At tonight’s meeting of St Enoder Parish Council, I tabled my latest monthly report which covered the period from 24th October to 11th December 2016. It was as follows:
1. Council meetings
I have attended a range of formal meetings at Cornwall Council over the last six weeks. These included: Full Council (2), Planning Policy Advisory Panel (3), associated preparatory and follow-up meetings (4) and a workshop, Central Sub-Area Planning Committee, Constitution and Governance Committee and associated informal meeting, Electoral Review Panel (2) and associated workshop, member briefings (3), Group Leaders meeting, China Clay Network meeting, a meeting of members from the Clay Area, Incinerator Liaison Group, and meetings relating to Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (3).
As well as the meetings listed above, I have had a large number of informal meetings with council officers at the unitary authority, and I have attended four meetings of St Enoder Parish Council and two meetings of the working group for the St Enoder Neighbourhood Plan (2).
2. Other meetings
I have also attended meetings of the ClayTAWC centre where I am Chairman (3), St Austell Bay Economic Forum (2), and the South and East Cornwall Local Action Group.
3. Full Council: 1st November
A special meeting of the Council was held to consider its position on the review into parliamentary constituencies. I am pleased to report that there was an overwhelming majority (78 votes to 12) against a cross-Tamar constituency.
In addition, I attended three days of hearings into the review at Exeter (7th November) and Truro (10th and 11th November). During the second day in Truro, I gave a twenty minute presentation in support of keeping Cornwall whole.
4. Full Council: 22nd November
At the second meeting of Cornwall Council in November, the budget for 2017/2018 was agreed and the Local Plan was also adopted by the authority.
The Liberal Democrat and Independent administration budget for 2017/2018 included a council tax increase of 3.97%, which included a precept levy of 2% to be specifically used for social care. A majority of councillors supported the budget, myself included.
None of the other political groups moved any amendments in the debate. And the telling thing for me was that the unitary authority will raise an additional £14 million from council tax next year but, because of ongoing cuts from central government, the Council will, overall, end up with £2.5 million less to spend on services.
In terms of the Cornwall Local Plan, councillors accepted the recommendations from the Examination in Public (EiP) run by an independent inspector – even though individual councillors raised concerns about a number of the changes. However, the strategic policies in the Local Plan now give greater surety to those groups working on Neighbourhood Plans for their local parishes.
5. Neighbourhood Plan
My priority in recent weeks has been the drafting of the second consultation for the St Enoder Neighbourhood Plan. The draft is on tonight’s agenda and I would like to thank my colleagues for their support in this work.
It is my hope that the document will be finalised this month and circulated in January.
6. New play area in Indian Queens Recreation Ground
Since my last monthly report, it is great to see that the tarmac path from the car park at the Recreation Ground to the new play area has been completed, and I would like to publicly thank local contactors T Julian and Son for the fantastic job that they did.
7. Lindsay Fields, Fraddon
I am pleased to be able to report that the “open space” in Lindsay Fields, Fraddon, has been transferred from the developer to Cornwall Council. I am presently seeking clarification from the environment section at the unitary authority about their likely maintenance regime.
It is ironic that, at the same time, the Parish Council has had to take on maintenance for the entrance area into Heather Meadow because Cornwall Council (Highways) were unwilling to look after it.
8. The Kelliers
The transfer of the freehold of the Kelliers to the Parish Council is taking longer that I had hoped. I am presently seeking an update from Cornwall Council about what is causing the delay.
9. Bus shelters
Since Cornwall Council’s recent comical communications with local parish councils about who is responsible for local bus shelters, I have formally requested that the unitary authority clean all shelters for which it has responsibility. I have asked that this include the removal of Graffiti.
I have, in addition, requested street cleaning throughout St Enoder Parish.
10. Highway matters
I have been in regular contact with the local CORMAC representative on a range of issues.
I understand that Cornwall Council is devising a scheme to combat the ongoing flooding problems at the entrance to Gaverigan Manor Farm.
CORMAC has also removed two of the three grit bins on the approach to Pedna Carne because they had “reached the end of their lives.” I have complained and one of the bins is likely to be replaced so that there will continue to be two bins on the steep approach road.
