New Barti BBQ sauce launches at Angle's iconic Old Point House
A shock on the Carmarthenshire Farm
A FARMER from Carmarthenshire is at the centre of a growing legal storm over the UK Government's controversial 5G rollout policy – a policy critics say is slowing progress, not speeding it up.
In 2017, ministers promised a faster, cheaper path to mobile connectivity by changing the law to let telecoms companies pay landowners far less for installing masts. But instead of unleashing 5G, the new rules have triggered a wave of legal battles – and rural Wales is bearing the brunt.
Thomas Richards from Llangennech, who agreed to host a mast in 2016 for around £5,500 a year, was stunned when the new rules allowed the telecoms company to revise their offer to just £3.50 a year.
'Negotiations were very stressful. I felt we were taken advantage of as a family,' he said. 'I can't believe the government is allowing this to happen. Who is going to want a mast on their land now?'
His case is one of more than a dozen disputes across Wales, all stemming from the 2017 reforms to the Electronic Communications Code.
Wales is now a legal hotspot for telecom disputes, with more than 14 tribunal cases since 2021. These include disputes with Cardiff International Airport, South Wales Fire and Rescue Authority, and farmers in Snowdonia and Powys.
The number of mast-related legal cases across the UK has surged from just 33 in the 30 years before the code change to more than 1,100 since 2017.
Many site owners – from farmers and churches to care homes and sports clubs – have reported rent drops of 90 percent or more, often with little say in the matter. Campaign group Protect and Connect say some landowners feel bullied and cornered.
In one case, a hill farmer in North Wales saw his annual rent slashed from £5,500 to £3.50. A park visitor centre lost £9,800 a year in mast income, damaging their ability to operate. A church in mid Wales was left scrambling to pay heating bills after its mast rent collapsed.
In response, telecom companies argue that the changes were necessary to stop landowners charging what they call ransom rents that stalled network upgrades. The UK Government insists the reforms are about making digital connectivity affordable and universal.
The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said it wants fairer, faster and more collaborative negotiations, and introduced the Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure Act in 2022 to encourage dispute resolution.
But critics, including the Farmers' Union of Wales, say the reforms have gone too far. One landowner was offered just £32 total for a 10-year lease – down from an earlier offer of £4,650 per year.
In Pembrokeshire, the battle over connectivity has a familiar ring. Residents in Tenby have been complaining about poor mobile signal for years, with tourists flooding in each summer only worsening the problem.
County Councillor Michael Williams said: 'All the providers are blaming visitor numbers, but that excuse doesn't justify the charges people are paying. It's the same problem every year.'
One resident told The Herald he had missed hospital appointments because of poor signal. Businesses relying on card machines and mobile bookings say the network failures cost them money and reputation.
Efforts to install a 20-metre mast in Tenby to ease pressure have stalled due to planning objections within the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park. Officials say it's a difficult balance between connectivity and conservation.
Another controversial mast plan in the Preseli Hills was recently rejected due to its visual impact. Despite the potential to improve rural signal, inspectors upheld objections that it would harm the landscape.
In Cardiff and other urban areas, rooftop masts are also facing disputes over low renewal offers, showing this issue is not confined to the countryside.
Official Ofcom figures show Wales lags behind on mobile coverage. Only 62 percent of land area in Wales has 4G from all four major networks. In some rural constituencies, that figure drops below 50 percent. Superfast broadband access in Pembrokeshire stands at around 93 percent, still below the Welsh average.
Broadband tells a similar tale of two Waleses. Overall, about 96 percent of homes in Wales can access superfast broadband via fixed lines or wireless solutions – roughly on par with the UK average. But rural counties lag behind. Powys has the lowest superfast availability at just 84 percent of premises. Ceredigion is at 86 percent. Pembrokeshire stands around 93 percent – better, but still below the Welsh average. When it comes to future-proofed networks, the gap is starker: only 40 percent of premises in Pembrokeshire have access to full-fibre broadband so far, compared to nearly 70 percent of premises in Cardiff.
Some relief for landowners has started to arrive via the courts. In a recent case, the Upper Tribunal increased the annual rent for a greenfield mast site from £750 to £1,750, after ruling that the earlier valuation was too low. Farming unions hailed the decision, but warned it was still far below the market rates common before 2017.
Campaigners and MPs are now urging a review of the policy before new rules expand the same approach to 15,000 more sites across the UK. Legal experts warn the number of tribunal cases could double again if this happens.
Telecoms industry representatives argue that the reforms were needed to break deadlock and reduce deployment costs. They say most landowners still agree terms without dispute, and that masts are essential national infrastructure, not just commercial equipment.
