems in the UK, and partly because of the consequences of the government's own backdrop to year one in government has been incredibly difficult because of these myriad factors. In the next year, the overall context may not get much easier, if at happens in the rest of the world could "obliterate" the budget choices the chancellor has already made. If the economy turns for the worse because of factors around the world, all bets are MP expressed some sympathy for No 10. As they put it, "What is the bandwidth when you have Israel, Iran, welfare, and the economy to deal with? There is no lightness in politics."The risk now is that the growing pains of year one could become embedded political problems in year two. After the welfare struggle, the winter fuel backtrack, and with genuine unhappiness on the backbenches, it is possible that Parliament becomes a regular obstacle for the government."Worst case?" says an influential figure on the left, "you'll have a big collective number [in the Commons] saying, well, you are not going to do it", leaving Downing Street as an administration with a big majority but only a small chance of getting things done."We might just continue to wobble," adds a senior source, "we have such a huge majority we should be able to be confident and stride out together – but the worst case is, we are still drowning" this time next year. Local elections will be held in May next year, and the results will be incredibly important. The best case scenario at the ballot box? A member of the government says, "Next year is essentially like mid-terms – we could win in Scotland, we do well in Wales and show at least some progress in England."But the worst case scenario, with Reform gnawing at Labour's vote from the right, and the Liberal Democrats and Greens from the left is "disastrous results in the locals", says one No 10 source. They predict that Labour is unlikely to hold on in Wales, that it will fail to get far in Scotland - and before long, you're in a "cycle of insecurity", one senior MP warns. Blood in the water And in the worst case scenario then? There are fears too that relationships in the party's top echelons might splinter, some with their own ambitions, wondering if they could prosper as a result of Starmer's difficulties. A senior figure in the Labour movement warns, "you have some people smelling blood in the water – there is some bad behaviour in that Cabinet and people ready to manoeuvre".One senior figure reckons questions might be asked about Starmer's leadership. "It is bananas", they say, but it is not entirely impossible to imagine that within a couple of years of July 2024's history making win, there could be moves against senior source even says, "I don't think there is a cat in hell's chance he leads us into the election".That talk isn't taken seriously in No 10. "There is no evidence at all of any serious attempt taking shape," one source says. Another MP tells me, "It's ridiculous, it would undermine the thing we are most concerned about which is stopping the chaos of the Tory years."Yet another, who argues that it would be foolhardy to question whether Starmer will be the leader to take Labour into the next general election, nonetheless acknowledges the conversation is out there."It is mindblowing, but people do go there that quickly – they do talk about it." Could Starmer's bloodymindedness pay off? It was Starmer and his team's mission not just to win, but to show a sceptical public that government could actually be a force for good in their lives, not a flawed institution attached to hordes of bickering politicians more interested in the sound of their own voices than getting anything make that happen they need their plans to work – whether it's building houses, or bringing down NHS waiting lists, reducing the number of small boats crossing the Channel, or filling potholes, or incredibly fraught areas such as overhauling welfare or special needs education, or social an almost universal acceptance too, throughout Labour, that the government must get better at telling its story. They need to do this to recover in the polls, and avoid a situation where even after two years of a government with an enormous majority, and tens of billions of public cash being spent, the public is still angry, still unconvinced that politicians are ineffective at best - and harmful at worst.A party veteran warns, "They allowed the heart of the Labour government [to] be almost unfathomable – they must recover the heart, until that is in place, no one will get what we are about." But bluntly, as its been obvious in the last week, and over the last year, multiple sources say this still young government needs to improve if they are to avoid squandering the huge opportunity it still has – not just No 10, not just the civil service, not just party managers, not just the Cabinet but, "it's everyone's job", a minister the last 12 months, it's been perhaps surprising, as one Whitehall source suggests, that Labour "seems to have been bewildered by the normal business of politics". There is hope among many Labour insiders I spoke to that Starmer's ability to keep going, relentlessly, however bad the circumstances, will ultimately pay off, through sheer bloodymindedness, they will be rewarded in the end – not with love, but a grudging respect from the electorate by the question for the next 12 months is whether the prime minister and his party, can put this year's painfully gained wisdom to good use. BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