11. Planning matters: Pines Tip
In my last report, I confirmed that the timetable for the appeal into the refusal of the application for three wind turbines on Pines Tip (Strategic Planning Committee; 10th March 2016) has not yet been published. That is still the case and I am awaiting a meeting with planning officers to consider how the authority will approach the appeal.
12. Remembrance Day
I was also pleased to lay a wreath at the St Enoder War Memorial at the annual Remembrance Day event and I am pleased that the monument is now protected as a Listed Building, thanks to the hard work of the Clerk.
13. Inquiries
During the last month, I have also helped numerous people with advice and guidance, the nature of which has been very varied.
14. Newsletter
I have produced my (six-monthly) newsletter which I am aiming to distribute around the Parish in the next ten days or so. Any help with deliveries would be much appreciated.
15. Nadelik Lowen
And at this time of year, I would like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year.
It is appalling that “The Casey Review” by Dame Louise Casey has criticised the expenditure of money on the Cornish language in a report on the need for greater social cohesion.
How can a review into “integration and opportunity in isolated and deprived communities,” sanctioned by the former Prime Minister and Home Secretary, feel it is necessary to be so dismissive of such an important part of the UK’s cultural tapestry.
The offending section was as follows:
1.67. Too many public institutions, national and local, state and non-state, have gone so far to accommodate diversity and freedom of expression that they have ignored or even condoned regressive, divisive and harmful cultural and religious practices, for fear of being branded racist or Islamophobic.
1.68. This accommodation can range from relatively trivial issues such as altering traditional cultural terms to avoid giving offence, to the department responsible for integration policy spending more in 2011-12 and 2012-13 promoting the Cornish language than the English language, or some trade unions challenging a strategy for all public sector workers to speak English. At its most serious, it might mean public sector leaders ignoring harm or denying abuse.
1.69. This has not helped the communities which many well-intentioned people in those institutions have wanted to protect; more often it has played straight into the hands of extremists. As a nation we have lost sight of our expectations on integration and lacked confidence in promoting it or challenging behaviours that undermine it.
Whatever positive justification there might have been for the study, the disrespectful attitude to Cornish identity is totally unacceptable.
It has even lead to spurious reports in the Sun and Daily Express.
My article in this week’s Cornish Guardian – under the above heading – is as follows:
A number of political parties based far away from Westminster, including Mebyon Kernow and Plaid Cymru, have long campaigned for an Economic Fairness Act.
It may not sound exciting, but such an Act would ensure that all parts of the United Kingdom would get their fair share of government investment, and it would commence the rebalancing of the UK economy away from its present fixation on London and the South East of England.
The importance of this campaign is shown by the recent statement from the Bank of England’s chief economist, Andrew Haldane, warning that inequality in the UK is becoming more pronounced.
And is it any wonder? I have certainly raised such concerns in this newspaper column on numerous occasions.
A few years ago, I wrote about how an independent report had detailed a shocking bias in how arts funding was distributed around the UK. The most telling figure was that the Department of Culture, Media and Sport had distributed £450 million of public funding to what it deemed “major national cultural institutions” – with London receiving £49 per head of population compared to just £1 per person outside the capital.
And some 18 months back, I commented on the research from the Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute, which documented another massive bias towards London in terms of infrastructure investment. It concluded that most other areas will be getting a raw deal with planned public investment per head in London being recorded at £5,304.73 compared to £805.29 in the South West.
I have often commented on the unfairness of funding settlements for councils in rural areas and, earlier this year, even highlighted the irony of Conservative MPs lambasting their own London-centric Government for “shifting funding from rural to metropolitan areas” and describing the funding as “extraordinarily unfair,” with one even stating that his local council had not only “trimmed off” the fat, but had “gone through the surface of the bone” and, in some instances, was “sucking out the marrow.”
And in the most recent Autumn Statement, the monies allocated to the Local Growth Fund were much less than had been anticipated.
It is therefore to be welcomed that the Bank of England’s chief economist has issued a challenge that regional inequality is among the most important issues facing the UK.
