Somerset Independents On Somerset Businesses: Wyke Farms Claims "100% Green" Energy But Environment Agency Shows Wyke Farms As Repeat Environmental Offenders

 

Wyke Farms Claims "100% Green"
But Is It? No.

As well as holding Somerset's councils and elected representatives to account, and praising them where appropriate, Somerset Independents has been penning a series of articles on Somerset's businesses.

Somerset has businesses that have great reputations in the West Country, in the UK and over the World. We want Somerset to be know for the right reasons. So far, we have looked at Clark's, Barber's and Norseland.

We have looked at employment rights, recruitment and retention, quality produce, the impact of Brexit, the impact of Covid-19 and the reputation of Somerset's businesses in general.

Now we turn our attention to Wyke Farms, a Somerset-based company in Wyke Champflower, near Bruton. The company has other sites in Somerset, including an Anaerobic Digester (AD) plant at Lamyatt, and a depot at Wincanton. They are also building a new storage facility at the former Lambrook Piggery, next to the AD plant.

Wyke Farms Sustainable Energy Visitor Centre

They claim, at the entrance to the AD plant and former Piggery, what is shown in the below photo.

Wyke Farms 100% Green

"Wyke Farms 100% Green Sustainable Energy Visitor Centre" the sign says.

They also make much of being in Somerset, and they repeat their "100% Green" claims several times on their website.

But Wyke Farms is not 100% green as they claim. Not by a long shot. It is just another load of greenwash, on the eve of the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow.

What do we mean by "greenwash". We mean that Wyke Farms appears to be yet another company that claims it is "green" but is not. The UK has enough of those already.

One earlier example of the gulf between their marketing and the reality of their business practises was the Lambrook Piggery that was next to the AD Plant. It is  now closed after animal rights activists exposed the barbaric practises at the Piggery, as reported by the Daily Mail.

Was this just a one-off offence? No. Why do we say this?

Because Wyke Farms is, in fact, a serial offender on the environment and being "green".

Do we have evidence? Yes we do. We do not state things without evidence, because we are a credible force in Somerset. It would be foolish, and illegal, to do anything else.

Any reasonable person would agree with us, presented with the evidence that we have, that Wyke Farms is a repeat offender. The facts are there in the evidence.

Our evidence is taken from Freedom of Information requests submitted by Somerset Independents, and other information that our officers and supporters have gleaned about Wyke Farms and its environmental greenwash.

The evidence is from the Environment Agency, who have been very reluctant to give it to us, and even more reluctant to enforce on Wyke Farms, despite their repeated offences. 

The evidence is also from local residents who have been impacted by Wyke Farms and its operations at various sites in Somerset.

And the evidence is also from various departments of the local authorities, Somerset County Council, Mendip District Council and South Somerset District Council. Like the Environment Agency, these local authorities have used a very "light touch" approach to regulating Wyke Farms, despite their repeated offences and despite the legal duty on the authorities to protect local residents and the environment, in co-ordination with the Environment Agency.

Below are some examples of the evidence that we have obtained. We publish it in the public interest, on the eve of COP26.

Evidence Part 1 - EPR Compliance Assessment Report from the Environment Agency on 11th March 2020 to Wyke Farms Limited regarding Lambrook AD Plant

"You have been scored a CCS 3 for the breach in emission limits with the test failure under condition 3.5.1 and table 3.1. If you are unable to fix this issue there are likely to be further scores including under management as root cause.
You should also have reported the breach as soon as you became aware of this under a schedule 5 notice of the permit - see condition."

This was a breach of an Air condition via a breach in emission limits and a breach of reporting. In other words, air pollution in the Somerset countryside.

Evidence Part 2 - EPR Compliance Assessment Report from the Environment Agency on 22nd May 2020 to Wyke Farms Limited regarding Lambrook AD Plant

"Pests
Non-compliance You have been scored a CCS 3 for presence of pests which are likely to give rise to annoyance outside the boundary of the site under condition 3.6.1. There were hundreds of gulls above and adjacent to the site. There were signs of mess on the AD domes and this has been mentioned before. It was said that these birds are present in such numbers since closure of a nearby landfill.
There has been a complaint regarding shooting of birds around the AD plant. But you say you do not use this method. There are other measures you could try.
Action Under condition 3.6.2 please submit for approval, within 1 month, a pest management plan which identifies and minimises the risk of pollution from pests."