But for rural communities, that message is wearing thin. Many feel they are being asked to sacrifice land, income and peace of mind – all while still waiting for improved service.
In Tenby, local plasterer Ben Jones says poor signal is costing him work. 'I've missed bookings from clients because they couldn't get through,' he said. 'One customer said it took him five tries to make contact.'
Another resident, Paul, told The Herald he had missed hospital calls and emergency transport arrangements due to unreliable signal. 'It's ridiculous that in 2025, my phone signal is worse than it was in the 1990s,' he said.
Shops relying on mobile card machines also report frequent outages. One shop owner said: 'It's embarrassing having to explain to customers that we can't process a payment because the network's gone down again.'
There is growing consensus that progress on connectivity must be matched by fairness for those who host it. As the Carmarthenshire farmer put it: 'I want better signal too. But not if it means giving up my land for pennies.'
Bridging the digital divide in Wales may require more than telecom towers. It may demand trust, balance, and real partnership between the countryside and the companies trying to connect it.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Cuts to BBC World Service funding would ‘make us less safe', MPs tell ministers
Hours before Rachel Reeves stood up to deliver her budget last year, government officials were still in tense negotiations with bosses at the BBC over how much the World Service would be given. The amount they were haggling over was relatively small – just £5.5m out of a total budget of £400m. But BBC chiefs warned the government that if the cuts were imposed on them, they would have to close several language stations in parts of the world where the Russians already hold influence. Doing so would be a gift to Moscow, they added. The argument worked, and the BBC got the extra cash it was asking for. But executives at the corporation worry that their appeal to Britain's soft power might not prove so effective this time, especially in light of the government's recent cuts to the aid budget. 'The government is asking the World Service to model cuts that would definitely mean having to close important parts of the service,' said one person familiar with the negotiations. 'The BBC's lobbying worked last time, but this round is proving harder.' The Guardian recently revealed the government had asked the World Service to model two scenarios: one where their funding remains the same in cash terms; and one where it would be cut by 2% each year in cash terms. Each scenario would see the budget fall behind inflation, and could mean it ends up to £70m short of what its bosses believe it needs. Jonathan Munro, the global director of the BBC, said: 'When it comes to international impact and influence, the BBC World Service is the UK's most powerful asset. 'While we currently deliver news in 42 languages to over 400m people every week, at the greatest value for money compared to other international news providers, we are ambitious about going further to provide independent news where there is a vital need.' The service is just one institution promoting Britain's soft power abroad, but it is arguably the most powerful, reaching 450m people a week, according to the broadcaster's own figures. When pollsters asked people from around the world about various British exports and organisations, the BBC came out well ahead of any other, with nearly 80% having heard of it and nearly 50% saying it made them feel more positively about the UK. In comparison, only about 55% had heard of the monarchy, and only 25% said it made them view the UK more favourably. According to the same research, which the BBC commissioned, the organisation is also the most trusted of any global news outlet, ahead of CNN, Al Jazeera and Sky News. Jonathan McClory, the managing partner at Sanctuary Counsel and an expert on soft power, said: 'It's a gratuitous accident of history that we have the BBC World Service. You couldn't recreate it if you were starting from scratch, but it enables us to shape a global information landscape and promote British values, such as a free press, transparency and broad support for human rights.' Ministers say they understand this. Jenny Chapman, the international development minister, told the Guardian: 'The World Service do tremendous work, work that nobody else can do … They are soft power, an absolute gold standard resource. We respect that.' But supporters of the organisation fear that budgetary pressure has left its influence on the wane. In 2014, the coalition government stopped funding the world service, leaving the BBC to pay for it purely out of the licence fee. Two years later the government restored some direct funding, which was ringfenced for certain language services, but at a much lower level. Most of the service's £400m budget still comes from licence fee money – a situation the director general, Tim Davie, has warned is not sustainable, especially when domestic operations are being cut. Both scenarios that the government has asked BBC bosses to draw up for the World Service would involve closing certain parts of it. While it will not shut down operations in entire countries, BBC insiders say they are likely to have to close certain foreign language services where there are relatively few people who speak that language. Those services in places close to Russia – which corporation bosses warned last year would be closed if more money was not forthcoming – are once more on the chopping block. The problem with closing operations, even those with relatively small audiences, is that it can give Russia and China a perfect opportunity to push their own propaganda. When the BBC