In an interview with the BBC, he said that these long-standing gaps “have nudged a little wider over the course of the UK's recovery” and “if you look at the level of income within region, per head, it is only really London and the South East where that is back above the levels it was before the crisis.”
Thank you for your efforts, Mr Haldane. I just hope the Government will start listening.
My article in last week’s Cornish Guardian addressed the recent Autumn Statement and the setting of Cornwall Council’s budget for 2017/2018. It was as follows:
The first autumn statement from the new Chancellor, Philip Hammond, has rightly generated a host of very gloomy headlines.
His statement included projections of lower growth from the Office of Budget Responsibility, while resultant discussions have focussed on the likelihood of higher inflation, lower tax revenues, continuing austerity and a squeeze on household incomes.
The independent Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has meanwhile reported that “workers would earn less in real wages in 2021 than they did in 2008,” with additional analysis showing that the biggest losers in the next few years will be people on low incomes.
Paul Johnson, the director of the IFS, commented that “this has been the worst decade for living standards certainly since the last war and probably since the 1920s."
It is such a massive contrast to the personal circumstances of Mr Hammond’s predecessor at the Treasury. Instead of focussing on his role as an MP, George Osborne recently raked in a total of £320,000 for giving five lectures to financial institutions and a university.
And it was especially disappointing that Philip Hammond did not act to address the crisis in adult social care.
This even led to a cross-party appeal from the Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Independent leaders of the Local Government Association for “urgent action” without which the “quality and safety of care of our elderly is at risk.”
One newspaper summed up the situation as “elderly care close to collapse as council funding runs out.”
Last week also saw the Liberal Democrat and Independent administration at Cornwall Council set its budget for 2017/2018 when a majority of councillors, myself included, voted for a council tax increase of 3.97%. This included a precept levy of 2% to be specifically used for social care.
Projections show that the unitary authority will raise an additional £14 million from council tax next year but, because of ongoing cuts from central government, the Council will, overall, end up with £2.5 million less to spend on services.
At the council meeting, Conservative councillors voted against the budget but failed to put forward any alternative proposals for consideration, and did not even acknowledge how cuts in central government funding were, to a large degree, responsible for many of the financial problems being faced by Cornwall Council.
In these very difficult times for local government, it is well-documented that there are many dangers associated with the Council’s budget and, for the sake of our public services, we need to do everything that we can to put pressure on the new Chancellor to end the under-funding of local councils.
In my column in this coming week’s Cornish Guardian will be as follows:
Politics is increasingly partisan these days and politicians often fail to compliment their opponents, even when they do something worthy of acknowledgement.
But in my column this week, I am pleased to be able to praise Steve Double MP for opposing the creation of a Devonwall parliamentary seat.
Last Friday in the House of Commons, MPs debated a Private Members Bill entitled the Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill. Tabled by a Labour MP from the north of England, the Bill proposes to make changes to the process by which parliamentary boundaries are presently being reversed.
It seeks to keep the number of MPs at 650 – not the 600 presently preferred by the Tories – and to allow the Boundary Commission more flexibility in redrawing constituency boundaries.
And from a Cornish perspective, if passed, the Bill would put an end to the proposal for a cross-Tamar seat.
The debate took place at the end of the week and, because many government MPs were not present, it passed its second reading by 253 votes to 37. It now moves to the committee stage and it is anticipated that MPs from the governing party will look to derail the Bill in the coming weeks.
But last Friday, Steve Double was one of two Conservative MPs who voted for the Bill, and therefore against Devonwall and against his own party.
Full credit to him for him for listening to the people of Cornwall and making it clear that he took this action because it was the “only way” he could see to “address the issue of the Cornish border and maintain Cornish MPs in Cornwall.”
It was, though, extremely disappointing (big understatement) that he did not get support from other Cornish MPs.
Two were present and voted against the Bill. And one of these, Sheryll Murray, participated in the debate and did all she could to undermine Steve Double’s arguments.
In 2010, Sheryll Murray pledged that she would “fight on and on” to make sure that the border was protected, but appears to have done a shocking u-turn.
Instead of backing her colleague from St Austell and Newquay, she called on MPs to “kick” the legislation into the “long grass where it belongs.”