You can see that Wyke Farms have tried to claim that "these birds are present in such numbers since closure of a nearby landfill". Wyke Farms tried to blame something else, other than their own shoddy practises - just like when Lambrook Piggery reached the national headlines and brought shame to Somerset.

Evidence Part 3 - EPR Compliance Assessment Report from the Environment Agency on 22nd May 2020 to Wyke Farms Limited regarding Lambrook AD Plant

"Odours...There was a faint gassy smell at the fence line of the AD site, but this was not detected further away over the culvert.
You said that as part of your own management regime you continue to undertake a routine leak detection and repair schedule.
Close by to the slurry lagoon there was an odour– although it was not noticed off site before my arrival. I recommended that, if ever agitation was needed, then this should be at times when the wind is not blowing from the south or towards nearby residents. The slurry pit is open and is a potential source of odour.
There is also an open circular tank in the permit which was said to be being used for surplus cow slurry. I explained that this is old infrastructure. Risks to the water course from it need to be minimised as well as being a potential source of odour. "

It is important to note the above, as there is later evidence from the Environment Agency and complaints from local residents over several years that shows repeat offences relating to pollution, noise and odours.

 

Evidence Part 4 - EPR Compliance Assessment Report from the Environment Agency on 15th February 2021 to Wyke Farms Limited regarding Lambrook AD Plant 

After an incident at the AD Plant, Wyke Farms was found to have made multiple breaches of the conditions of their permit. The four breaches were:

1. Breach of Infrastructure Permit Conditions (Engineering for prevention & control of pollution).
2. Breach of General Management Permit Conditions (Management system & operating procedures).
3. Breach of Emissions Permit Conditions (Surface water).
4. Breach of Monitoring and records, maintenance and reporting Permit Conditions (Reporting & notification).
   

The Environment Agency Report says:

"This was a response to a self-report of an incident involving the over topping of the permitted slurry lagoon. This arose from waste being stored in the Permastore leading to uncontrolled emissions of slurry contents to the yard, surface water drains and the stream which runs beneath the site. The report was phoned in around 8:50 on 15/02/2021, but had occurred at around 16:00 on 14/02/2021."

As we have pointed out above, Wyke Farms were warned in earlier reports of "The slurry pit is open and is a potential source of odour... Risks to the water course from it need to be minimised as well as being a potential source of odour. " 

The Report says:

"We consider pollution was caused... 

The failure to put in place appropriate measures to prevent the spill...

The root cause is considered to be a failure of management."

So despite being warned about it, Wyke Farms did not pay attention. Their management failed. And when the incident occurred, causing pollution, they delayed reporting it. 

The Environment Agency should have acted earlier. Local residents made many complaints about the AD Plant, and the Piggery. But the Environment Agency did not act early enough. And repeated pollution incidents, to air and water, have occurred.

But the same lax management of the Piggery, and the repeated failures by Wyke Farms to act on the Environment Agency reports, added to the reluctance of the Agency and local authorities, meant that pollution had occurred again at the AD Plant.

In a time when development in Somerset is held up due to pollution, it is important to note that the local river is the River Brue that flows through Bruton, past Glastonbury and eventually into Bridgwater Bay.

So Wyke Farms has polluted air and water repeatedly, as we have said at the beginning of the article. But this is only some of evidence.

The Environment Agency has set out the Actions that Wyke Farms must take:

"Actions
Monitoring the water quality including any waste or polluting sludges or slurries that are stored or spread to land
Make arrangement to tanker excess liquids away
Provide a plan to remove the contents of the tank in the safest way possible by 26 February 2021
Review your accident management plan 26 February 2021
Provide a plan for decommissioning the Permastore tank by 26 February 2021 works to be completed by August 2021.
Review and improve monitoring of the former pig slurry pit.
Review your notification procedures 26 February 2021
We consider that there is an on-going pollution risk at the site and therefore you are requested to submit an Emissions Management Plan to identify and minimise the risk of pollution to the ground and water as set out in condition 3.2.2. This shall include: Managing the water course in the culvert including an assessment to minimise potential emission sources from the site.

This is an initial Compliance Assessment Report for the incident. We may review scores and action subject to any further information that may come to light. We are considering our enforcement response."

Above are just some examples of the environment offences by Wyke Farms, that prove that the are repeat offenders, and that the exposure of the disgraceful Piggery was not just a once-off.