ended its long-wave BBC Arabic radio service in Lebanon, for example, Russian-backed media took over that exact frequency and began broadcasting on it instead. And on the day that thousands of pagers used by Hezbollah all simultaneously exploded in Lebanon, BBC monitors said they picked up what Davie later called 'unchallenged [Russian] propaganda' on that station. The BBC's research has found that its trust level was largely unchanged from four years ago at 78%. Trust in both Russia Today and China Global Television Network had jumped however, from 59% to 71% and from 62% to 70%, respectively. Last week Caroline Dinenage, the Conservative chair of the culture, media and sport select committee, wrote to cabinet ministers warning: 'Without sufficient resources, it could lead to more situations where the world service withdraws or reduces its services and Russian state media fills the vacuum, as in Lebanon. 'Ahead of the spending review, I invite you to reassure us that the government is not seeking to make a 2% cut to its funding of the World Service, at a time when it is vital to our strategic priorities, and that the government will not require cuts that will lead to the BBC having to close one or more language services.' Such arguments have worked with Reeves and her officials in the past. But the chancellor is hemmed in like never before, having already promised major funding increases for defence, the health service and local transport. Dinenage said: 'Ministers have told us that the world service bolsters UK security. Cutting its funding now would undoubtably make us all less safe.' A Foreign Office spokesperson said: 'Despite a tough fiscal situation, we continue to back the World Service, providing a large uplift of £32.6m this year alone, taking our total funding to £137m. 'The work they do as an independent and trusted broadcaster is highly valued by this government, as our continued financial support shows.'
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Justice Jackson warns Supreme Court is sending a 'troubling message'
"It is particularly startling to think that grants of relief in these circumstances might be (unintentionally) conveying not only preferential treatment for the Government but also a willingness to undercut both our lower court colleagues' well-reasoned interim judgments and the well-established constraints of law that they are in the process of enforcing," Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote. Jackson was dissenting from the conservative majority's decision to give Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency complete access to the data of millions of Americans kept by the U.S. Social Security Administration. Once again, she wrote in a dissent joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, "this Court dons its emergency responder gear, rushes to the scene, and uses its equitable power to fan the flames rather than extinguish them." A district judge had blocked DOGE's access to "personally identifiable information" while assessing if that access is legal. Jackson said a majority of the court didn't require the administration to show it would be "irreparably harmed" by not getting immediate access, one of the legal standards for intervention. "It says, in essence, that although other stay applicants must point to more than the annoyance of compliance with lower court orders they don't like," she wrote, "the Government can approach the courtroom bar with nothing more than that and obtain relief from this Court nevertheless." A clock, a mural, a petition: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's chambers tell her story In a brief and unsigned decision, the majority said it weighed the "irreparable harm" factor along with the other required considerations of what's in the public interest and whether the courts are likely to ultimately decide that DOGE can get at the data. But the majority did not explain how they did so. Jackson said the court `plainly botched' its evaluation of a Trump appeal Jackson raised a similar complaint when the court on May 30 said the administration can revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans living in the United States. Jackson wrote that the court "plainly botched" its assessment of whether the government or the approximately 530,000 migrants would suffer the greater harm if their legal status ends while the administration's mass termination of that status is being litigated. Jackson said the majority undervalued "the devastating consequences of allowing the Government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending." The majority did not offer an explanation for its decision. More Supreme Court wins for Trump In addition to those interventions, the Supreme Court recently blocked a judge's order requiring DOGE to disclose information about its operations, declined to reinstate independent agency board members fired by Trump, allowed Trump to strip legal protections from 350,000 Venezuelans and said the president can enforce his ban on transgender people serving in the military. Jackson disagreed with all of those decisions. The court's two other liberal justices - Sotomayor and Elena Kagan - disagreed with most of them. More: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson can throw a punch. Literally. The court did hand Trump a setback in May when it barred the administration from quickly resuming deportations of Venezuelans under a 1798 wartime law. Two of the court's six conservative justices - Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito - dissented. Decisions are expected in the coming weeks on other Trump emergency requests, including whether the president can dismantle the Education Department and can enforce his changes to birthright citizenship.