And in a particularly unedifying section of the debate, she called out Steve Double for claiming he was speaking “on behalf of the Cornish,” adding that she wanted it “put on the record” that she was a “Cornish girl” and he “was not speaking” for her.
To be fair to Steve Double, he dealt with it well, pointing out how may people had raised the issue with him in his constituency “on the doorsteps, in the pub and at surgeries” and that it was an issue that he “as a Cornishman” felt strongly about.
It is my strong view that now is the time for us all to put pressure on George Eustice MP, Scott Mann MP, Sarah Newton MP, Derek Thomas MP, and even Sheryll Murray MP, to follow Steve Double’s example and do the right thing and oppose Devonwall.
It has been a pretty hectic week and I have only just realised that I hadn’t posted my latest article in the Cornish Guardian, which was published on 9th November under the above title. It was as follows:
When the United Kingdom Government signed off the so-called Cornwall Devolution Deal in 2015, it claimed that it was "historic" and a “major step” in their commitment to “extend opportunity to every corner of our country.”
The Prime Minister David Cameron said the deal would put power in the hands of local people and talked about the “fantastic potential that Cornwall holds.”
The deal also included reference to “Cornwall’s rich and unique heritage, including its historic revived language and passionate communities.” It even noted the importance of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.
At that time, I saw it somewhat differently from the press office of the Conservative Party.
Through Mebyon Kernow, I welcomed the fact that devolution was being talked about but criticized the very limited scope of the deal. I described it as unambitious, and also hit out at the growing influence of unelected and unaccountable entities – such as the Local Enterprise Partnership – which have no democratic legitimacy.
Some two years on (Friday 21st October 2016) the Communities Minister, Sajid Javid, was at an event in Exeter titled “South West Growth Summit.”
Speaking in the context of a potential “devolution deal” for the 17 local authorities in Devon and Somerset, he branded the previously “historic” Cornwall Devolution Deal as “not ambitious.” He made reference to the fact that the deal did not include any new money (even though it was Conservatives who refused various requests from the unitary authority for additional investment) and went on to tell the attendees from those two counties: “What’s the point of going down that route?”
In his speech, he disparagingly added that “some in Cornwall see their county as distinct from the rest of the region, a special case that should be handled separately from everywhere east of the Tamar.” He linked this statement to a few more comments about rivalries and tensions in the wider South West, before adding “that whole attitude has to change.
So much for the Conservative’s promises and their (threadbare) commitment to Cornwall, Cornish distinctiveness and our “rich and unique heritage.”
I can cope with Tory politicians contradicting each other and showing one and all that their spin does reflect any reality. But I am worried that central government seems to be, once again, looking to promote a “large south west” model for future governance which would see Cornwall’s distinct needs marginalised – just as the UK Government is pushing forward with a boundary review which disrespects Cornwall’s historic border.
At Lys Kernow (“New County Hall”) in Truro today, a further twenty speakers appeared at the second day of the Boundary Commission hearing. All raised objections to the proposal for a cross-Tamar constituency.
The full list of speakers was as follows:
Angela Angove, Malcolm Brown, Eileen Carter, Lance Dyer, Zoe Fox, Ken George, Deborah Hopkins, Jane Howells, David Hughes, Juliet Johns, Angus Lamond, Charmian Larke, Rob Lawrence, Denzil Monk, Colin Retallick, Mr and Mrs Ronan, Craig Weatherhill, plus me (see my earlier blog entry for a copy of what I said).
Ken George gave his presentation entirely in Cornish which was translated into English by Mark Trevethan.
Once again the representations were extremely well-crafted and, over the two days of the hearing, it was reassuring that fifty people took the time to oppose Devonwall, while only three speakers (all Conservatives) failed to speak out against a cross-Tamar seat.
But there is so much more still to do, especially in terms of lobbying central government for an amendment to the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act.
Let's keep working on this campaign.
At Lys Kernow (“New County Hall”) in Truro today, speaker after speaker appeared at the Boundary Commission hearing to raise objections to the proposal for a cross-Tamar constituency.
The various representations were extremely well-crafted and made a strong case against Devonwall. Many people called for the Boundary Commission to join them in making representations to central government to amend the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act, while many outlined the distinctive characteristics of Cornwall and its identity. Three people gave presentations entirely in Cornish which were translated into English by Mark Trevethan.
