This site is no longer updated
Please use the links in the sidebar to visit the new sites!
Showing posts with label Carms. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Carms. Show all posts
Tuesday, 28 February 2017
Tuesday, 14 February 2017
FMQs: No Love Lost
By OwenTuesday, February 14, 2017Anglesey, Business, Carms, Climate, Cons, Crime, Elderly, Energy, FirstMin, FMQs, Iaith Gymraeg, Labour, Marine, Plaid, Schools, Swansea, Third Sector, UKIPView Comments
The increasingly fractious row over Carmarthenshire Council's decision to make Llangennech School Welsh-medium-only continues. Plus, other questions on climate change, scams/cold calling and the Welsh Government “leaning” on lobbyists and the Third Sector.
Tuesday, 7 February 2017
Tuesday, 31 January 2017
FMQs: Trump Ban, Cancer & Tidal Lagoons
By OwenTuesday, January 31, 2017ActTrav, Carms, Cons, DWP, Energy, FirstMin, FMQs, Foreign Affairs, FreeMove, Industry, Labour, Marine, Medicine, NRW, Plaid, Religion, Swansea, UKIP, USA, WGEconView Comments
For most of this afternoon's FMQs, you would think you were following a parliamentary session in an independent country: foreign policy, condemnation of foreign governments, state visits, discussion of immigration, how to win the battle against Islamic State – and Carwyn Jones was using the language of a Prime Minister, not a regional premier.
Saturday, 12 November 2016
Carmarthenshire's Roll of Dishonour
By OwenSaturday, November 12, 2016Assembly, Blogosphere, Cabinet, Carms, Courts, Independents, Labour, Pembs, Plaid, Regs, WAO, WWSCView Comments
This weekend, people will gather near monuments which, in some cases, will list the names of those who willingly and unwillingly sacrificed their lives in conflict.
Tuesday, 20 September 2016
Monday, 4 April 2016
Ta-ra Tata : What future for Welsh steel-making?
By OwenMonday, April 04, 2016BIS, Carms, China, Cons, Election 2016, EU, EUCOM, Flint, India, Industry, Labour, Lib Dems, Netherlands, Newport, NPT, Plaid, SteelSOS, Trade, UKIP, UnionsView Comments
![]() |
| (Pic : The Independent) |
This is an immediate follow-on from the National Assembly debate held earlier today. This post will look in more detail at some of the options facing Tata and other interested parties (like the UK and Welsh governments), as well as what the next steps might be.
Saturday, 23 January 2016
Thursday, 21 January 2016
Local Democracy petition given short shrift by AMs
By OwenThursday, January 21, 20164Assembly, 4PET, 4WGPub, Carms, Independents, Labour, Local Gov, Pembs, Plaid, WWSCView Comments
![]() |
| LA! LA! LA! LA! WE ARE NOT LISTENING! LA! LA! LA! LA! (Pic : Carmarthenshire Planning) |
When it comes to rotten boroughs in Wales, there's one that stands head and shoulders above any other and that's Carmarthenshire, which is being run in a manner similar to Saudi Arabia; there's a token elected body but an unelected monarch calls the shots.
Thursday, 10 September 2015
Road to Somewhere?
By OwenThursday, September 10, 20154WGEcon, BlaenauG, BudgetWG, Caerphilly, Carms, Conserv, EmpSk, EU, Merthyr, Monmouth, Newport, NPT, RCT, Roads, Scotland, TourismView Comments
![]() |
| With the latest section of the A465 dualling project set to fully open soon, it's worth reflecting on the short-term and long-term impact. (Pic : a465brynmawr2tredegar.co.uk) |
The latest section in the long-running project to dual the Heads of the Valleys road (A465) between Abergavenny and Hirwaun is due to fully open imminently (it's been partially open for a few weeks now). Section 3, which runs between Tredegar and Brynmawr, has cost £158million, with £80million of that coming from the EU.
Tuesday, 12 May 2015
Westminster 2015 : The Post-Mortem
By OwenTuesday, May 12, 2015Carms, Ceredigion, Cons, Denbigh, Election 2015, Greens, Hospitals, Labour, Lib Dems, Nationalism, Plaid, PM, SNP, UK Parliament, UKIP, Unionism, WhitehallView Comments
![]() |
| Why are we looking at five more Tory years when we could've had this? (Pic : Wales Online) |
In one final visit to the 2015 House of Commons election, it's worth looking in more detail at last Thursday's results in Wales - considering why it happened and what can be learned from it.
Sunday, 26 April 2015
Wednesday, 22 April 2015
Flying Doctors set to take to the sky
By OwenWednesday, April 22, 20154Plenary, 4WGHealth, Air, Ambulance, Carms, Ceredigion, Cons, Gwynedd, Hospitals, Labour, Lib Dems, Medicine, Military, Pembs, Plaid, Powys, ScotlandView Comments
![]() |
| It's happened! It's actually happened! A common sense, practical idea on ambulance services from the Welsh Government. (Pic : EMRTS Cymru) |
After a longer than usual Easter recess, the National Assembly has returned for summer term. Although the election will be on everyone's minds, it's important to remember that AMs still exist, and I'm sure many of you are as bored of the election as I am by now.
Thursday, 26 March 2015
Assembly takes a ride on Heavy Metal
By OwenThursday, March 26, 20154Assembly, 4Plenary, 4WGEcon, Cardiff, Carms, China, Cons, EmpSk, Energy, EUCOM, Flint, Industry, Labour, Lib Dems, Newport, NPT, Plaid, SteelSOS, TradeView Comments
![]() |
| Heavy metal? Or no metal at all? (Pic : Paul Webb via pickledimages.co.uk) |
Tuesday, 20 January 2015
Making tracks in west Wales
By OwenTuesday, January 20, 2015Cardiff, Carms, Ceredigion, Cons, Conserv, Gwynedd, Ireland, Labour, Lib Dems, Plaid, Planning, PubServ, Rail, Swansea, UniversitiesView Comments
![]() |
| There are growing calls to reopen a railway between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen. (Pic : BBC Wales) |
At the moment, Carmarthen-Lampeter-Aberystwyth is served by the T1 TrawsCymru long-distance bus service, which has been criticised for excessively long journey times. Despite the existence of this service, there has been talk of reopening the line for several years (related 2009 post from Syniadau with a video showing one option for the route), but a formal campaign – Traws Link Cymru – was formed in the last year or so to lobby in favour of the project (website with project overview here).
The campaign is gathering pace, with a official statements of support from : Carmarthenshire Council, numerous community and town councils along the former route and a large number of AMs and MPs. Campaigners are also set to meet the Welsh Secretary, Stephen Crabb MP (Con, Preseli Pembs.), at some point. A (relatively) well-attended public meeting was held earlier this month, with plans for further activities in the near future.
