People need ‘time to enjoy' saint's days, says Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader
People need 'the time to enjoy' St David's Day in Wales and St Piran's Day in Cornwall, Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader has said amid calls for bank holidays.
In a debate to mark St David's Day, which takes place on Saturday, Liz Saville-Roberts told the Commons that not having a bank holiday for the event 'doesn't stop us from coming together to celebrate' Wales.
But she said people throughout the UK should celebrate national saints 'with vigour and enthusiasm'.
Neither St David's Day on March 1 nor St Piran's Day on March 5 are bank holidays.
St George's Day, celebrated in England on April 23, is also not a bank holiday.
But people in Northern Ireland and Scotland receive bank holidays to mark patron saints' feast days – St Patrick's Day on March 17 and St Andrew's Day on November 30.
Ms Saville-Roberts, who wore a daffodil pinned to her top, said: 'It's a time of course to take pride in our culture, our communities, our language, each a rugged testament to our resilience as a nation.
'We are a nation of creativity and innovation.
'We all here know that Wales has the talent, the resources, the potential to be more than brilliant.
'But it's time to be more ambitious, it's time to up our game.
'While we may not yet have a St David's Day bank holiday, that doesn't stop us from coming together to celebrate what makes our country so special.'
Ben Maguire, the Liberal Democrat MP for North Cornwall, intervened in her speech and asked: 'Would (Ms Saville-Roberts) support my calls to make St Piran's Day – the national day of Cornwall – a bank holiday which is taking place on March 5?'
Ms Saville Roberts, who is the MP for Dwyfor Meirionnydd in North Wales, replied: 'Yes, we should be celebrating our regional saints and our national saints with vigour and enthusiasm, and make sure that people get every opportunity and the time to enjoy them.'
She also called on MPs to 'acknowledge the challenges we face' and said the National Theatre Wales company had 'shut up shop', after its closure last December.
'Our arts and culture, so integral to our national identity, they are at present hanging in the balance,' Ms Saville-Roberts said, adding that the NHS west of the border had been 'chronically mismanaged'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
The UK is about to pass Europe's most extreme abortion law
Britain may soon have one of the most extreme abortion regimes in the world. Next week, the Commons will vote on amendments, proposed by Labour MPs Stella Creasy and Tonia Antoniazzi, to the Crime and Policing Bill that seek to decriminalise abortion up to the moment of birth. In Britain, abortion is currently legal until 24 weeks of pregnancy. But for the pro-abortion lobby this isn't enough. A YouGov survey revealed that 70 per cent of MPs think women should not be liable for prison sentences if they have abortions outside current restrictions. Yet this is wildly out of step with public opinion. Just 1 per cent of British people support abortion up to birth. How is such a wildly unpopular opinion on the verge of becoming law? Let's rewind to 2020. The UK was in lockdown. Face-to-face appointments for abortions were suspended. Women were allowed to access over-the-phone appointments with clinicians and have abortion pills sent to them by post. These pills can only be used legally until 10 weeks' gestation. But without an in-person appointment, there is no way of knowing how far along a pregnancy has progressed. And there is no way of preventing women who are well past 10 weeks – and even past the 24-week limit – from claiming, or being coerced into claiming, that they are less than 10 weeks pregnant. Due to the risks, this arrangement was intended to be temporary. But in 2022, pro-abortion MPs hijacked an unrelated Bill to make pills-by-post permanent. Many people – including me – warned that this would lead to an increase in illegal abortions, dangerous late-stage terminations, coercion and undetected abuse. And we were right. In June 2023, Carla Foster was found guilty of aborting her baby eight months into pregnancy. She was given abortion pills after claiming she was only seven weeks pregnant. In December 2024, Stuart Worby was jailed after spiking a woman's drink with fraudulently-obtained abortion pills and ending the life of her unborn child. In just 18 months after pills-by-post was introduced, some estimates suggest that more than 10,000 women had to receive hospital treatment after taking abortion pills at home. These cases only exist because of pills-by-post, a scheme for which abortion providers enthusiastically campaigned. Before 2022, there were just three prosecutions for illegal abortions in 160 years. Yet instead of arguing for a return to face-to-face appointments, the abortion lobby is now capitalising on these prosecutions to convince MPs that women are being wrongly criminalised. The consequences of full decriminalisation will be grim, with inevitable increases in coercion and medical complications. The experience of Victoria, Australia suggests we will see more babies born alive after failed 'DIY' late-term abortions, and a rise in sex-selective abortions. Abortion is a sensitive issue and there is no public consensus on what the legal time limit should be. But in a society where human rights are respected and the vulnerable protected, it is unthinkable that there should be no consequences for ending the life of an unborn, fully-formed human child. Just moments after birth, such an action would incur life in prison. MPs must not allow the unpopular obsession of a handful of activists to change the law. Stand up to the extremists – the public are behind you. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Indianapolis Star