People at the hearing who opposed Devonwall came from a range of Cornish cultural groups, some independent councillors, as well as a representatives from a number of political parties (Green Party, Labour, Liberal Democrats, Mebyon Kernow and even one Conservative!)
I left at six and there were still a couple of people due to speak later. The full list of speakers against Devonwall up to 6.00 was as follows:
Candy Atherton, Bert Biscoe, Dee Brotherton, Armorel Carlyon, Mike Chappell, Matthew Clark, Merv Davey, Mael Garrec, Peter Harvey, Claire Hewlett, Loveday Jenkin, Ian Lobb, Andrew Long, Greg Matthews, Nev Meek, Jack Morrison, Dave Munday, Gareth Parry, Mick Paynter, Amanda Pennington, Milo Perrin, John Pollard, Helen Rawe, Donald Rawe, Hugh Rowe, William Thomas, Mike Tresidder, Sarah Tresidder and Robert Webber. Apologies if I have missed anyone.
Highlights for me included the kilted William Thomas bursting into song with a fabulous rendition of “Bro Goth Agan Tasow, and Mael Garrec from the Union Democratique Bretonne making an insightful contribution about the negative aspects of border-blurring which had been experienced in Britanny.
Three speakers did not oppose a cross-Tamar seat. They were all Conservatives – George Eustice MP, Tim Smith and Richard Stephens.
I will be speaking tomorrow at about 2.30 and there are still a number of open slots for the hearing which will last from 9.00 to 5.00.
Staff from the Boundary Commission were very accommodating today and a number of people who turned to support other speakers were able speak themselves in some of the vacant slots.
So if you are free tomorrow – why not come along, have a say and oppose Devonwall!
The Boundary Commission will be in Truro tomorrow for the first day of a two day hearing into the proposed new parliamentary boundaries for the “South West.” Hearings were also held in Exeter on Monday and Tuesday (7th and 8th November), and I attended the morning session on Monday. My report is as follows:
The Boundary Commission had invited all political parties with an MP in the Westminster Parliament (Conservative, Green, Labour, Liberal Democrat and UKIP) to make representations. Each was given a thirty minute slot. I have complained that it was unjust that Mebyon Kernow was not invited to make a similar representation and I have been assured that I will be allowed extra time to speak on behalf of MK in Truro on Friday.
On Monday, the first speaker was Labour’s Greg Cook from London, who described himself as Head of Political Strategy. He welcomed that the “south west region” was the “sub-national building block” for the Review, and fleetingly noted the unhappiness about the Cross-Tamar seat. He additionally queried the name of the Bideford, Bude and Launceston constituency, questioning whether the name should include reference to two Cornish towns when the majority of the seat was in Devon! Mr Cook’s main focus was on local boundaries around Gloucestershire, Bournemouth and Dorset.
Second up were the Liberal Democrats. They were represented by Gavin Grant (from their “Western Counties region”) and Ian Jolly (from their “Devon and Cornwall region”). They did say that they wished to “protest at the creation of a cross-border seat” but recognised that it met the recognised legal and population requirements. They did not point out the irony of a political party organised on a “Devon and Cornwall” basis arguing against a “Devonwall” seat.
They did build some humour into their presentations. When Mr Grant had to give his home address at the beginning of his presentation, he said it was less complicated than Mr Jolly’s who he said lived in rural Devon. Mr Jolly lives in Cornwall. They also managed to spell Camborne wrong on their powerpoint presentation.
And then it was the turn of Roger Pratt from the Conservatives. He also made a fleeting reference to Cornwall, noted that it was “not possible” to prevent a “Devonwall” seat, and stated that they thought it best that the Tamar was breached to the north – rather than in the south.
Iwan Jones spoke on behalf of the Green Party and set out clear opposition to the basis of the whole review and the creation of a cross-Tamar seat. UKIP meanwhile declined to take up the offer to present their views.
Richard Williams then spoke on behalf of Cornwall Council for about twenty minutes and delivered a comprehensive speech in opposition to “Devonwall,” making it clear that the unitary authority will continue to make representations to central government to change the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act to Keep Cornwall Whole.