Simon Thomas AM (Plaid, Mid & West Wales) held a short debate in the National Assembly on this issue back in March 2014 (below). Meanwhile, Carwyn Jones has expressed his tacit support for the principle of the project during First Minister's Questions (I remember him saying it at least once but can't remember precisely when, so don't hold me to that). He gave no firm commitment for reasons which will become obvious.
An Irish Case Study
![]() |
| Ireland's Western Rail Corridor is a similar project, but is it an appropriate direct comparison? (Pic : paulsalveson.org.uk) |
Comparisons have been drawn to the Western Railway Corridor in the Republic of Ireland, which is a proposal to link Sligo and Limerick along Ireland's west coast. At the moment, all lines lead to Dublin in the same way Welsh railways go east-west. A section enabling trains to travel between Galway and Limerick opened in 2010 at a cost of around €107million (£84million at 2015 prices). The total cost of reopening the line to/from Sligo was, in 2004, estimated to be around €366million (£286million [2015]).
Since reopening, there's been criticism of low passenger numbers between Galway and Limerick (Galway alone is larger than Carmarthen, Lampeter and Aberystwyth combined, while Limerick is about twice the size of Llanelli). The service is subsidised by the Irish Government, with cheap online fares and tax incentives to encourage people to buy season tickets - but it's right to point out that service frequencies are very low indeed with maybe no more than 5 trains a day in each direction.
The crucial difference between Aber-Carms and the Western Corridor section is that, in Ireland's case, large sections of the track were already there and were used as a freight line. All the Irish Government needed to do was (re)build the infrastructure for passenger services (stations, improved track etc.). So the Western Corridor is more comparable to the reopening of the Vale of Glamorgan and Ebbw Vale lines.
Aber-Carms would be a major engineering project above and beyond that of the Borders Line in Scotland, and would arguably be the most extensive reopening of a railway on the island of Great Britain since the Beeching cuts. The old alignment is just over 90km long (56miles), and almost all of it has been pulled up apart from the Gwili railway on the outskirts of Carmarthen.
The Possible Route
![]() |
| Click to enlarge (Pic : Adapted from Google Earth) |
I would guess stations would/could be built at Glangwili Hospital, Bronwydd, Pencader, Llanybydder, Lampeter, Tregaron, Llanilar and Llanfairian. Some of the smaller stops would presumably be request stops like those on the Heart of Wales line.
The Benefits
The obvious one - it makes it a lot easier to get to Aberystwyth by public transport from the south and vice versa (Swansea, Cardiff and London) whilst reconnecting a large part of Carmarthenshire and Ceredigion to the rail network. Considering the relatively poor state of north-south road links in west Wales, journey times are likely to be competetive with road.
The catchment area, although rural, will be physically large with great opportunities to provide park and rides as well as linking with local bus services. Public transport provision is often poor in rural areas, so encouraging people out of their cars there is often ignored, as the emphasis is usually focused on urban areas. Reopening the line would have a knock-on positive impact on pollution and accident rates, with the A44 between Aberystwyth and Llangurig being the most dangerous road in the country and the A487 not faring much better.
Creating "commuter villages" in and around the three larger towns – Aberystwyth, Lampeter and Carmarthen – might spread out development and enable these villages to retain some of their local services like pubs and schools.
If this were combined with a Bangor-Porthmadog link and a re-engineering of Dovey Junction it would eventually connect four university towns. This would guarantee minimum passenger numbers, but also develop economic and academic links right along the west coast to compete with the "city universities".
In the long, long, long term, reopening this line could enable serious consideration being given to reconnecting Newcastle Emlyn, Aberaeron and Cardigan to the rail network.
The Challenges
![]() |
| Do not think for one second that this is going to be a simple case of lobbying for funds. There are serious challenges facing this campaign that need to be overcome. (Pic : Network Rail) |
Reinstating the old route – Most of the former route is development-free but there are areas where the route has been built on, mainly for homes or cycle paths. The route can be engineered to avoid these areas, but the old route will have been the most logical path in the first place (short of radically new alignments). This is down to the shortsightedness of planning authorities. Though there's a bit more protection for former railways nowadays, it's too late for this project.
Farm access and (negative) environmental impact – The former route is littered with crossings to and from farms. Network Rail are supposed to be phasing out level crossings, as they're not popular with transport unions and are a safety hazard. I don't think they'll take kindly to including so many unmanned crossings. They might have to be replaced by bridges, which is an added expense.
Reopening a railway may not be associated with environmental damage, but obviously there would be as the route crosses or passes near environmentally-sensitive areas.
The Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) – My personal opinion is that regardless of fiscal tests, as many former railways should be reopened for its own sake where practical (before I'm accused of being a buzzkill).Unfortunately, this is the primary reason why it won't happen.
The political will is there, and I suspect if all of the trackbed were still in place Welsh Government backing for the project would be stronger (and the price tag would probably be no more than £100-150million).
A full CBA (or cost-benefit ratio) usually costs around £20,000-30,000. If the ratio on return of investment is below 2:1 (for every £1 spent, there's a £2 economic return), public authorities won't consider it "high value". That's very technocratic, but it's supposed to prevent the creation of white elephants and discourage "pork barrel spending" , even if at the same time it puts a set of concrete shoes on socially-important projects like this.
A potential price tag of £650million has been bandied about, so this would have to (theoretically) have a wider economic impact of at least ~£1billion to get the levels of return on investment necessary to be approved.
Taking into consideration the relatively small catchment area (population wise) and likely low passenger numbers, the Carms-Aber rail link will fail any CBA instantly (as would my idea of reopening the Mid Wales line). You can have as much heavyweight political support as you want, but these tests determine whether big projects go ahead or not.
AMs and other senior politicians should be well aware of this, but they're not in a position to quibble (because they're pathologically unable to tell the truth and say "no" during an election year) so I'll have to play "the bad guy" for them.
Service levels – It's too early to say what sort of service levels people could expect if it were reopened. You would presume the service would mainly run as a shuttle between Carmarthen and Aberystwyth (due to lack of space on the south Wales mainline) with a few direct trains each day further beyond – probably to Swansea and/or Cardiff (which would make reopening the Swansea District Line for Cardiff-bound trains a higher priority in itself).
The old track alignment between Llanybydder and Strata Florida is remarkably straight and could enable high running speeds. This is offset by some very difficult terrain between Carmarthen and Pencader – though a diversion via Alltwalis has been mentioned. If the line were designed with an average running speed of between 60-70mph then it's possible to get the journey time down to nearly an hour (making Aber-Swansea ~1hr50mins, Aber-Cardiff ~2hrs30mins), but that requires a high quality route that will be expensive to engineer.