5 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
Here's what the woman forcibly removed from Indianapolis meeting wanted to say
Standing outside the City-County Building on June 9 after sheriff's deputies forcibly removed her, Lauren Roberts — a former deputy campaign manager for Mayor Joe Hogsett and the first woman to accuse the mayor's top aide of sexual harassment — read the statement she had planned to share with the Indianapolis City-County Council before she was kicked out. "If I could tell my younger self what Joe Hogsett and his then-campaign manager, Thomas Cook, were about to put me through," Roberts said of her time working for Hogsett from November 2014 to June 2015, during his first mayoral run, "I would tell her to run away and don't look back." Law enforcement's aggressive removal of Roberts is the latest eruption in a conflict made public in July 2024, when IndyStar reported Roberts and two other women's allegations that Cook pressured them toward intimacy and unwanted sexual encounters while he served as their boss under Hogsett. To investigate the claims, the city hired the Chicago-based law firm Fisher Phillips to conduct an investigation. The 54-page final report released May 29 found that the Hogsett administration followed the law in handling the women's claims. But investigators highlighted ethical concerns around Hogsett's decision to allow Cook to resign in 2020, more than two months after an internal recommendation to fire him. What further outraged Roberts and another Cook accuser, however, is what did not appear in the report: that the mayor, who was married and more than 30 years older than each woman at the time, sent them late-night and personal texts alluding to poetry. Fisher Phillips investigators have declined to comment on the omissions. Cook in the past apologized for his conduct. Hogsett, meanwhile, has defended his handling of his past investigations into Cook and did not address IndyStar's questions about the text exchanges. In her statement, Roberts called the Fisher Phillips report a "political performance" because the text messages were left out and Cook wasn't subpoenaed to testify — an authority granted to the council's Investigative Committee. "Fisher Phillips' report made glaring omissions in favor of the mayor's version of events, made sloppy errors about basic facts that we backed with overwhelming documentation, and frequently, in the most misogynistic way, characterized survivors' statements as claims while the mayor's were treated as facts," Roberts said in her statement outside the council meeting. At the June 9 meeting, the council voted to postpone the final $300,000 payment to Fisher Phillips until councilors learn more about why the law firm left out certain details. The council said its Administrative and Finance Committee would hear public comment on the report in its next hearing on June 17 at 5:30 p.m. During her official comments to the council, Roberts spoke for about 10 seconds before a councilor interrupted her to ask whether her speech was relevant to the meeting agenda. After Roberts restarted and accused councilors of trying to silence her with "manipulative back-room conversations," Council President Vop Osili interrupted Roberts. 'You're welcome to have me hauled out by sheriffs, but I'm going to take my time," Roberts told Osili. 'You will have two minutes," Osili replied, invoking the standard time limit for public comment, "and when you are done with that two minutes, you will be done." When the two minutes were up, Osili said, "Ms. Roberts, you are now done." After she refused to stop talking and leave the microphone, Osili said, "Sheriff, you will remove anyone who is talking at this point." Multiple sheriff's deputies pushed Roberts out of the room while she resisted and told them to stop touching her. "It is never a pleasure to escort someone from our room," Osili told media after the meeting. "But we have a sense of order here and we have rules that we have followed … for a very long time. And others have had to abide by those. When someone indicates or says that they will talk for as long as they like, it's not something that this council can stand with." Roberts' overarching message to councilors Monday night was that they should call for Hogsett to resign. So far, three councilors — Democrat Andrew Nielsen, Democratic socialist Jesse Brown and Republican Joshua Bain, who announced his demand Tuesday — have called on Hogsett to resign. Councilor Crista Carlino, chair of the investigative committee, said after Monday's meeting that she was "deeply considering" that possibility. In her statement, Roberts chastised all the councilors for failing to act. "Survivors, whistleblowers, city workers and campaign staff who speak out about abuse are not the problem for the Democratic party, for this administration, or for this council," Roberts said. "Abusers are the problem. Your constituents cannot afford for you to spend another moment wringing your hands or claiming that your role is limited to policymaking."