I trust that update is of interest to you all.
Mebyon Kernow has prepared a number of “proforma” letters that can be used to oppose the imposition of a “Devonwall” constituency.
The letters are for the Prime Minister Theresa May, the Minister for the Constitution Chris Skidmore, the Boundary Commission and Cornwall’s six MPs, and are principally calling for an amendment to the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act to Keep Cornwall Whole.
The letters make it easier for people to join in this important campaign. They can be downloaded from Letters to oppose Devonwall and sent off to the addresses on the individual letters.
Hard copies will also be available at MK’s Conference in Truro on 19th November, when we will be collecting together completed forms and sending them off in bulk to the Government, Boundary Commission and MPs.
Please join us in opposing the cross-Tamar seat.
After spending much of today debating Devonwall at "County Hall," I have just realised that today is also the sixth anniversary (1st November 2010) of a particular Westminster vote on the Parliamentary Voting Systems and Constituencies Bill.
The vote was on an amendment to protect parliamentary boundaries in a number of areas including parts of Scotland, Anglesey, the Isle of Wight and Cornwall & the Isles of Scilly. It was moved by the late Charles Kennedy, but was voted down by 315 votes to 257 votes.
As I recorded at the time, all six Cornish MPs voted to support Kennedy’s amendment, but unbelievably they only won the support of twelve other Conservative / Liberal Democrat colleagues which included Scottish MPs and the member for the Isle of Wight. The MPs were as follows:
I am very pleased to be able to confirm that the members of the unitary authority have overwhelmingly re-affirmed their commitment to opposing Devonwall.
The motion agreed to continue to lobby central government to change the legislation and make further representations to the Boundary Commission about the inappropriateness of a cross-Tamar seat.
I made the MK perspective clear once again: “Travesty – an assault on Cornwall’s very nationhood.”
But I was very conciliatory and appealed to “one and all” to oppose the creation of a Devonwall seat. I suggested that we were all councillors because we wanted Cornwall to thrive and succeed; that we wanted the best for Cornwall – but added that what hope was there for that “noble aim” if central government refuses to even acknowledge Cornwall as a distinct political unit.
The Conservatives moved an amendment which stated that the Council should not bother to offer any challenge to the process, which lead to much criticism of their group.
The Liberal Democrats were particularly quick off the mark to point out the failings of the Conservative group and to condemn their MPs for not standing up for Cornwall on this issue.
I found that quite amusing, as I had been among the protesters at Polson Bridge on Sunday when the Lib Dem MP Norman Lamb (from Norfolk) was among the speakers. He did a grand job; lovely speech! But he forgot to mention that, in 2010 when there was a Coalition government, he had failed to support the amendment to keep Cornwall whole. Indeed, he had actually been one of the tellers for the Government, when 95% of Coalition MPs had voted down the amendment!
Today’s vote at Lys Kernow to continue to oppose Devonwall was passed with 78 votes in favour. I understand this comprised six Conservatives and everybody who wasn’t a Conservative.
There were 12 votes against – all Conservative!
The members of the unitary authority will be considering their position on the parliamentary Boundary Review tomorrow.
Back in May, councillors voted to oppose the creation of a Devonwall seat after I had tabled a motion to that effect. In particular, it was resolved that:
“1. that the Government be urged to respect the spirit of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and take all necessary steps to amend the Act [Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011] prior to completion of the said parliamentary constituency review to specifically protect the parliamentary constituencies of Cornwall so that they remain fully within the boundary of Cornwall;
2. to write to all the Members of Parliament for Cornwall to seek their urgent and active support for the proposed amendment as set out under paragraph (1) above; and
3. that the Leader seek an urgent meeting with the Boundary Commission for England to raise the fundamental constitutional issue of the integrity of Cornwall’s boundary and the impact of the said Framework Convention that is critical to the effective implementation of the said parliamentary constituency review.”
The recommendation in the report for tomorrow’s meeting does not deviate from this. It sets out the nature of the representations to be made to the Boundary Commission, but also sets out that the Council will continue to lobby central government to change the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act.