![]() |
| Click to enlarge (Pic : Adapted from Google Earth) |
Another option would be to use the path of the Vale of Rheidol narrow gauge railway for a few miles, then create a link to the "main route" south to Carmarthen. This would be rather expensive due to the landscape it would have to cross which requires several deep cuttings and/or short tunnels. It would provide an opportunity to build a station serving the Glanyafon Industrial Estate and with a footpath/cycle path it could link directly to Coleg Ceredigion - but at the expense of stations in Llanfairian and Llanilar.
A further option would be to tunnel under Penparcau, which is certainly doable but depending on the construction method and underlying geology would likely cost £50-60million on its own. This would probably be the best option, but I'm no engineer.
One of the only other options left, therefore, is to CPO the former route, which will mean demolishing several buildings and possibly more than 100 homes (because several blocks of flats have been built on the former line). This means legal challenges, local opposition and a significant additional cost. An alternative would be to allow some limited street-running, but I'm presuming this will be a heavy rail project.
You could create a new route following a ridge around Pen Dinas and going through a caravan park instead (perhaps on a viaduct), but that would be a significant engineering outlay like the tunnel.
Friday, 7 November 2014
Carmarthenshire : The Rot Laid Bare
By OwenFriday, November 07, 2014Blogosphere, Carms, Civil Liberties, Courts, Labour, LGS, Local Gov, Pembs, Plaid, Planning, Unions, WAO, Williams, WLGA, WWSCView Comments
The eagerly-anticipated Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA) report into the governance arrangements, culture and practices at Carmarthenshire Council (CCC) has been published (pdf).
Jonathan Edwards MP and Rhodri Glyn Thomas AM (both Plaid, Carms E. & Dinefwr) issued a joint statement. The Western Mail describe the report as "damning", while the Carmarthen Journal put a slightly positive spin on it.
Meanwhile, as you might expect, the Carmarthenshire blogosphere are keen to give their own views. The full list of recommendations is available on Carmarthenshire Planning – as well as Jacqui's thoughts on the report itself. Y Cneifiwr provided an extensive account of the report, adding his scepticism whether things can change due to the political leadership, and Pat Racher from West Wales News Review calls for CCC's councillors to "wake up and take control of the wheel".
The report's 39 recommendations can be summarised as :
- CCC should implement an immediate managerial "cultural change programme" to promote transparency and openness.
- CCC should review its media and public engagement protocols, and promote/support the use of social media by councillors.
- CCC should hold an annual register of interests (published on its website).
- The Local Service Board (LSB) should consider broadcasting its meetings and update its website regularly.
- CCC should introduce a new constitution and provide guides for councillors and the public.
- The new constitution should :
- allow councillors to ask supplementary questions
- relax requirements for signatories for motions
- should not allow motions to be referred to another committee or the Executive Board
- place greater prominence on the role of Chair
- CCC should promote the opportunity for the public to table questions at council meetings, have an online petition system, review its approach to the public gallery and commit to continuing council meeting broadcasts.
- CCC should publish the Executive Board's forward work programme, consider broadcasting Executive Board meetings, allow non-executive members to remain for exempt items and allow non-executive members to be present for decision meetings.
- Executive Board members should only attend scrutiny committee sessions when invited, and their role should be confined to presenting policy and reports.
- CCC should revise its "call-in" procedures.
Culture, Leadership & Values
![]() |
| The report hints at a "leadership clique" that - directly or indirectly - placed barriers on moves towards openness and transparency. (Pic : Carmarthenshire Planning) |
However, the report says there were several "behavioural, cultural and procedural barriers to achieving the Council's ambition", and rebuilding relationships will take some time. For starters, the change will have to be councillor-led with officers only offering support.
Interviewees spoke of "internal tensions" between councillors, and a lack of trust was said to be a key theme, partly due to the fact wards, Assembly and UK Parliament seats in the authority are hotly contested meaning the political groups are often at each others throats.
CCC's constitution has contributed to problems, with limited opportunities to "call-in" decisions and ask supplementary questions as well as restrictions on tabling motions. It's said the constitution "is neither conductive to nor encourages challenge from within the council".
In terms of the relationship between the Executive Board (Cabinet) and officers, it's described as "constructive and positive". But it's implied the Executive Board are distrustful of non-executive members and non-executive members were equally hostile to officers, with the role of officers and Executive Board members "becoming confused".
This suggests a "ruling clique", and many responses focused on the role of the Chief Executive, Mark James – who has a much higher profile and role in council affairs than he should, resulting in media attention focusing on unelected officers as opposed to the elected Executive Board. There's a culture of defensiveness, where CCC, "doesn't deal with negativity well", and was "deemed to react....aggressively to challenge, particularly from the media".
Relations with the Media & Public Engagement
![]() |
| "Do you agree or disagree that you can influence decisions in your local authority?" (Pic : National Survey for Wales) |
There are "a number of local bloggers with a particular interest in the business of the authority" with a "disproportionate interest in the activities and perceived influence of bloggers in Carmarthenshire" amongst interviewees – mostly as a result of the libel trial and its outcome. The report says things like social media can be a double edged sword as it's a tool for engagement, but also the accuracy of reporting is likely to fall short of mainstream media standards.
In terms of wider public engagement, Carmarthenshire residents are amongst the least likely in Wales to say they can influence the authority's decisions and "do not feel empowered" – Bridgend doesn't do much better, by the way.
The Council's Workings
There were concerns about senior officer appointments, especially appointment of senior officers on an interim basis. The current management team is described as "stable", but several senior officers are seeking severance agreements, and this "upheaval" is described as "unprecedented in a Welsh local government context".
Although there was praise for councillor training, the report said it wasn't "member led or designed", with mixed attendance levels at training sessions because they're inconveniently timed. There were also concerns that the Business Management Group was an "unconstitutional decision-making forum" which didn't take minutes and excluded non-executive members.
Council Meetings
![]() |
| Although recent reforms have been praised, the council's constitution placed unnecessary restrictions on the public and councillors. (Pic : The Telegraph) |
Many councillors are dissatisfied with council meetings, and believe they should be the "crucible for local democratic debate" and "focus for public engagement", as opposed to the current stage-managing. Some also believe that meetings should be held at a time that's convenient for the public and should be as long as they need to be (there's a limit of 3 hours, and standing orders need to be suspended to go beyond that).
CCC were praised for starting to take questions on notice, but lack of supplementary questions was described as "peculiar" and "inconsistent with other local authorities".
The rules for motions on notice are described as "restrictive" by requiring seven signatures, while opposition councillors were concerned they couldn't table motions on controversial issues, as the scope of motions was often set out by senior officers.
Then there's the public gallery. CCC infamously take a register of details for people attending in the gallery "for fire safety purposes", which the review team said could be seen as "officious" and "deter people from attending". There was also the issue of members of the public filming meetings – which is allowed in England, but there are concerns that it could be "disruptive".