We will be publishing more, leading up to and during the COP26 Climate Change summit. There will be enough BS being spoken and written in Glasgow for COP26.

So we hope to restore the balance and facts to the reputation of companies like Wyke Farms who are based in Somerset, use questionable marketing and PR claims to market their products. And as we have shown, Wyke Farms' claims do not stand up to much scrutiny. 

Wyke Farms are definitely not 100% Green.

Somerset Independents On Somerset Businesses: Foreign-Owned Somerset Cheese Producer Norseland

Somerset Independents is continuing its focus on Somerset businesses. We want to see Somerset's reputation enhanced as a producer of the best goods and services, and for Somerset businesses to be the best employers, with the best pay and conditions for workers.

So we were alarmed when residents, current workers and former workers at Norseland, the company that owns Ilchester cheese, contacted us about what it is like working at the company. Norseland's UK manufacturing base in in Ilchester, Somerset. Here is the Norseland UK "About" page.

Norseland is not UK-owned. It is not owned by Somerset people. Ultimately, Norseland is Norwegian-owned, and owns a large number of cheese brands including Jarlsberg, Snofrisk, Gudbrandsdalen, Applewood and Mexicana cheeses. TINE SA is the owner and is "Norway's largest co-operative of farmers". Norseland has told us that "Norseland is an operating subsidiary of Tine SA as part of the Tine International".

So while Ilchester cheese carries the Ilchester name, and it is produced in Ilchester, the owners are Norwegian.

However, Norseland's Clive Richer Head of Human Resources (HR) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) told us:

"whilst Norwegian owned, with a Norwegian CEO,  Norseland runs very independently, and recruits 90%+  of its staff from the Somerset/Dorset Area (Being only 6 miles from the Dorset Border), and this will continue to be the case ongoing."

The contact with us from workers followed articles appearing in local media, including with SomersetLive (Reach/Trinity Mirror), where various claims were made by Norseland in a barely-concerned advert for the foreign-owned company, but also in the article Norseland were blaming Brexit for their recruitment and retention problems. 

These workers were incensed at the claims made, and refuted the claims made by Norseland.

During the course of 2021, Brexit has been blamed for many things - sometimes this is justified with evidence and sometimes this is not justified by evidence.

So we contacted the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Manager mentioned in one of the article, Mr Clive Richer, to ask him some questions.

The letter from the Leader of Somerset Independent, Andrew Pope, is below, along with the responses from Mr Richer. 

We will let you make up your own minds about whether he answered our questions, and whether his claims stack up under scrutiny.

We suggest that the claims from Clive Richer do not stand up to much scrutiny.

It also took Mr Richer over two months to reply, and we had to chase him for a response.

We will be going back to the people who made the allegations with Mr Richer's responses.

We will also be asking the unions about Norseland, including what the unions did to help workers, what they did not do to help workers, and why  there is no union recognised by Norseland for collective bargaining purposes.

---

Letter from Somerset Independents to Norseland's Clive Richer

Good Morning Mr Richer,

Somerset Independents is a pressure group that was formed by residents
to stand up for Somerset residents and their rights.

We support business and the promotion of Somerset. Some of your
cheeses have the names of well-known places in Somerset.

So we were alarmed to note some of the claims made by you in the
following articles:

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/somerset-cheesemaker-braces-huge-christmas-5587322

https://www.business-live.co.uk/manufacturing/somerset-cheesemaker-norseland-says-brexit-20829245

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/somerset-cheese-factory-says-staff-5531197

You stated in the articles that Norseland is a "respected employer
locally; we offer training, good benefits and a career path for
workers". We also note your "Modern Slavery Statement".

Former workers have contacted Somerset Independents to tell us that at
least some of the claims that you made in that article are of
questionable veracity.

They've told us that the recruitment and retention problems faced by
Norseland are nothing to do with Brexit.

These former workers who are residents of Somerset, plus other
residents of Somerset too, have alleged that:

1. Norseland has thrown innocent people out of work
2. The problems are not to do with Brexit, but with the situation at Norseland
3. Norseland inflicts bad treatment on its workers
4. There are health and safety problems at Norseland
5. The pay at Norseland is poor
6. There is poor management and poor leadership
7. Problems are not sorted out

Q1. How do you respond to the above allegations?

Q2. What changes have been made in the management and structure of
Norseland recently, and do you believe these have had an impact on
recruitment and retention?

