'First-of-its-kind' disused tips bill passed by Senedd
The Labour deputy first minister said: 'We are keenly conscious of the worry and the anxiety that so many families living in the shadow of disused tips feel, right across Wales.'
The bill updates the 'not fit for purpose' Mines and Quarries Act 1969 and establishes the Disused Tips Authority for Wales, charged with ensuring tips do not threaten human welfare.
Vowing never to forget the Aberfan tragedy, Mr Irranca-Davies said 'Climate change, with ever-increasing and erratic levels of rainfall, poses increasing challenges for the management of disused tips.
'And for thousands of people in all our communities across Wales… these tips are an ever-present reminder of what can go tragically wrong.'
The bill includes arrangements for the assessment, registration and monitoring of tips as well as powers for the Disused Tip Authority to enter land and require information.
Mr Irranca-Davies described the bill as progressive and the first of its kind in the UK, saying: 'As a nation that was in the vanguard of the coal industry, it's entirely appropriate that we lead the way with the legislation to ensure the future of disused tips and quarries.'
Janet Finch-Saunders, the Conservatives' shadow environment secretary, backed the bill during a debate on July 15 before Senedd members voted 50-0 in favour.
But Ms Finch-Saunders raised concerns about the estimated £600m cost of remediation, with 2,500 coal tips and 20,000 non-coal tips in Wales.
Delyth Jewell told the Senedd: 'Communities were told to make peace with the desolation left as successive governments shied away from tending to the open wounds of the abandoned mines – allowing them to fester so visibly, painful reminders of exploitation.
'This has not just imposed a terrible environmental toll, the unexorcised spectre of the coal mining industry has weighed heavily on the collective consciousness of these communities.'
Plaid Cymru's shadow climate secretary broadly supported the bill but bemoaned a lack of ambition in regulating the use of coal in the remediation of mines.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Metro
3 hours ago
- Metro
Labour's love lost in less than a year but will electoral reform rescue it?
In MetroTalk: Readers discuss Labour leaders, the left-wing, mass migration and the wealth tax debate (Picture:) Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments. Is your spiritual home sturdy? Reader comments on Farage, Corbyn and Starmer Brian Dooley (MetroTalk, Wed) thinks Jeremy Corbyn's new political party should be the spiritual home of Labour supporters because Sir Keir Starmer has abandoned core Labour values. If only! Starmer ran to be Labour leader on left-of-centre policies and then understandably abandoned them to win last year's general election. Then, inexplicably, he forgot why he had won and reverted to comfort-zone, left-of-centre policies that plunged the government into a serious poll dive that shows no sign of being reversed. Immigration control, law and order, economic growth, NHS reform… policies very popular with the electorate have all collapsed in less than a year. Instead, out-of-touch, left-of-centre backbenchers bully the prime minister to maintain a bloated welfare state that is a magnet for migrants. No wonder Nigel Farage is so popular. Brian, the present Labour Party is indeed your spiritual home… until it is swept away in a few years' time – something that has happened in practically every country in Europe. Chris Shepherd, London Left-wing and centre-left vote to be split four ways? This reader says Corbyn would have less momentum if Labour offered concession to the left-wing(Picture:) I couldn't agree more with James Freeman (MetroTalk, Tue) that if Labour were to offer any sort of concession to the left wing of the party then Corbyn's party wouldn't have as much momentum. To reduce the threat posed by Reform UK, we also need proportional representation (PR). Under first past the post (FPTP), there is a danger the left-wing and centre-left vote will be split between Labour, the Lib Dems, the Greens and Corbyn's party, while the right-wing vote is largely united behind Reform UK. Reform could win an overall majority with just 30 per cent of the popular vote under FPTP – but this could not happen under PR. Alan Yearsley, Sheffield Anti-immigrant, anti-immigration or pro-borders? Reader debates Some politicians and pro-immigration activists call their opponents 'anti-immigrant' protesters. Got a question about UK politics? Send in yours and Metro's Senior Politics Reporter Craig Munro will answer it in an upcoming edition of our weekly politics newsletter. Email alrightgov@ or submit your question here. Maybe the protesters are not so much opposing immigrants – maybe they are opposing the government policies that have encouraged mass immigration? So, why not call them anti-immigration protesters? Or again, perhaps it would be more accurate to call them pro-borders protesters? Some of the pro-immigration activists carry banners calling for 'No borders, no nations'. Will Podmore, London 'Trying to nail down jelly', reader talks wealth tax This reader says wealth tax would be 'impossible to administer' (Picture:) Rob Slater (MetroTalk, Tue) asks why chancellor Rachel Reeves has ruled out introducing a wealth tax. The answer is simple – it's impossible to administer, as other countries have found. How do you put a value on works of art, fine wines, vintage