The issue of the Chief Executive "advising" the Chair was also raised, with varying policies across Wales. Some councils have a monitoring officer to provide constitutional advice, and the role of other officers is to advise on policy. In CCC's constitution the "Proper Officer" – who just so happens to be the Chief Executive – has a role in determining the validity of motions and questions. The review team believe this responsibility should be the Chair's.
The Executive Board & Scrutiny
![]() |
| Carmarthenshire's Executive Board are secretive, hold too much power and the call-in processes for scrutiny committees were roundly criticised. (Pic : Carmarthens Journal) |
The Wales Audit Office say the issue of "exempt items" needs particular improvement, with some authorities said to be "working towards a more open approach" where fewer items are considered exempt.
The review team were "surprised" that non-executive members had to leave Executive Board meetings, along with the press and members of the public, during the discussion of "exempt items". Only 5 other councils do this, and of those, some are reconsidering the policy while others say exempt items are rare.
There were concerns over transparency of Executive Board decision meetings, with no opportunity to call-in decisions and seemingly sweeping powers to Executive Board members to approve spending – including the recent "Meryl's Millions" (c/o Y Cneifiwr). There were also concerns that decisions were rubber-stamped during the Executive Board meetings and the real discussions took place in behind closed door "pre-meetings".
Although there were said to be good examples of scrutiny work - and such work was often highly-regarded - there were also major worries.
The arrangements for Executive Board members attending committee meetings seems unclear, with some attending even if not invited, while others are unsure if they should attend at all. Best practice is for Executive Board members to only attend when invited so the relationship between the Board and committees doesn't become "cosy" and impact objective scrutiny.
Scrutiny committees also have the power to "call-in" decisions. However, CCC's call-in procedures are arranged in such a way it makes it very difficult to trigger one, which requires the approval of more than half of a committee's membership within a three day deadline. Other local authorities have more relaxed requirements and longer deadlines, while CCC's is described as "onerous".
Winds of Change?
The first step towards recovery is admitting you have a problem. In many ways the commitment to reform from CCC is admirable, so I won't be too snide.
As Jacqui Thompson said, although the language of the report was "professional and polite", when you read between the lines, the report paints a picture of a local authority that's no longer fit for purpose, stuck in a self-congratulatory bubble and keeps digging itself into holes.
It's a shame its taken court cases, legal injunctions and the full force of the Wales Audit Office to get things done, when Jacqui herself and others (up to and including councillors) have flagged up these issues and have been calling for the measures outlined in the report for the best part of a decade.
If this review had happened years ago, CCC really would be towards the top-performing local authorities in Wales. But there was a breakdown in trust due to the paranoid and excessively autocratic rule of Mark James, the Executive Board and other senior officers.
Ultimately, we're only here because of a domino effect caused by #DaftArrest (perhaps earlier), and because a handful of concerned citizens, politicians and whistleblowers kept picking away at the council's record in the face of legal threats, obfuscation and a distinct lack of action and concern from the Welsh Government.
If – and it's a big if – these changes are implemented then it'll be a (Pyrrhic) victory for long-standing "critics", and arguably the most significant thing the Welsh blogosphere has ever contributed to, as a reformed Carmarthenshire will likely be a model post-Williams Commission local authorities will work from.
Jacqui Thompson and others are vindicated. Although there's not much anyone can do about the libel verdict, if CCC are keen to pursue the reform agenda, they should admit the libel action was on behalf of CCC as a whole (which is unlawful), negotiate a token settlement with the Thompsons which would allow them to keep their home, and allow Mark James to move on to pastures new with a bit more dignity than his Pembrokeshire counterpart.
The libel cases, the bluster in the press and the defence of the indefensible – it wasn't worth it, was it?The political leadership of Carmarthenshire Council now face a critical choice.
On one hand, there's a chance to create a "New Model Council", and after all the mistakes they've made, Kevin Madge et. al. can restore some pride and gain respect by leading the reforms, and perhaps even going above and beyond the recommendations in the report.
On the other hand, CCC can dismiss the recommendations or take a "pic n' mix" approach, which after the positive feedback from the WLGA will result in them losing friends and credibility pretty quickly, and put a return of Dyfed firmly back on the table.
Based on their track record so far, I think you all know which way this is going to go....
Sunday, 2 March 2014
Bandits control the Wild West
By OwenSunday, March 02, 2014Blogosphere, Carms, Courts, Independents, Labour, LGS, Pembs, Plaid, S4C, WAO, WLGA, WWSCView Comments
![]() |
| Carmarthenshire folk don't take kindly to varmint auditors. (Pic : via angelfire) |
We've already seen Pembrokeshire Council's (PCC) Indians protect their chiefs - another round of that next week - but Carmarthenshire's cowboys and cowgirls (CCC) had an opportunity to restore natural order to their territory earlier this week.
The council instead hanged the sheriff by choosing to "note" – effectively reject - the Wales Audit Office (WAO) report into unlawful indemnity funding, whilst accepting they made mistakes on that and the pension payments – with nobody taking responsibility, naturally.
The broad message coming out of the meeting was identical to that of Pembrokeshire - "We haven't done anything wrong, but we won't do it again."
Y Byd ar Bedwar
Ahead of the meeting, S4C's Y Byd ar Bedwar provided a decent summing up of the issues in Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire (available here with English subtitles), with contributions from Carmarthen Planning's Jacqui Thompson and Y Cneifiwr. Both Mark James and Bryn Parry-Jones had an opportunity to put their side of the story across but turned it down.
Former Chair of CCC, Cllr. Sian Thomas (Plaid, Penygroes), said she "could see the erosion of democracy within the county council". Although it was her job to ensure councillors could have their say, she feared she would be corrected or overruled by the executive.
To put that in context, imagine if the head of the Welsh Government civil service attended meetings of the National Assembly, was looking over the shoulder of the Presiding Officer, telling her who should and shouldn't speak, for how long and on what basis.
Although it's standard practice for senior officers to attend council meetings, that's how bad things have been in Carmarthenshire for many years. But don't worry, because they're the best local authority in Wales.
"At the end-a the day...."
| Outfits from Debenhams.... (Pic : lightmasterstudios.co.uk) |
After a failed attempt by Cllr. Emlyn Dole (Plaid, Llannon) to – under CCC's constitution – remove Tim Kerr QC from proceedings, it moved on to statements on behalf of the WAO and Tim Kerr himself.
The auditor, Anthony Barrett, said "the law is very clear" that no funding can be provided for a counterclaim, there were failures in governance and procedure, and he called on CCC to withdraw the indemnity.
