Comment

By Patrick O'Brien

IT HAD BEEN the clinching argument. There was, the minutes of the Cabinet meeting of 17 March said, “no need for further housing in the area.”

The overtures from IMP Developments’ Prys Edwards had failed. His approach to Ceredigion council to buy the freehold of a strip of publicly-owned land in Felin y Mor road, in an already heavily developed part of Trefechan, and build 10 luxury flatlets for the rental market, had been refused.

That of course is history. As Cambrian News readers know, the decision, which included the assertion that the council would retain ownership of the land, and that the terms of IMP’s lease would remained unchanged, was reversed last month. Without explanation … and after a further approach by Prys Edwards.

But I can reveal there’s been a terrible mistake. The March minutes, as I say, state that the reason for the Cabinet’s decision not to sell was that there was no need for further housing. The minutes, which are on the council website, have been saying that for the last nine months. But the minutes are wrong. That’s not what the Cabinet meant.

I know it’s not, because I’ve been told so by Ray Quant. And he should know, because he’s the Cabinet member with special responsibility for highways, property and works, which will include things such as the land at Trefechan.

I had emailed him and the six other Cabinet members who were at the meetings in March and November at which, behind doors, closed to press and public on grounds of commercial confidentiality, the approaches by Prys Edwards were discussed. (That’s not counting the unofficial meetings of the Cabinet as a group which take place before scheduled meetings.)

I asked them, among other things, why the Cabinet had reversed its March decision to hang on to the land and to continue with the present lease. Why the Cabinet’s U-turn had not been explained to the taxpayers who are the owners of the land. Why, having said in March there was no need for more housing, the Cabinet now apparently believed that there was.

Ray, an Independent, was one of three members to reply. I heard nothing from Lib Dems Eurfyl Evans or Carl Williams, or Independent Gethin James. Lib Dem Ceredig Davies said he was not present when the land was discussed, and as a member of the planning committee did not want to risk jeopardising his participation in any future committee deliberation by talking about the matter in advance. The council’s lone Labourite, Hag Harris, said he was too busy to respond immediately and pointed out that every development is subject to the planning process.

At first, Ray was a bit snappy, emailing me: “Can you confirm that any response given by me will be printed in full, otherwise it will be just your spin on the issue, while ignoring the facts?” Later, he told me: “I have now managed to track down all the paperwork ... and the Cabinet decision.”

I’ll let him take up the story, so he doesn’t think I’m “ignoring” anything.

“Once Cabinet has discussed a paper and made a decision”, he tells me, “we move on to the next item without confirming the reason for the decision, which is added later when the minutes are produced. In this instance the reason for the decision which was added later reads ‘no need for further housing in the area’. That was incorrect; it should have read ‘to allow further discussion between Aberystwyth Town Council and the lease holder for the potential use of the land of (sic) allotments’,” says Ray.

He adds: “May I thank you for bringing this error to my attention and my sincere apologies to you and the readers of the Cambrian News for the error which has misled your readers in respect of our March decision, especially when it seems we made a complete reversal of that decision in November. I have learnt a lesson in check (sic) the accuracy for the reason given for a decision.”

OK Ray. But I should point out the obvious: that I didn’t know it was an error. And I still don’t know the basis for your assertion that the Cabinet meant something quite different from what the minutes say it did. Did the authentic “reason for decision” return to you with blinding certainty? Do you know if anyone else’s recollection is the same as yours?

Even assuming there is agreement, we still await an explanation for what remains a very tight U-turn, an explanation too of how the Cabinet was persuaded to part, on behalf of the public, with this small but valuable piece of real estate at a price “based on the maximum development value of the land.”

And there is a further puzzle. If the Cabinet wanted, as Ray says it did, to allow time for talks between the town council and Prys Edwards over possible use of the land for allotments, why did the Cabinet on 17 November execute its U-turn without knowing the outcome of any such talks?

How do I know the Cabinet went ahead without any such information? Ray Quant tells me so.

“Following the (March) Cabinet decision”, he writes, “it was hoped the leaseholder might accommodate the Aberystwyth Town Council request and I don’t know if the town council or others contacted the leaseholder.”

As chairman of the fateful 17 November Cabinet meeting, you might have thought Ray would have checked on that point.