Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED That the decision of Cabinet, in regards to the Visit Pembrokeshire Partnership Agreement from the 7 July 2025 meeting, be upheld.
There were no apologies for absence. Councillors Di Clements, Terry Davies, Brian Hall and Shon Rees were substituted by Councillors Aled Thomas, Vanessa Thomas, Alan Dennison and Tim Evans, respectively.
Councillor Huw Murphy, as the author of the call-in, was present to speak at the meeting with the Chair’s consent.
Councillor Huw Murphy wished to highlight that he was previously a Member of Visit Pembrokeshire. The following interest was declared: Item 4 – Visit Pembrokeshire Partnership Agreement Councillor Paul Miller declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that he is the Council appointed Director of Visit Pembrokeshire.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the decision of Cabinet, in regards to the Visit Pembrokeshire Partnership Agreement from the 7 July 2025 meeting, be upheld.
The Chair introduced the report and invited Councillor Paul Miller to speak to the item. Councillor Miller stated that he did not have any points to raise in addition to the report, and was happy to listen to Councillor Huw Murphy’s rationale for the call-in, as well as the views of the Committee Members. The Head of Cultural, Leisure and Registration Services also had nothing to add but was happy to take any questions. Councillor Murphy, originator of the call-in, then outlined his rationale for the submission. He referred to the current period of financial stress for many residents in Pembrokeshire and Members’ duty to those residents. He stated that at the July meeting of Cabinet, Cabinet Members debated the financial support to be given to Visit Pembrokeshire with a range of options outlined in the report. Councillor Murphy highlighted that Cabinet accepted a proposal made by Councillor Miller which would result in Visit Pembrokeshire receiving £22,000 over the funding period of four years, a difference of £52,000 to what was presented by Officers. He referred to the tourism levy decision that had been deferred by Cabinet for the new administration in 2027 to decide on how they wish to support tourism in Pembrokeshire. The Committee then raised the following points: • Councillor Alan Dennison sought clarification regarding Councillor Miller’s outlined declaration as the Director of Visit Pembrokeshire and his interests in the matter as the Director. Councillor Miller explained that he had taken advice from Legal and stated that it was only a personal interest, as he was the Council appointed Director of Visit Pembrokeshire, and his role was purely related to his Cabinet portfolio in regards to tourism. The Chair asked for the Head of Law and Governance / Monitoring Officer to join the meeting to clarify the matter. • Councillor John Cole also questioned Councillor Miller’s declaration and wished to hear from Legal about the appointment pool from the Council in terms of appointing Members as Directors of private limited companies, and the potential conflict of interest. He also wished to know whether there were any remuneration packages for this role. Councillor Cole then referred to the call-in and questioned the proposed grant term and suggested that it needed to be decided on annually or bi-annually, in line with the determination of the Council’s budget. In response, Councillor Miller explained that he was not remunerated as the Director of Visit Pembrokeshire, and that his role was set out in the agreement that was reached when Visit Pembrokeshire was created. He added that both Pembrokeshire County Council and Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority had the right to nominate a director in perpetuity. • Councillor Cole then asked for an answer in regards to the legalities around the Council setting up a limited company. • The Head of Law and Governance / Monitoring Officer joined the meeting at this juncture, and stated that declarations of interest was not something that Members should be questioning other Members on during a meeting. She confirmed the advice she gave to Councillor Miller, which she had spoken to the Ombudsman about, and they had confirmed that it was only a personal interest. In regards to Councillor Cole’s question, due to poor connection, she asked that the question be emailed in order for her to respond. The Head of Cultural, Leisure and Registration Services then explained that the Council did not set up Visit Pembrokeshire and stated that the legal element was set out within three agreements, said to be the grant agreement, an associated asset transfer agreement, and an options agreement to buy back the resources if necessary. He highlighted that in the original report to Cabinet, part (b) of the recommendation was to delegate to himself the ability to update those agreements as needed, in any agreed extension. • The Chair wished to clarify that this was the first five-year agreement with Visit Pembrokeshire since it was set up in 2020, and that the proposed agreement was for a further five year agreement. The Head of Cultural, Leisure and Registration Services confirmed that to be the case and highlighted that the current agreement ended in November 2025. He explained that the recommendation in the original report was to extend the agreement by a period of three years and five months, in order to take it up to March 2029. He stated that any incoming administration from May 2027, should it wish to consider implementing a visitor levy, would do so in terms of consultation in the autumn of 2027, with a Council decision in March 2028, and if the decision was to do so, then a 12 month notice period would be required for the trade and visitors. He explained that the soonest a levy could be implemented would be April 2029, therefore the rationale behind the extension to the Visit Pembrokeshire contract was to align with that period. • Councillor Mark Carter believed that tourism in Pembrokeshire was immeasurably important, and that tourism brought £620 million worth of revenue into the County. He stated that given that the proposal by Councillor Miller was to reduce the expenditure by £22,000, the £152,000 per annum based against the £620 million of revenue was a small sum of money in comparison. He then referred to the benefits of tourism across the County. Councillor Mark Carter then Moved the following: That the decision of Cabinet, in regards to the Visit Pembrokeshire Partnership Agreement from the 7 July 2025 meeting, be upheld. Seconded by Councillor Tony Wilcox. • Councillor Wilcox stated that Visit Pembrokeshire was well established and effective. • Councillor Dennison disagreed with the comments made by Councillor Carter in terms of the value that Visit Pembrokeshire brought to tourism and believed that the ratepayers of Pembrokeshire deserved value for money. Councillor Dennison then questioned what would happen in regards to the funding for Visit Pembrokeshire between the contract ending in November, and