Tim Kerr QC – not as cheery as he was in Pembrokeshire, this was Serious Tim – repeated the assertions in his November 2013 legal advice (covered here).
That being :
- the WAO doesn't have an authoritative voice in law.
- the Welsh Governments 2006 Order didn't remove powers to indemnify officers under Section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972.
- CCC wasn't "a litigious council" because they were sued.
- there were no procedural flaws.
Cllr. Darren Price (Plaid, Gorslas) said officers failed to be cautious, adding that the public would expect someone earning £200k to fund legal proceedings themselves. He said guidance clearly prevents individuals undertaking legal proceedings,and that by ignoring it, CCC were questioning the legitimacy of Welsh Government. He posed the question - "Was it really worth it?"
Cllr. Sian Caiach (People First, Hengoed) argued that officers had been used as a proxy to undertake a libel case on behalf of the council through a legal loophole. This action undermined both free speech and the authority of the Welsh Government.
Council Leader, Kevin Madge (Lab, Garnant), tried to make a statement, but proceedings were interrupted as CCC invited Sunn O))) to perform an impromptu concert.
After some bowel-loosening drone metal, he continued, saying he wanted to set up cross-party group to overview governance, led by the WLGA (aka. "Form a committee" - Welsh solution to everything).
Kevin was "appalled and disgusted by some of the things said about Mark James", and it was right - as an employer - to support him as part of their duty of care. The court judgement backed that decision, and only the courts can determine the interpretation of law with regard the legality of the indemnity.
Then the leader of the "Independents" - Cllr. Meryl Gravell (Ind, Trimsaran) – admonished the "disgraceful content on blogs", saying five defamatory blogs constituted "exceptional circumstances" (when it was later confirmed that "exceptional circumstances" has no clear cut definition and evolved from case law). She wagged fingers at people around the chamber, saying that it was all those who committed the grievous crime of speaking to the media who brought the council into disrepute.
Later, Cllr. Giles Morgan (Ind, Swiss Valley) – Martin Bell minus ethics – described the Thompson case as a "crusade against council officers", saying people who talk about the council as if they're down the pub are "reprehensible" (unless they're actually down the pub, I presume - or is that where CCCs lawyers are heading next?).
Though Giles did accept that Mark James should've left the meeting. Which....would render the process unlawful on its own. Which means having to accept the WAO report.
An impassioned speech from Cllr. Glynog Davies (Plaid, Quarter Bach) said the "plain English" guidance cautioned against awarding the indemnity and bans using funds to undertake a claim. The Executive Board say they didn't get independent legal advice because of their "knowledge of the blogger", and he asked whether the decision was morally correct? Cllr. Linda Evans (Plaid, Llanfihangel-ar-Arth) asked if advice from the barrister representing Mark James – Adam Speker – counted as "independent advice"?
The answer to both questions was, of course, "yes".
CCC moved to "note" the report, suspend part of constitution relating to indemnity funding, and called for Welsh Government to clarify the law. As a result, there's an outside chance the WAO could take the council to the High Court.
The pensions and no-confidence debates were staid. However, it was broadly accepted CCC got things wrong - even by Meryl Gravell.
Cllr. Anthony Jones (Lab, Llandybie) said senior executive pay was "out of kilter" and immoral, calling for the Welsh Government to intervene and issue clear guidance. It's worth pointing out that the National Assembly's Public Accounts Committee are undertaking an inquiry into senior management pay.
Kevin Madge's broad defence was, "I was doing it all in good faith."
The no-confidence debate had something to do with bungalows and Debenhams. Also, it included one of the most bizarre statements I've ever heard - that Carmarthenshire was "unscathed by the recession". This report from the Wales Rural Obervatory (pdf) – sorry, Jac – indicates otherwise, with Carmarthenshire suffering relatively badly compared to other rural authorities.
Although the mother hens of the Independents looked as though they were "Waiting until Great Birham Wood to high Dunsinane Hill shall come against him", Kevin Madge et. al - as expected - saw off the no-confidence vote comfortably.
Plaid left with their tail tucked between their legs having "stood up for taxpayers", Labour-"Independents" rallied behind themselves, but ultimately CCC remains led by someone who can't command gravitas however decent, if misguided, a bloke he comes across as.
"Where seldom is heard a discouraging word"....
![]() |
| Mark James wasn't there in person, but he was in spirit. (Pic : via photobucket) |
When you weigh up the sums of money involved, the lack of any reimbursement, disregard for normal procedure, the bloody mindedness of both authorities in the face of public criticism and most importantly of all - basic morality - they're guilty as sin. That often counts for more.
The reason Carmarthenshire has gone so far down this road is because small mistakes haven't been acknowledged properly or corrected, officers and senior councillors come to think they're always in the right, then the mistakes get bigger and bigger and bigger - what Pat Dodd Racher described on West Wales News Review as "a bubble of self-congratulation".
CCC had a golden opportunity to start its healing process by taking full accountability for what they did, but they fluffed the test.
If those at the top had done the decent thing and resigned, still co-operating with any cross-party investigation into procedures at the council, that would've been praiseworthy and honourable.
Instead, far from drawing a line under the matter, I suspect they've just made things worse.
If Gloucestershire Police and CPS decide there's a criminal case to go forward, CCC have just done something monumentally stupid. I'd also be surprised if Carmarthenshire survives local government reorganisation now, because they've publicly undermined the Welsh Government's authority.
We're talking about one of the largest local authorities in Wales effectively slipping into administrative anarchy by forming their own interpretation of Welsh Government guidance and orders, even when it's been made crystal clear that what CCC has done was contrary to them.
They've made AMs and MPs from all parties look like chumps. They blatantly disrespected Anthony Barrett and the Wales Audit Office. They've spat in Lesley Griffiths' coffee, farted in Carl Sargeant's face and kicked Carwyn Jones in the balls. They've made the National Assembly look like muscleless wonders and left a flaming bag of dog poo on the steps of Cathays Park.
The Welsh Government can either restore good order themselves by sending in more sheriffs, or they can let it go, giving other local authorities in Wales a green light to try the same thing in future.
Monday, 10 February 2014
Carmarthenshire Goes Rogue
By OwenMonday, February 10, 20144Assembly, 4PET, 4WGPub, Anglesey, Blogosphere, Carms, Courts, Independents, Labour, LGS, Local Gov, Pembs, Plaid, UK Law, WAO, Welsh Law, WWSCView Comments
The fallout from two critically damaging Wales Audit Office (WAO) reports continues – I don't need to tell you to follow the Carmarthenshire blogs and South Wales Guardian there – with an extraordinary general meeting of CCC due to be held on 27th February to discuss them.
The opposition Plaid Cymru group seek to table motions of no confidence in senior officers and members of the Executive Board - which decided to award the pension payments and indemnity in the first place.