Q3. Why does Norseland seek to blame Brexit when it appears from these
allegations from your own former workers, that it is the way your
company is being run that is the problem and not Brexit?

Q4. When you claim in one article that, and I quote:

"So many of our staff returned to their home countries when Brexit
happened, and we have faced a struggle to recruit replacements because
of the general exodus of EU workers across the county and the UK as a
whole. "

It isn't true, is it? Because these workers have found better work for
better pay elsewhere after leaving Norseland, some of them within a
matter days.

Q5. Because of their unhappiness, we've been informed that workers
joined the GMB union, which they are entitled to do under the law. Is
there a union recognised by Norseland for collective bargaining
purposes? Which union is it?

Please give these questions your earliest attention. We offer you a
right of reply.

Regards,
Andrew Pope
Leader
Somerset Independents

 

Responses To Questions from Clive Richer to Andrew Pope

Q1. How do you respond to the above allegations?

In response to this question, we believe at Norseland that we treat all our staff with fairness and respect. The business has a number of company policies and procedures in place to ensure that everyone is treated equally. In terms of people leaving, we have conducted confidential exit interviews which demonstrate that a number of staff have left to return home.

 

Regarding Health and Safety, Norseland takes this very seriously and as such monitors our near misses and loss time accidents etc and compares these to industry standards set out by the HSE. On all measures, we are performing better than the standards set. These are achieved by all our employees following the thorough processes and procedures in place.

 

In terms of pay, Norseland’s starting rate is £10.00ph and goes up to £10.65 (Food Processor rates) and this does not include Shift premiums available for certain shifts, with an additional £2.08ph. We believe these are competitive within our area.

 

We cannot comment on specific incidents involving past employees. On the question about “Poor Management, Poor Leadership and problems not being addressed”. What we can say is that we also closely observe our retention and absence as a business and our figures are in line with national CIPD averages for our industry. It is always regrettable when people leave our business because they are unhappy, and as a responsible employer, we always try and learn from those experiences to provide a better working relationship with new and existing employees going forward.

 

Q2. What changes have been made in the management and structure of Norseland recently, and do you believe these have had an impact on recruitment and retention?

 

We have had management changes over the last 18 months, however we do not believe these have had a negative impact, to the contrary our retention figures has significantly improved over the last 2 years.

 

Q3. Why does Norseland seek to blame Brexit when it appears from these allegations from your own former workers, that it is the way your company is being run that is the problem and not Brexit?

As previously mentioned, a number of our staff have left to return home.

 

Q4. When you claim in one article that, and I quote:

 

"So many of our staff returned to their home countries when Brexit happened, and we have faced a struggle to recruit replacements because of the general exodus of EU workers across the county and the UK as a whole. "

 

It isn't true, is it? Because these workers have found better work for better pay elsewhere after leaving Norseland, some of them within a matter days.

 

In response to Q4: Some of our staff have left due to Brexit. Clearly there will always be other staff who move on to other businesses for a variety of reasons of which pay will no doubt be one of them.

 

Q5. Because of their unhappiness, we've been informed that workers joined the GMB union, which they are entitled to do under the law. Is there a union recognised by Norseland for collective bargaining purposes? Which union is it?

 

In response to Q5: Norseland does not currently have a recognised Union.

 

 

 

Clive Richer​

Head of HR & CSR

 

Arrears Of The Year: Somerset's Rogue Councillors Who Didn't Pay Their Council Tax

 

The Rogue Councils Were All Lib Dem-Run or Tory-Run

Somerset Independents stands up for residents. 

We have investigated all 250+ district and county councillors, to find those who persistently did not pay their council tax.

By "persistently", we mean councillors who were two months or more in arrears. 

Their names? Bloomfield, Clarke, Durdan, Hayden, Hodgson, Osborne, Pailthorpe. 

The councils they are on? Mendip District, Somerset County, South Somerset District, Somerset West and Taunton District.

Read on to find out more.

It is AGAINST THE LAW and a CRIMINAL OFFENCE to vote on council tax-related matters when a councillor is persistently in arrears.

Green, Lib Dem, Tory and Fake Independent Councillors
Did Not Pay Their Council Tax

As we have made clear on many occasions, we have not pursued private individuals on their arrears in paying up. In fact, we have spoken up for hard-pressed residents when councillors have increased council tax without a Referendum. 

But councillors are not private individuals. They hold public and elected office, funded by the taxpayer. They are there to represent you. But we have found too many who have brought the office of councillor into disrepute.