I am optimistic that councillors will support the recommendation that has been prepared.
One point of particular note is that Cornwall Council has sought legal advice on whether it would be possible to launch some form of judicial challenge. The answer, from two prominent QCs, is not helpful in that regard.
The view is summarised as follows in the report:
“The legislation governing the boundary review does not breach the rights of Cornish people under the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. The Framework Convention is not part of UK law and so it cannot be used to mount a direct challenge to an Act of Parliament and any further change to the 1986 Act Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 [as amended by the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011] is a matter for Parliament.”
But this does not stop us from continuing to lobby central government to respect the spirit of the Framework Convention. Indeed, this must still be our priority.
Mebyon Kernow – the Party for Cornwall will be holding its Annual Conference on Saturday 19th November 2016.
It will take place in the Council Chamber at Lys Kernow (“New County Hall”), Truro.
At tonight’s Parish Council, I will be tabling the following report, which covers the period 26th September to 23rd October 2016. Some of the content has already been featured on this blog, but the report is here for the sake of completeness.
1. Council meetings
I have attended a range of formal meetings at Cornwall Council over the last month. These included: Full Council, Constitution and Governance, a meeting for Cornwall Councillors in the China Clay Area, a meeting of Group Leaders, a meeting between the leadership of the Council and the Chairs of the various Policy Advisory Committees, a member briefing, and an all-day Planning Conference which was held in the parish of St Enoder at Kingsley Village
As well as the meetings listed above, I have had a large number of informal meetings with council officers.
2. New play area in Indian Queens Recreation Ground
In the last few weeks, I have continued to work with the Parish Clerk in negotiating with the suppliers about some “snags” which have now mostly been dealt with.
In my last monthly report, I did write about the grant application I had submitted to the National Lottery’s Awards for All programme on behalf of the Parish Council. It was for a grant of £10,000 to construct a tarmac path from the car park area to the new play area in the Recreation Ground, to make it easier to access the new facilities during the winter months when the field can get quite wet and boggy.
I can report that, on the 11th October, the National Lottery publicised that we had been successful
Following the much-heralded recognition of the Cornish people as a “national minority” through the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, radio amateurs from Cornwall contacted Ofcom to request that the new status be reflected in their call signs.
In their representation to the “independent regulator and competition authority,” the Poldhu Amateur Radio Club and various individuals pointed out that radio hams in the other Celtic parts of the United Kingdom had their own Regional Secondary Locators or RSLs.
Many people were delighted when Ofcom initially agreed to permit radio amateurs with a main station address in Cornwall to use their own distinctive RSL of “K” as part of their call signs.
Obviously, the symbolic “K” comes from the initial letter of Kernow.
But we were all extremely disappointed when the regulator changed its mind and the original offer of a permanent RSL was downgraded to a one-year temporary RSL for the calendar year of 2016.
That said, the use of the temporary RSL was well-received by radio hams in Cornwall and, earlier this month, Poldhu Amateur Radio Club sent a detailed submission to Ofcom.
This set out how the RSL had delivered a significant boost to their endeavours, while causing no problems whatsoever. The representation also appealed to Ofcom to review its previous decision and to make the Cornish RSL permanent.
I was pleased to be able to support this initiative and, with the Leader of Cornwall Council John Pollard, drafted a letter of support for the Poldhu Amateur Radio Club which was also signed by all the group leaders on the unitary authority; Adam Paynter (Liberal Democrat), Andrew Mitchell (Independent), John Keeling (Conservative), Tim Dwelly (Labour) and Bob Egerton (non-aligned group).
The response from Ofcom came extremely quickly – in about a week – and declined to agree to the extension to the Cornish RSL.
Their response is obviously discriminatory and it is clear that they had given little or no consideration to the Framework Convention. And it is my view that, following on from the “national minority” recognition, it would be unjust for Cornwall to be the only Celtic part of the UK not to have its identity respected with a bespoke RSL.
If you agree with me that this decision makes no sense at all, you might like to join radio amateurs throughout Cornwall who will be continuing to lobby Ofcom. The address to send letters to is Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London, SE1 9HA.
[This will be my article in this week’s Cornish Guardian].