The recent intervention of Keith Davies AM (Lab, Llanelli), who's joined calls for Mark James to be suspended, is significant because – as Carmarthenshire Planning has said – he's the first senior Labour figure to voice that opinion and could – as Y Cneifiwr has said – give some Labour councillors a "green light" to back a motion of no confidence or abstain.
I don't know much about internal Carmarthenshire politics, but judging by the numbers it's likely any motions of no-confidence will need at least 10 votes from Lab-Ind, or abstentions, to succeed. Easier said than done.
I'm sure many councillors would've wanted an immediate extraordinary meeting, but it was perhaps the right decision to give the debate some breathing room, even if it extends the headlines for several weeks.
You would've expected suspensions of the senior officers involved too because of the seriousness of the judgements. It's the sensible thing to do – to protect the officers as much as the reputation of the council - but CCC are delicate little flowers and are never, ever, ever wrong!
The formal responses from CCC have been quite astonishing and have read like North Korean news bulletins.I expected a rebuff, but not to these levels.
Caerphilly took it on the chin, but unfortunately it's since descended into an unedifying "tu quoque" bun fight between Labour and Plaid Cymru. It looks like Pembrokeshire are dilly-dallying – though the former Council Leader, John Davies, has been big enough to admit they were wrong. Neither have reached anywhere near the same levels of petulant delusion as Carmarthenshire.
It's an old trick Fungus used at Manchester United – make "your side" (Labour & Independents) think the whole world's against you and it'll create a siege mentality where everyone will pitch together and dig in to win whatever the cost. Fungus was also often described as a Stalinist. And, as history has taught us, sometime an autocrat can get you to do what they want just by being in the same room and looking at you.
The Legal Advice
Aside from the publication of the WAO reports themselves, preliminary police involvement and the intervention of Keith Davies, the biggest development since has been the publication of two pieces of legal advice CCC received in relation to the indemnity funding. As far as I can tell there's been nothing relating to the pension payments, though Pembrokeshire Council are due to debate that later this week.
The first set of legal advice from 2008, by James Goudie QC (pdf), suggests the 2006 Order didn't override clauses in the Local Government Act 1972 (Section 111) which grants local authorities any and all powers to discharge their functions – what West Wales News Review described as a "Get Out of Jail Free Card".
Basically, if CCC want to ignore the 2006 Order, they believe a certain interpretation of the 1972 Act and how the 2006 Order relates to it gives them the power to do so.
As far as I can tell though, that would only be the case had Wales voted no to devolution in 1997.
The auditor said the 2006 Order provided a statutory code to Welsh local authorities outlining precisely when a Welsh local authority can indemnify officers in libel defences, explicitly prohibiting their use to undertake a claim.
Last time I checked, Carmarthenshire was in Wales and the National Assembly has responsibility for most aspects of local government within Wales. What the Welsh Government says in that regard, goes.
Although James Goudie QC disagrees with this, he says in no uncertain terms that "the restrictions in the 2006 Order and the Welsh Assembly Guidance on the bringing of defamation are a weighty factor against granting an indemnity" and that "it will be extremely rare for such a decision by the Council to be reasonable."
The broad conclusion of the 2008 legal advice was, therefore, "even if you can do it – don't". A common sense cautious approach could've interpreted it as advising against awarding the indemnity quite easily.
The Executive Board were apparently told there was unequivocal support in favour of granting the indemnity – which was bullshit, as there in black and white in the legal advice itself.
The second set of advice, from Timothy Kerr QC (pdf), is retrospective and doesn't add anything new. It's basing the lawfulness of the indemnity, largely, on the (for now) successful outcome at the High Court and on similar grounds to the Goudie advice (Section 111 powers).
The outcome isn't important. The lawfulness of the indemnity when it was originally granted is. Therefore, the 2008 advice trumps anything after it.
The WAO reports were written with full knowledge of both sets of legal advice and other unpublished correspondence, so I doubt the publication of the advice damages the credibility of Anthony Barrett's reports at all. It's now CCC's word against the WAO and will almost certainly head for the courts unless "something else" happens.
When it comes to matters of public finance, I know whose unqualified opinion I believe carries more weight.
Carmarthenshire : Rogue State?
| We deal with upstart rebel territories a bit differently nowadays. (Pic : themiscollection.com) |
By resorting to a justification based on the 1972 Act, they're effectively saying the 2006 Order isn't worth the paper it was written on. I hope Lesley Griffiths, the First Minister, AMs and civil servants in Cathays Park can see that. Their rather timid response to date shows they perhaps don't.
If CCC are given an opportunity to overturn WAO reports in relation to remuneration and indemnities, it could lead to challenges under the 1972 Act provisions to all sorts of Orders issued by the Welsh Government. It undermines both the devolution of local government, and the mandate Welsh Ministers have from the Welsh electorate to make regulations in that area.
That's before considering the serious damage it would do to the Wales Audit Office's reputation.
Carmarthenshire are, in effect, trying to seize control of some aspects of local government finance from the Welsh Government via a loophole that shouldn't even be there.
In less-enlightened times, if a local fiefdom were undermining the authority of the central government and its public servants in such an insolent manner, legions of knights would now be crossing the Loughor and heads would be put on spikes.
We're no stranger to this. Senior officers in Carmarthenshire are in danger of joining the long list of shit heel petty princes who paid the price for getting ideas above their station, having little care for the damage it could do Wales as a whole.
Councillors have been left in a tough position. Many will be swayed by the legal advice, but if they focus on the first set alone, and fully comprehend it, they'll realise the case for awarding the indemnity was likely to have been exaggerated beyond recognition.
I even feel sorry for Executive Board members. They still have to go for their own incompetence, but they've been done up like kippers by people they surely trusted. The sillier ones will still trust them, and will be standing there alongside the officers when the inevitable happens one day.
This is in danger of becoming a national embarrassment, and because of CCC digging their heels in, is more serious than it otherwise would have been.
A failure to, at the very least, suspend those involved temporarily means Carmarthenshire may as well be considered a rogue local authority that's become a law unto itself, needing to be brought to heel in the same way Anglesey was.
This isn't just about the credibility of CCC now, but about the credibility of Welsh local government and some of our most important public institutions.
When it rains....
I doubt anyone will have noticed this, but another sign of both the implosion within CCC's bunkers and contempt they hold the National Assembly and Welsh Government has come from an unexpected source.
The National Assembly's Petitions Committee recently discussed a petition to list the former ground of Llanelli RFC and Scarlets - Stradey Park - which has been eyed up for a controversial housing development (since under construction, apparantly).
The petition itself was closed after Culture Minister, John Griffiths (Lab, Newport East), said no more could be done (pdf).