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Planning reforms ‘critical' to 1.5m homes pledge delivery clear Commons
Flagship planning reforms which are 'critical' to the delivery of Labour's pledge to build 1.5 million homes have cleared the Commons. MPs voted by 306 to 174, majority 132, to approve the Planning and Infrastructure Bill at third reading on Tuesday evening. Housing minister Matthew Pennycook said the Bill, which aims to improve certainty and decision-making in the planning system, will help to tackle the UK's housing crisis. Meanwhile, shadow housing secretary Kevin Hollinrake described the draft legislation as 'dangerous' and warned it could lead to 'rows of uninspiring concrete boxes'. Speaking in the Commons, Mr Pennycook said: 'This landmark Bill will get Britain building again, unleash economic growth and deliver on the promise of national renewal. 'It is critical in helping the Government achieving its ambitious plan for change milestone of building 1.5 million safe and decent homes in England in this Parliament. 'When it comes to delivering new homes and critical infrastructure, the status quo is patently failing the country and failing the British people. 'We can and we must do things differently, this Bill will enable us to do so. It is transformative. It will fundamentally change how we build things in this country, and in doing so it will help us tackle the housing crisis and raise living standards in every part of the country.' Mr Hollinrake argued it is not possible to 'concrete our way to community', adding: 'This Bill, in its current form, is not just flawed, it is dangerous. It risks eroding trust in the planning system and widening the gulf between government and the governed. 'We need homes for first-time buyers, for young families, for key workers, for the next generation. But we need the right homes in the right places, shaped by the right principles. 'What are we being offered instead is a top-down model driven by arbitrary targets and central dictats. The result: solar settlements, identikit developments, rows of uninspiring concrete boxes that bear no relation to the history, the heritage or the hopes of the communities they are building.' This comes after Labour MPs rebelled on Monday over the Government's plans to change current nature protections in the planning system. Campaigners have raised concerns the Bill will allow developers to effectively disregard environmental rules and community concerns, increasing the risk of sewage in rivers, flooding and loss of valued woods and parks. Mr Pennycook said the 'suboptimal status quo' for the environment and development is not working, as he pledged to introduce a nature restoration fund to bolster conservation efforts. He added: 'We want to take forward a new strategic approach across wider geographies, ensuring that Natural England bring forward plans that go beyond offsetting harm to driving nature recovery as well as unlocking development.' During the Bill's report stage on Tuesday, Conservative former minister Robbie Moore accused the Government of permitting 'absolute theft' in its compulsory purchase order (CPO) reforms. The Bill will allow an inspector or, where there are no objectors, authorities to remove 'hope value' from land when a CPO is made, meaning any uplift calculated on the basis that a developer could be given planning permission in future is ignored. The MP for Keighley and Ilkley said: 'So-called 'hope value' is not a capitalist trick, it is not a racket, it is not unfair, it is simply the true market value of the property. 'Property rights matter. They are the foundation of our society. 'If the state chooses to use its powers to confiscate property of a law-abiding person and then they must stipulate on how that land must be used, and then tell the landowner how much they are entitled to receive from the state, that is wrong and in my view is an absolute theft of private property.' Labour MP Chris Hinchliff urged the Government to go further, calling for it to remove 'hope value' for any land or property which is being compulsory-purchased for the purpose of delivering housing targets. The North East Hertfordshire MP said his amendment 68 would 'give councils the land assembly powers necessary to acquire sites to meet local housing need at current use value, and so do away with speculative hope value prices, which put taxpayers' money into wealthy landowners pockets'. 'This would finally make it affordable for local authorities to deliver the new generation of council homes. That is the true solution to this nation's housing crisis,' he added. The Government has previously said it will ensure that compensation paid to landowners through the CPO process is 'fair but not excessive' and that development corporations can operate effectively. The Bill will now be sent to the House of Lords for further scrutiny.