cars, property or companies owned by individuals, to give just a few examples? What's to stop people who live here moving their assets to another country? How many civil servants would you need to assess values – if indeed you could? How many court cases would be brought by those who feel their assets have been overvalued? It's like trying to nail down jelly. The big mistake this government made was in promising not to increase those taxes that make up two-thirds of the total tax income – income tax, national insurance and VAT. If we don't want to pay more tax then we have to expect cuts to public services. It's as simple as that. John Daniels, Redhill Reader says Reform can't solve emigration when the party includes many ex-Tories responsible for mass migration? In her analysis of the causes of mass immigration, Helen (MetroTalk, Tue) ignores the fact large numbers of migrants don't come from countries with war or disaster but the EU and India etc. She glossed over the fact many who do come from problem countries go through safe countries to get here. Helen ignored the impact on the country of over-population (in the 1970s people were urged to stop having children as the then much smaller population was considered unsustainable). She also ignored the fact not only are we becoming 'an island of strangers' – in the words of Starmer, albeit words he now regrets – but of enemies as per the under-reported conflict between Muslims and Hindus. Helen is right about the terrible conditions driving some to emigrate but as to Reform claiming to being the solution, the party contains many ex-Tories responsible for much of the mass migration. Reform is in favour of increasing the wealth disparity between rich and poor, probably increasing the drive for immigration. Mark, via email At what age can you be rugby tackled to the floor for breaking the law? This reader saysthat if they're allowed to vote, they're old enough to face consequences for stealing(Picture: Getty Images) The other night I watched two teenagers walk out of my local superstore with a rucksack full of shopping they had not paid for. The security guard tried to stop them but they just casually walked past him. He told me they did it all the time because they know he can't touch them. If the government considers them old enough to vote then surely they are of the age where they can be rugby-tackled to the floor for breaking the law. Gareth, London Reader suggests substance testing for those on benefits with mental health issues Why doesn't the Department for Work and Pensions introduce drug and alcohol testing for those who receive benefits and claim to have mental health issues? Very often I see people on the street smoking marijuana or with a can of beer. It's easy to see what kind of state they are in and it's very dangerous. These individuals should be receiving medical care and food, travel and rent vouchers, not money or benefits. If they refuse, they should be disqualified and prosecuted. Val, Broxbourne Arrow MORE: KöD's signature three-course menu for only £39.50: 10 unmissable Time Out deals Arrow MORE: I'll sleep soundly through the next heatwave thanks to this game-changing item from Oodie Arrow MORE: Former UFC fighter Conor McGregor loses appeal for civil rape case
North Wales Chronicle
3 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Starmer: Small business owners should not have to put homes on the line
A crackdown on late payments that businesses waste time chasing is also being launched as part of the Government's newly published small business plan. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said late payments were the 'number one issue' raised by small businesses as he and Sir Keir Starmer visited a Swindon co-working space in a former train shed. The plan also aims to boost access to finance after small businesses said they were struggling to secure loans. 'I don't want anybody who is willing to take a risk and start a business to feel that their family home might be a risk if that doesn't go right, so working again with private lenders to give people that reassurance,' Mr Reynolds said. The Prime Minister said being an entrepreneur in the UK was a matter of putting 'your whole self' into it. 'You put your whole self in, you put your whole self in, you put your family in, you put so much into running a business.' But he said he wanted to make access to business finance easier, after hearing from the owner of a salon business who told him she had faced 'astronomical' interest rates when she had first opened her business and looked at a bank loan. He said: '(We're) making sure people can access that more easily, more readily, don't necessarily have to feel that they've got to put their equity, their house on the line.' He said he had been shocked to learn that £11 billion is lost through late payments annually and that it is often big businesses paying late. Upcoming legislation will introduce maximum payment terms of 60 days. The small business commissioner will also get new powers to fine large companies persistently paying suppliers late. The commissioner will also be able to enforce a rule that customers must pay their supplier within 30 days of receiving a valid invoice, unless otherwise agreed, with spot checks to help identify breaches. The plan will also pump £4 billion of financial support into small business start-ups and growth. This is set to include £1 billion for new firms, with 69,000 start-up loans and mentoring support over the next four years. And the British Business Bank will have its financial capacity increased to £25.6 billion. Andrew Griffith, the Conservative shadow business secretary, said: 'Cracking down on late payments will be welcome for small business but will mean nothing for the 218,000 businesses that have closed under Labour. 