Here's edited version of what was said at the Committee meeting last week on this petition :
(Chair) William Powell AM (Lib Dem, Mid & West Wales) : We....received a response from the Minister for Culture....and from Carmarthenshire County Council....I think it would be fair to say that we found a degree of churlishness from the local authority. I have had sight of e-mails from the local authority officers that fall some way short of courtesy to the team that supports this committee and to us. I think we should put on record that that is regrettable. Possibly, we might wish to bring these matters regarding the curt and somewhat inappropriate tone of the correspondence to the attention of the leader or chief executive of Carmarthenshire council.
Joyce Watson AM (Lab, Mid & West Wales) : I think courtesy is the least that anyone can expect. Are you telling me that what is printed here—I read this a few times—is what you received? Was this it?
(Clerk) Mr George : No, this was the second response that we received. The first response was shorter than this.
William Powell AM : I believe that it was, ‘No, no and no’
Joyce Watson AM : That sounded -
Mr George : I went back to say that the response was likely to be put before the committee and, maybe, they wanted to reconsider. We then got this response instead.
Joyce Watson AM : ....I move that we write to the leader of the authority, Councillor Kevin Madge, and to the chief executive.
William Powell AM : Mr Mark James.
Joyce Watson AM : We should simply say that, in our opinion, it is not normally the way we receive correspondence from those that we ask questions of. For as long as I have been on this committee....I have not seen anything so brief, so blunt and which lacks complete engagement, quite frankly.
William Powell AM : It may, at the least, flag-up some sort of training need and the need for people to be called to account.....it would be useful for us to write to the chief officer and the leader of Carmarthenshire....just to flag up that matter, because it shows a discourtesy to the committee, to our team and, indeed, to the petitioners to have adopted such a tone.
It's unclear precisely who sent the "No, no and no" response, though the Head of Planning at Carmarthenshire Council is Eifion Bowen. You can read a tidied-up of CCC's curt and disrespectful response to both a National Assembly Committee and more than 4,000 petitioners here (pdf).
Thursday, 30 January 2014
The Rotten Borough - Carmarthenshire's Smoking Gun
By OwenThursday, January 30, 20144Assembly, Caerphilly, Carms, Civil Liberties, Cons, Crime, England, Labour, LGS, Local Gov, Pembs, Plaid, WAO, WWSCView Comments
It's quite fitting that Romania can now play a full part in the EU, as today has a.....pre-Christmas 1989, Bucharest feel about it.
It's already been covered comprehensively by Y Cneifiwr, Carmarthenshire Planning, Wales Eye and Inside Out; as well as BBC Wales, South Wales Evening Post and Western Mail.
It's only right – because of the wider impact this pathetic county's actions have had on political criticism in Wales – that I add my own voice to the chorus of condemnation.
As covered back in September/October, the Wales Audit Office believed two decisions taken by Carmarthenshire Council (CCC) were unlawful. Those two decision were; pension arrangements for senior officers (also implicating Pembrokeshire – more from Cllr. Jacob Williams), and the granting of indemnity funding to Chief Executive, Mark James, to undertake a counter libel action against Carmarthenshire Planning's Jacqui Thompson.
As you can understand, the thought that such upstanding public servants would engage in something....."unlawful"..... (synomyms and related words : illegal, criminal, actionable, corrupt, nefarious, prohibited, outlawed, illegitimate, illicit)....came as a terrible shock.
Today, the Wales Audit Office's Anthony Barrett published two separate public interest reports into the decisions. They make pretty damning reading for Carmarthenshire Council. So damning, it could be the beginning of the end for many.
The Pensions Arrangement (pdf)
It's already been covered comprehensively by Y Cneifiwr, Carmarthenshire Planning, Wales Eye and Inside Out; as well as BBC Wales, South Wales Evening Post and Western Mail.
It's only right – because of the wider impact this pathetic county's actions have had on political criticism in Wales – that I add my own voice to the chorus of condemnation.
As covered back in September/October, the Wales Audit Office believed two decisions taken by Carmarthenshire Council (CCC) were unlawful. Those two decision were; pension arrangements for senior officers (also implicating Pembrokeshire – more from Cllr. Jacob Williams), and the granting of indemnity funding to Chief Executive, Mark James, to undertake a counter libel action against Carmarthenshire Planning's Jacqui Thompson.
As you can understand, the thought that such upstanding public servants would engage in something....."unlawful"..... (synomyms and related words : illegal, criminal, actionable, corrupt, nefarious, prohibited, outlawed, illegitimate, illicit)....came as a terrible shock.
Today, the Wales Audit Office's Anthony Barrett published two separate public interest reports into the decisions. They make pretty damning reading for Carmarthenshire Council. So damning, it could be the beginning of the end for many.
The Pensions Arrangement (pdf)
- The agreement to pay cash sums instead of pension payments to senior staff who opted-out of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) - to mitigate effects of changes to tax relief on pensions - was ultra vires (beyond their power).
- The Executive Board of CCC, which made the decision and includes senior councillors, were wrongly informed that officers would have to leave the LGPS as a result of changes to the law.
- Although CCC maintain that they have the power to enter into particular financial arrangements with their employees, the Auditor believes the powers can't be used to get around pensions legislation. In shorthand terms, this was a tax avoidance scheme.
- The Executive Board failed to take into account all relevant considerations. They also failed to provide evidence that supported their claims that not approving the cash payments would prevent the recruitment of high-calibre senior staff.
- They also failed to take equalities duties into account, and the decision "constituted indirect discrimination" on age and sex grounds because senior staff – mostly older men – would benefit disproportionately from the cash payments compared younger staff and women. As nobody complained within the legal timescale, it was "indirect" discrimination rather than outright.
- The item approving the payments didn't appear on the Executive Board agenda, therefore couldn't be scrutinised by the public. This breached regulations and "had no reasonable basis". CCC defend leaving the item off as one of their assistant chief executives – who believed it had to be addressed before the next meeting - was very busy at the time, so it didn't need to be treated as a formal urgent item. The Auditor disagrees.
- The report itself was drafted and presented by a senior officer who had a disqualifying personal interest as they would've benefited from the cash payments – rendering it an unlawful decision just by their mere presence.
- £28,750 was paid to Mark James in lieu of pension contributions across 2012-13 and 2013-14, though it's unclear if it's been paid back. The equivalent sum for Pembrokeshire is over £50,000.
- CCC has since rescinded the cash payments, so the Auditor recommends CCC address procedural weaknesses.
The Libel Indemnity (pdf)
- The decision to award indemnity was contrary to the Local Authorities (Indemnities for Members and Officers) Order 2006, as indemnities can only be used to defend a defamation claim not bring a counter claim. CCC can't fall back on previous laws dating from 1972 either.
- The Welsh Government's legal advice - when the regulations were issued - clearly warns local authorities "to use common sense" and generally avoid funding defamation proceedings from the public purse.
