Strong support needed for traditional music in Wales
Ms Wynne said: "I'm grateful to all of those who generously shared their thoughts, ideas and passion for traditional music with us.
"The review highlighted that the structures in Wales, which once supported the handing down of traditional music skills and tunes, are no longer viable without support and some urgent interventions.
"While much of the review discussions focussed on enlivening grassroots participation, we have understood the traditional music sector in Wales as an ecosystem – each part impacting upon the others.
"The Arts Council of Wales's response to the review findings has been heartening, and the very intelligent ongoing discussions about how best to support this sector flourish and grow are very exciting."
The report, the most comprehensive of its kind in Wales, was managed by Tŷ Cerdd in partnership with Trac Cymru and gathered input from more than 280 contributors.
It describes a sector full of creativity and cultural relevance but lacking the support and investment needed to thrive.
Among the key concerns raised are the need for stronger grassroots provision, especially for young people and intergenerational groups.
The report also calls for expanded opportunities for informal participation at the community level, better integration of traditional music in schools and higher education, clearer development pathways for musicians, and targeted efforts to build audiences.
Dafydd Rhys, chief executive of the Arts Council of Wales, said: "There's huge passion for traditional music in Wales, and the consultation showed a clear need for more coherence, visibility and support.
"In response, we're committing £300,000 for Gwerin this year – a 270 per cent increase on previous dedicated funding pre-Investment Review.
"The majority of which will go into the sector to support delivering activity."
The review forms part of the Arts Council's broader efforts under its 2023 Investment Review to strengthen the cultural sector across Wales.
It also highlights successful models from Scotland, Ireland, and Belgium that could inform future development in Wales.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
4 days ago
- The Sun
I tried Naked Wines: is 12 bottles for £65 worth it?
MY job means that most days of the week, I receive some sort of delivery containing something that needs reviewing. Having done it for a while now, I can tell you for a fact: the best product in the world to arrive home to is a case of wine. I've been doing a Naked Wines review, testing out the service, the value for money and, most enjoyably, the quality of the wine. Get £80 off a case of 12 wines at Naked Wines BUY HERE If you've heard of Naked Wines, you'll know that it's famous for its alluring introductory offers — I've received paper vouchers in everything from meal delivery boxes to magazines. Currently, the brand is offering new customers a massive £80 off a case of 12 wines worth £144.99, bringing the price down to £64.99. That's less than £6 per bottle — less than you'd spend on a bottle of supermarket swill. However, the deals can seem a bit too good to be true, and the company's business model can be slightly confusing, so I've nobly quaffed my way through six bottles of wine to find out whether Naked Wines is worth it. How much is Naked Wines? Prices of individual bottles vary, but you can currently get a box of 12 bottles for £64.99, a discount of £80. You even take a quiz first, so the box is (slightly) tailored to your tastes. Who's it best for? People who want to discover new wines without paying through the nose. What we loved: I mean, do I really have to spell it out? It's great wine for less than £6 per bottle. It's also cool that you get tasting notes, serving suggestions, food matches and information on the winemakers, and that the wines themselves aren't available to buy anywhere else. What we didn't: Predictably, you'll be enrolled onto a £25 per month "Angel" subscription 30 days after you order, but you can cancel any time. And you can cancel online, unlike some other wine subscriptions (I'm looking at you, Wine52). There also seems to be quite a large number of reviewers who experience delays in their deliveries. How does the Angel membership work? This is not a wine subscription. While you will be charged £25 every month, that does not mean that a box of wine will turn up on your door every month without you lifting a finger. In fact, I have a friend who was unknowingly paying £25 per month into his Naked Wines account for over a year without realising. By the time he clocked that he was an Angel, he had poured £400 into his account — all without receiving a single bottle of wine. Instead, you're essentially purchasing and accumulating store credit. It's like transferring £25 per month of your cash into the currency of a country where wine is cheaper (and nicer). It's like transferring £25 per month of your cash into the currency of a country where wine is cheaper (and nicer). While this means you have to stay on top of ordering, there are a couple of advantages as well. Firstly, it means you can order the amount of wine you think you'll drink every month. Trying to cut down? Order the minimum six bottles, or none at all. Planning a party? Use some accumulated credit to stockpile. Secondly, where wine subscription services send a pre-selected selection of bottles that are chosen without your input — you only get to choose between red, white and mixed — Naked Wine is more of a traditional store. If you're a fan of Argentinian Malbec, for example, or want to discover the wines of the English Southeast, Naked Wines allows you to do that. This isn't the case for the introductory offer, though; instead, you fill out a short quiz about your preferences, and Naked Wines will automatically pick out a dozen wines for you. Are the wines good? Get £80 off a case of 12 wines at Naked Wines The best thing about Naked Wines is that the wines you get are usually exclusive to the site. This is because of the company's funding model. The reason members are called "Angels" is that they're Angel investors; Naked Wines uses your £25 membership fee to fund independent wineries, and in return, you get great wine at a much lower price than usual. This is because the model eliminates middlemen, keeping prices low. Some of the prices on Naked Wines might seem a little misleading; prices are usually displayed something like " £14.99 £12.99". In reality, nowhere else is charging £15, because there's nowhere else to buy them; these are often relatively small batches of wine, and there isn't enough made to sell through other retailers. However, the £14.99 is an indication of what similar wines cost from traditional retailers. The way this process manifests itself in the wine itself is that you feel a lot more invested in each bottle. Naked Wines provides heaps of information about the wines, from exact Google Maps locations of the vineyards, to in-depth food pairing ideas, to video interviews with the winemakers themselves. The closest comparison I can think of is that it's like knowing the name, breed and diet of the cow whose steak you're eating, as well as the farm it was bred on and how the grass it ate impacts the flavour of its meat. And I can tell you, if you knew that much about the steak, you'd savour every bite. It's very much the same with Naked Wine. Get £80 off a case of 12 wines at Naked Wines Naked Wines kindly sent me a hand-picked selection for this review, and I drank each bottle with a sort of focus that doesn't feel particularly warranted for a bottle from Tesco Express. However, I think it's worth pointing out that just because you know that a lovely gentleman named Jacques has made your Sauvignon Blanc on his humbly-sized vineyard in the Loire Valley, that doesn't mean that it's good wine or that you'll enjoy it. However, the other thing that Naked Wines is good at is fostering a community of users who leave honest, polite reviews, and there seems to be a pretty good algorithm in place for recommending wines based on your tastes. So whether the wines are good is a subjective choice, but Naked Wines certainly does a good job at creating a system where it's easy to enjoy every bottle. At this price, certainly. I can't remember the last time I spent less than £6 on a bottle of wine, so this deal is worth taking advantage of from a financial standpoint alone. However, it'll also give you a chance to experience the co-operative element of Naked Wine, where you can access endless amounts of information about the wine you're drinking. There are some things to take into consideration; for example, unless you go onto the website and order the wine, you won't receive any, but you will still be charged £25 per month. That means that you need to remember to cancel your membership within 30 days of ordering your introductory box, or to periodically go online and spend the money you've deposited in your account. For the committed wine lover, Naked Wines offers an exclusive, rewarding experience. However, the introductory offer is an unmissable bargain for anyone who enjoys wine. At less than £6 a bottle, it's a low-risk way to explore independent winemakers and a more thoughtful approach to what's in your glass.