'The reality for businesses under Labour is a doubling of business rates, a £25 billion jobs tax and a full-on strangulation of employment red tape. 'Only the Conservatives are on the side of the makers and will support businesses across Britain to create jobs and wealth.' The Lib Dems said the announcement 'falls far short' of a proper plan. Sarah Olney, the Lib Dem business spokesperson, said: 'Small businesses are the beating heart of our economy and our local communities, yet they've had to suffer through years of chaos under the last Conservative government and are now being badly hit by this Government's damaging national insurance hike. 'Ministers can't go on burying their heads in the sand about the huge challenges that SMEs face. We must urgently see a proper plan centred on scrapping the national insurance rise, fixing business rates and cutting sky-high energy bills.' Mr Reynolds said about half of all businesses in the UK were paying the same or lower national insurance employer contributions. 'But we will always acknowledge there have been some difficult decisions the Government had to make on the public finances. 'That makes it even more important to deliver on these measures that will make a practical difference to save businesses time and money wherever we can.' Sir Keir said rising business rates were a 'real cause of concern' and that his Government was going to stabilise it. 'So, it's not changing year on year. So, lower it because that's really important for these small and medium sized businesses,' he told ITV West Country.
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of Gary Neville's money
As a footballer Gary Neville was not known for his versatility. He was a one-club man who trundled up and down the right flank like a plough-horse. So it is heartening to see him switching things up politically. This week he became the latest Labour supporter to turn on them over tax. 'I honestly don't believe […] companies and small businesses should be deterred from employing people,' said Neville, who owns several businesses alongside his punditry gigs. 'So, I think the National Insurance rise was one that I feel probably could have been held back.' Leaving to one side the fact that Sky viewers might not mind living without his rabid commentary, there is a delicious schadenfreude in watching Neville, a noisy Labour fan, change tack. Last June, he even proved his commitment by taking Keir Starmer up the Langdale Pikes for a campaign interview, in what must have been the most tedious man-marking job of his life. Until recently Rachel Reeves has been blessed in her enemies. When she and Starmer broke a manifesto promise to whack farmers with inheritance tax, they couldn't have hoped for a better opponent than Jeremy Clarkson. Here was not some sympathetic turnip-tender on the breadline but a celeb who was on the record as saying dodging IHT was a reason he bought a farm. Number 10 must have rejoiced again in March when Alexander Armstrong, arguably the pre-eminent primetime posho, complained about VAT on private school fees. His quip that he was feeling 'extremely poor' did not land well with those who were actually feeling extremely poor. Now, even Labour's fans are rethinking. Neville was not the first. In February, the Iceland boss Richard Walker, who had supported Reeves' Budget, warned that, while it was right to look at 'levelling the playing field on tax', the Government had 'parked its tractor in the wrong place going after hard-working British farmers'. The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money. Even Gary Neville's. Lower the voting age? Here's a better solution Full credit to Jeremy Corbyn for waiting until Labour had said they would lower the voting age before announcing his new party. The Government thought letting 16 and 17-year-olds have a go at the ballot box might give them the edge in a few marginals. Instead, they might hand a sizeable bloc to Corbo and his band of plucky dreamers, not to mention the Greens and even Reform. Luckily for Keir Starmer I have a solution. Rather than lowering the voting age, he should introduce a cut-off. Many problems in the UK are, we're told, down to our limitless brigades of pensioners. As they don't have day jobs or Xboxes to occupy them, voting provides a welcome distraction. With gilded pensions and houses they bought for a shilling and sixpence, they vote to preserve their interests. But you have to reapply for your driving licence at 70, so why not your voting licence? A short quiz could determine eligibility: should we keep the triple lock? Should the winter fuel allowance be extended to summer? Is the PM too young? Are the policemen too young? Is the Pope too young? I can foresee objections, so how about a compromise: you have 50 eligible voting years in your life and you can choose when to use them. If you wanted to torch them on idealism at 16, you would be free to, but you wouldn't be able to defend your pension later. Either way, surely this would be the kind of bold move Starmer had in mind when he promised 'action, not words'. At least, that's what he told Gary Neville, on a hillside in Cumbria.