- Mark James participated in the decision to award the indemnity and didn't declare an interest, which even by his very presence makes the decision unlawful.
- CCC apparently held an off the record "pre-meeting" - which Mark James didn't attend - to go over the details before the formal Executive Board meeting, and therefore CCC believe Mark James didn't participate in the decision-making process and board members were fully-informed of the issues. The auditor doesn't buy it, saying this raises concerns about openness and transparency of decision-making processes.
- The Executive Board failed to take advice from the Wales Audit Office into account, failed to consider the likelihood of the law suit's success and failed to consider a (presumably) "no win, no fee" funding arrangement for the libel action.
- The Executive Board only saw what's been described elsewhere as a "sexed-up dossier" of legal advice on the indemnity funding, not the full advice which was significantly more cautious.
- Treating the matter as an "urgent item" was questionable, and again CCC use the excuse that a decision was needed before the next meeting, which contravened regulations and prevented public scrutiny. There was, however, enough time for the item to be introduced the standard way – at least three days before the meeting.
- A total of £26,426 has been spent on external legal advice since 2012-13, but it's unclear how much this will eventually cost CCC.
- The Auditor recommends the libel indemnity funding be withdrawn immediately.
The Reaction
Rhodri Glyn Thomas AM and Jonathan Edwards MP (both Plaid, Carms E. & Dinefwr) have called for senior resignations, the former believing the authority should also be placed in special measures. Shadow Local Government Minister, Janet Finch-Saunders (Con, Aberconwy), said it highlights the need to rein in senior executive pay.
The local Plaid Cymru group leader, Peter Hughes Griffiths (quoted via Y Cneifiwr), has called for a rainbow coalition to "take control of the situation".
No political capital can be made out of this as it's much a fault of councillors as officers. A power-sharing agreement between an old, venal regime and upstart rebels wouldn't change things. There needs to be a clear-out, and those involved don't deserve the dignity of quietly walking away into retirement.
Not only does this highlight at least two substantial failings of governance and procedure that opened the door to possible misconduct in public office, it also underlines that the governance structure at CCC is neither working, transparent or 100% kosher.
The positions of senior officers and councillors at Carmarthenshire are now untenable. As Jacqui herself said, there are clear parallels with the fraud investigation in Caerphilly, and this should, ideally, be investigated by a police force from outside Wales. Just to underline the seriousness, if this falls under the definition of fraud or misconduct in public office - totalling over £50,000 - we're talking prison sentences.
I concur with Rhodri Glyn Thomas that there's a strong case for placing Carmarthenshire into special measures and run directly by commissioners as soon as practically possible.That requires Welsh Government involvement, so we shouldn't get our hopes up.
There's also a need for a full inquiry – possibly involving Pembrokeshire and Caerphilly too - which could serve as further evidence when considering reforms to how local government works in Wales, something broadly ignored by the Williams Commission. The National Assembly's Public Accounts Committee could do that, and it looks like the Chair, Darren Millar AM (Con, Clwyd West), is ready to go.
People start making mistakes when they think they're invincible and beyond reproach.
Far from a "sustained campaign of harassment", words Jacqui Thompson has used to describe some actions of Carmarthenshire – which apparently damaged Mark James' feelings and reputation to to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds, possibly resulting in Jacqui's future homelessness – were embellishments of a cold, dark truth. I think we all knew that, but if the law's often an ass, defamation laws are a haemorrhoid.
As she heads towards some semblance of vindication, Jacqui Thompson's not only owed a full apology from Carmarthenshire Council, she's owed justice.
What we're NOT allowed to say about Carmarthenshire Council
![]() |
| It's time to play the music! It's time to light the lights! |
So, it's worth noting the warning recently issued by Carmarthenshire's (outside chance of soon being ex-) Council Leader, Kevin Madge (Labour).
All of us should realise that we're here to listen and nod along to anything anyone in elected (or unelected) office says or does. As they cock their legs on their plush leather seats, we should bend over in tribute, gratefully receiving their rose-scented farts - of both brain and bowel.
Heeding Kevin's advice, it's best - for public information purposes - that I outline the sort of things we're not allowed to say about this illustrious local authority.
We can't say, for example, that Carmarthenshire Council is a festering tumour on democracy in Wales, and perhaps the biggest single threat to it since the Battle of Britain.
It would be wrong to insinuate that some Carmarthenshire councillors are walking, breathing proof of evolution from lesser forms of primate - senior councillors and officers acting as silverbacks at the head of a pack of Homo Moridunum.
It would be totally wrong to suggest they're also proof that age doesn't make you wiser, or more competent, and that – unless you've proven you can handle public responsibilities - sometimes retirement or your student days are best spent in a garden or library, not a council chamber or committee room.
It's incorrect to say that many councillors are about as much use at their desks as a gonk, or that I've dissected cadavers with more self-awareness of both where they are and what responsibilities they have to the public.
I shouldn't give the impression to any readers that many councillors are people elevated above their station. Or, that many are paper candidates who walk their way though elections because of first past the post, but who aren't trusted to take control of matters of any real importance. This is highlighted by CCC making the fastest attempt by authorities to offload management of public toilets since rumours of an e-coli outbreak circulated at the British Vindaloo Festival
Then, one day, because the number of competent elected members are few, or because the wrong party's in power at the wrong time, Forrest Gump becomes your Council Leader. Meetings are reduced to a night at the world's dullest cinema, and councillors are appointed to senior positions lacking the faculties or bravery to question officer's decisions properly.
It would be wrong to point out that the Independent "group" – vipers in grandparent's clothing - con us into believing that all non-affiliated members would share exactly the same ideals at exactly the same time. That doesn't sound like a political party to me at all; subjecting themselves, and everyone else, to political manoeuvring and clandestine backstabbing that would make New York's Five Families blush, bending quicker than a rubber tree in a hurricane.
It would be wrong to say Carmarthenshire residents are seen as mushrooms by their local council because – after all - mushrooms need to be fed bullshit and kept in the dark.
It would be libellous to suggest that CCC is corrupt. They're not corrupt. They're not clever or competent enough to be corrupt, as it takes skill to be bent and get away with it.
It would verge on harassment to say there's anything dodgy about Parc-y-Scarlets and other developments, or that Carmarthenshire residents should ask the people of Boston in Lincolnshire how that will pan out.
I can't say that senior officers are bullies. Because one characteristic of bullies is that they get others to fight their battles for them – up to and including the resources of an entire council. This hasn't happened in Carmarthenshire. Nope.
I pour scorn - as the legal system continues to do so - on anyone who would dare criticise the best local authority in Wales. Shame on you.





