the financial year starting the following April. He believed that the same rules should apply to the company as the statutory duties that the Council undertake, and that he would object to an increase in funding, other than what the Officers had recommended. In response, Councillor Miller wished to clarify that the Council’s grant to Visit Pembrokeshire did not increase with inflation each year, therefore they had made savings and instead absorbed the inflationary costs on an annual basis. In regards to the budget setting process, he stated that once Council services received money for their budgets, they then had to make savings, which was not the case for Visit Pembrokeshire as they had a flat cash annual agreement. In relation to the Officer recommendation, Councillor Miller stated that it was a recommendation for a reason. Councillor Dennison suggested that the matter be referred to Council for its view. • Councillor Aled Thomas highlighted that the proposal made by Councillor Dennison would constitute as an Amendment, but would still go to Cabinet for a final decision following Council, as it was an Executive function. He then referred to the budget savings that were outlined previously for the next financial year, and that the outlined proposal was doing exactly that in saving £22,000. He believed that the outlined proposal was logical, as it was giving Visit Pembrokeshire a sense of consistency in order to continue providing support, however, they would still be taking cuts due to the inflationary pressures that would be faced over the next five years. He stated that he would be voting in favour of Councillor Carter’s proposal. • Councillor Cole agreed that tourism played a huge part in the County’s economy, especially for small businesses, and referred to the business rates being paid to Welsh Government. He went on to suggest that Welsh Government should provide funding for Visit Pembrokeshire. Councillor Cole then questioned why Councillor Miller proposed an alternative option, against the Officers’ recommendation outlined in the original report. In response, Councillor Miller stated that there was no change to the grant period, and explained that the reason behind choosing a different option to the one that was recommended, was due to the fact that he placed a greater importance on supporting Visit Pembrokeshire and by extension, the tourism economy in Pembrokeshire. He added that he did not believe that, economically, it was the right time to reduce support for the tourism industry in Pembrokeshire. He highlighted that Cabinet unanimously supported the decision. • Councillor Carter wished to clarify some of his earlier comments in relation to what the tourism industry was worth in Pembrokeshire. He stated that he was not implying that Visit Pembrokeshire was entirely responsible for the £620 million of revenue brought in by tourism, but that they helped to provide it. He also agreed with Councillor Miller that times were currently hard for tourism businesses. • Councillor Chris Williams wished to recognise the vital role that tourism plays across the County and referred to his own community in Saundersfoot, where tourism was a major economic driver, with many jobs relying solely on the visitor economy. He appreciated the work that had gone into the partnership and the work undertaken to promote regional tourism, but raised concerns in regards to businesses being significantly quieter compared to other years. He did not believe that the Council was getting the best out of Visit Pembrokeshire and that it was not transparent. Councillor Williams also felt that more work was needed in local communities to promote the areas. [Councillor Thomas Tudor joined the meeting at this juncture.] • The Chair referred to the original recommendation in the Cabinet report and believed it to be the most realistic. She also believed that based on the number of increases to Visit Pembrokeshire, in terms of Membership, the Officer’s original recommendation was doable, and that the money saved could be used for other services. She also stated that she did not understand why Visit Pembrokeshire could take a more serious cut over the five years. She added that the original Officer recommendation was more transparent and in line with current financial hardships. • Councillor Dennison stated that the Administration wished to impose a tourism tax within Pembrokeshire, despite Councillor Miller stating that he supported tourism in Pembrokeshire, as well as Visit Pembrokeshire being against a tourism levy. He also reiterated his comments regarding the budget gap between November and April next year. In response, the Head of Cultural, Leisure and Registration Services explained that the £22,000 was previously approved by Council for this financial year's budget. He stated that Councillor Dennison was correct in that the £22,000 could not be taken in the current lifetime of the existing grant agreement, which would expire in November 2025. He explained that the intention would be that any new agreement, whichever option was ultimately approved, the first step in those options would be to take the £22,000 agreed saving within that November to March period of this financial year. He added that regardless of the option that would ultimately be approved, that £22,000 would be taken in the last quarter of this financial year. Councillor Miller wished to correct Councillor Dennison on his initial statement, and stated that the Administration had ruled out implementing a tourism or visitor levy, which meant that there would be no such levy in place in Pembrokeshire until 2029 at the earliest. Councillor John Cole then proposed that the Officer’s original recommendation to Cabinet be supported; Seconded by Councillor Tim Evans. • Councillor Tim Evans referred to businesses that he had spoken to in relation to this matter, and highlighted that a lot of small businesses used social media, which had brought in more business from their own promotion compared to that of Visit Pembrokeshire. He also referred to the figures for Visit Pembrokeshire as well as Visit Wales and how many people they were bringing into the County and the Country. • Councillor Murphy suggested that more should be expected from Visit Pembrokeshire due to the funding that they receive, and referred to the budget discussions for the following year, and stated that there was no money to waste. He also agreed with the original Officer recommendation to Cabinet. The vote to uphold the decision of Cabinet, undertaken by way of a roll call, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Steve Alderman, Mark Carter, Rhys Jordan, Viv Stoddart, Aled Thomas, Thomas Tudor and Tony Wilcox [7] Against the Motion: Councillors John Cole, Alan Dennison, Tim Evans, Vanessa Thomas, Anji Tinley and Chris Williams [6] There were no abstentions. RESOLVED That the decision of Cabinet, in regards to the Visit Pembrokeshire Partnership Agreement from the 7 July 2025 meeting, be upheld.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.