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
SNP ministers accused of secrecy over £2m Grangemouth carbon capture study
Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... SNP ministers have been accused of secrecy after refusing to publish a £2 million study into whether a pipeline that will connect Grangemouth with a key carbon capture project will fall flat. The 'alarming' move comes as Chancellor Rachel Reeves is poised to confirm at her spending review this week whether the Acorn carbon capture project for St Fergus, near Peterhead, will finally receive the funding it needs to get off the ground. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Carbon capture technology is seen as being essential to Scotland and the UK reaching net zero | POOL/AFP via Getty Images The previous Conservative UK government only granted the Acorn project reserve status and ploughed funding into carbon capture and storage projects south of the Border instead. This comes as finance secretary Shona Robison asked Chancellor Rachel Reeves to award funding for the Acorn carbon capture project and to ensure Scotland receives a share of GB Energy funding that matches its contribution to UK clean energy goals, ahead of the UK spending review. She also called on the Chancellor to 'prioritise growth' and to fully fund the employer national insurance increase for Scotland's public services. Ms Robison urged the UK Government to abandon some of its 'damaging policies' such as cuts to welfare support for disabled people, to scrap the two-child benefit cap and to reinstate a universal winter fuel payment, ahead of the review on 11 June. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad She said the Scottish Government had not yet been provided with 'clarity' on spending priorities. The delays to the project has been partly blamed for SNP ministers rolling back climate targets, with the Acorn plans initially hoped to be up and running before 2030. But now, the Scottish Government has refused to release the results of a feasibility study into the pipeline, despite confirming the document was completed in March. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad SNP ministers handed over £2m to National Gas last year to assess whether it was possible to turn an old 174-mile gas pipeline that runs from Grangemouth in the Central Belt to St Fergus, Aberdeenshire into 'Europe's largest carbon capture pipeline'. Officials have refused to release details of what the study shows, despite campaigners requesting it under Freedom of Information law. Acting Energy Secretary Gillian Martin during a visit to drone manufacturer Flowcopter in Loanhead, to mark the publication of the Scottish Government's Green Industrial Strategy | Andrew Milligan/PA Wire Concerns have been raised about carbon capture technology, which campaigners warn simply allows oil and gas companies to continue burning fossil fuels. Under the technology, harmful carbon emissions are prevented from being released into the atmosphere and instead trapped and injected into the seabed. Fears have been raised about leakage, with the technology not yet tested at commercial scale. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad During a trip to St Fergus in 2023, then prime minister Rishi Sunak also raised concerns about the technology, warning that it would be a boost 'if we can get it to work'. Now, campaigners have warned that any further public funds for the Acorn project would benefit major oil companies, including Shell, which have made £90 billion profits in recent years and Harbour Energy who recently laid off 250 staff despite paying out almost £1bn to shareholders in the past three years. The UK government has already pledged £22bn to the carbon capture industry, a move which the Public Accounts Committee branded a 'high risk gamble' that could push up household energy bills. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad First Minister John Swinney has vowed to increase the public handout from the Scottish Government for the Acorn project beyond £80m. But that is contingent on the UK government first backing the project - amid doubts the funding could be axed in the spending review amid a perilous economic backdrop. Friends of the Earth Scotland's climate campaigner Alex Lee said: 'The public are again being forced to pay for the oil industry's greenwashing carbon capture plans, and it is deeply alarming that we don't even get to see what our money has unearthed. 'Plans to run a 280km high pressure carbon pipeline through towns and villages are fraught with danger and uncertainty because this has never been done before in Scotland. Have the people who live along the route of this pipeline proposal been informed of the risks and consulted on these proposals? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'It is a farce that ministers have been talking up carbon capture for 20 years and only now are they checking whether it would even be feasible to do this. 'When working climate solutions are crying out for funding, there should be no public investment in dodgy scams like carbon capture.' Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves and Energy Security and Net Zero Secretary Ed Miliband during a meeting of the National Wealth Fund Taskforce in 11 Downing Street. PIC: Justin Tallis/PA Wire Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie said: 'The Greens have always been sceptical about putting too much reliance on untested carbon capture technology, and we are firmly opposed to using it as an excuse for more fossil fuel extraction or burning. 'Even its advocates don't think it will make any impact on our emissions in the near future, so the priority has to be the action we know how to take right now - cutting road and air traffic levels, insulating homes and shifting to clean heating, and supporting communities to change land use. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Climate action isn't rocket science and we don't need to wait for new technologies to get off the drawing board - we just need to do what we know works.' A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'The Scottish Government provided National Gas with a £2m grant to support a study to explore the technical feasibility and viability of repurposing an existing gas pipeline for the transportation of carbon dioxide. 'The conclusions of the study were requested under environmental information regulations. However, for reasons of commercial confidentiality these can't be released. 'The Scottish Government fully supports the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS), and we have been advised by the Climate Change Committee that they 'cannot see a route to net zero that does not include CCS'.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A UK government spokesperson said: 'We are delivering first of a kind carbon capture projects in the UK, supporting thousands of jobs across the country, reigniting industrial heartlands and tackling the climate crisis.