ITV News
5 days ago
- ITV News
Chancellor defends UK Government funding for Wales
Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves has defended the level of the UK Government's spending in Wales during a visit to a coal tip remediation site near Port Talbot. Meeting Welsh Finance Secretary Mark Drakeford MS, she pointed to £118m allocated in the recent Spending Review over three years to improve disused coal tips across Wales. "The whole of the United Kingdom has benefited from coal in Wales and therefore it's right that the UK make sure that these communities are now safe" she said. The visit comes just one day after Eluned Morgan completed one year as First Minister, during which time she insisted she would "call out" Labour MPs in Westminster if they "get it wrong for Wales". Reeves said she continues to work closely with the First Minister and said the partnership has provided money for rail improvements in North and South Wales, "the biggest settlement since devolution", and a fall in NHS waiting lists in England and Wales. She also defended the UK Government's controversial rise in employers' National Insurance contributions. Previously Mark Drakeford called out the decision and said it was "wrong" that Wales' public services faces a shortfall of up to £65m due to the increases. Reeves justified the move, saying it was necessary to improve public services in Wales and England. She said: "We have now delivered millions more appointments in England and Wales over the last year in our NHS but that was only possible because we raised the money..." "I do recognise the challenges raises in National Insurance creates but without that money we would not be able to secure our public finances."
The Independent
30-07-2025
- The Independent
Revealed: The age group most affected by pension changes – and how much they could lose
The age bracket which stands to lose out the most from potential changes to the state pension age has been revealed after Labour's recently announced review into the current age of retirement. Millions of workers could lose more than £17,000 if an increase to the age at which the state pension can be claimed is moved forward, analysis by a wealth management firm has found. This is one of the more commonly speculated possibilities that could come from the government's state pension review, announced by work and pensions minister Liz Kendall last week. Governments are legally required to carry out a review of the state pension age every six years. The last one concluded in 2023, while this one is due to finish in 2029. It must give at least 10 years' notice for any state pension age change. Currently set at 66, and rising to 67 by 2028, the state pension age is the point at which a person is able to retire from work and receive the government-funded state pension. The figure is set to rise to 68 by 2046, but there is a strong possibility this is pushed forward by ministers in a bid to rein in massive spending on the state pension. Such a move was actually proposed by the previous pensions review, suggesting the rise to 68 be completed by 2039, but was never acted on by the government. New analysis by wealth management firm Rathbones has now found that if the deadline was pushed back even to 2039-41, workers aged 51 to 53 now would stand to lose out the most. This is because they would lose a full year of state pension payments that they would otherwise be receiving. Because of the triple-lock guarantee, which sees the state pension rise by at least 2.5 per cent every year, workers currently aged 51 would lose out on £17,774 from the change, Rathbones calculated. For those aged 52, it would be £16,918, and for those aged 51, it would be £17,340. Rebecca Williams, divisional lead of financial planning at Rathbones, said: 'With longevity increasing and population pressures mounting, future generations appear set to face a less generous state pension regime than that enjoyed by many of today's retirees. The situation appears particularly precarious for those in their early 50s who face real prospect of missing out. 'The state pension alone is not enough for a comfortable retirement. Individuals need a broad foundation built on workplace pensions, private savings, and the ongoing support of pension tax relief. Cracks are beginning to show in the system, and they must be addressed urgently if we are to maintain faith in the UK's pension framework and ensure people are equipped not just to survive, but to thrive in later life.' In her statement last week, Ms Kendall had noted that by the 2070s, the number of pensioners is expected to have increased by over 50 per cent, whereas the working age population will have only grown by over 10 per cent. She said that this makes 'it even more imperative to help future pensioners put into a savings pot they can rely on in the future'. Ms Kendall warned: 'My big worry is, so many young people have not even got a hope in hell of getting on the housing ladder, they're being absolutely killed by their rent, and if you are paying off your mortgage in retirement, or still renting in retirement, that is what is driving this sort of tsunami of pensioner poverty that is coming our way.' The minister told reporters: 'Put simply, unless we act, tomorrow's pensioners will be poorer than today's, because people who are saving aren't saving enough for their retirement. 'And crucially, because almost half of the working age population isn't saving anything for their retirement at all.'