Councillors increased your council tax during the Covid-19 Pandemic.

As described on this website, our officers turned up and spoke at ALL four district council budget meetings and the County Council budget meeting in February 2021, PLUS the Police and Crime Panel. We asked councillors to NOT put your council tax up.

But councillors at all councils did put YOUR COUNCIL TAX up.

So have all councillors been paying THEIR council tax? No, they have not.

We have documented the responses from the district councils and county council on this website, to our questions.

Councils attempted to cover up the wrongdoing of their councillors.

Some councils gave us the information without a problem - Sedgemoor, Somerset West and Taunton, and Somerset County Council. They did what they were supposed to do - answer our questions under the Freedom of Information Act.

But two councils obstructed our enquiries and have not answered our questions.  Mendip District Council and South Somerset District Council have broken the law on Freedom of Information and in other legal respects.

Private Eye and The Leveller have helped us to report on those councils and the councillors that the councils have tried to protect.

Speaking to The Leveller for their lead article in the October edition of the newspaper, Andrew Pope, Leader of Somerset Independents said:

Andrew Pope

 

"Somerset Independents is a campaign group formed to stand up for residents.

When we discovered that councillors had not paid their council tax, we were incensed. So as volunteers, we investigated the councillors of all districts and the County council.

We asked councillors directly at their February Budget meetings to not increase council tax during the Pandemic. But they did. Yet some councillors did not pay themselves - some of them did not pay over many months and even years. They hold public office but have brought it into disrepute.

Residents told us that these councillors should resign. We agree."

Andrew adds: 

"Now we have forced the councils to expose their rogue councillors, it is in the public interest that we publish the list of councillors who were persistently in arrears.

We have offered the Right of Reply to our questions to all of these councillors.

Too many of these councillors ignored our offer and those who did respond did not answer our questions fully and frankly. Some of them lied. Some of them were obnoxious. All of them were persistently in arrears, some of them over years.

They should all go, and go now. We will be publishing more details about them and the lengths their councils have gone to, in order to prevent the public knowing about their wrongdoing."

 

Arrears Of The Year... Or Rogues Gallery?

In alphabetical order of surname, the councillors who were persistently not paying their council tax are as follows. Click the links for their contact details if you want to ask them why they did not pay. 

Lib Dem, Green or Tory, Same Old Story

 

 

Councillor Neil Bloomfield (South Somerset District Council and Somerset County Council)

Councillor Neil Bloomfield

Independent (resigned from the Conservatives) Councillor for Martock Ward and Martock Division on Somerset County Council.

We offered him a right of Reply. His response was bizarre and unrepentant.

Councillor Bloomfield told us, while not answering our questions on his arrears:

"I’ve been in private eye twice now but first time for this...Yes was behind, now I’m ahead (I hope) and no I won’t be resigning."

Councillor Paul Bolton (Somerset West and Taunton Council)

Councillor Paul Bolton

Independent Councillor for Alcombe.

The Mayor of Minehead told us that he had paid up, following our investigation. He did not initially reply to our correspondence, so we used other ways of contacting him. When we did speak to him - he rang us - he did give some answers but he also claimed that we had not contacted him before - a false claim. More in our report here. The Leveller has reported on him in their October issue.

Councillor Louise Clarke (South Somerset District Council) 

Councillor Louise Clarke

Liberal Democrats Councillor for Martock Ward.

We offered her a Right of Reply. She did not respond. We have extended the time offered for a response.

 

Councillor Kelly Durdan (Somerset West and Taunton Council)

Councillor Kelly Durdan

Independent (former Conservative candidate) Councillor for Creech St. Michael.

We offered her a Right of Reply. She did not respond. We phoned her. She was obnoxious, did not answer our questions, and hung up, without providing any explanation. The Leveller has reported on her in their October issue.

 

Councillor Francis Hayden (Mendip District Council)

Councillor Francis Hayden

Green Party Councillor for Cranmore, Doulting and Nunney.

We offered him a Right of Reply. He did not respond with answers, and was obnoxious in his response. He even bragged about it in public, claiming that he prioritised his wife's business first. He refused to resign. The Leveller has reported on him in their October issue, citing our evidence that he committed criminal offences in voting on council tax-related matters. Mendip District Council has told Somerset Independents, and The Leveller, that they would change the way they worked on the issue of council tax.

Councillor Ben Hodgson (South Somerset District Council)

Councillor Ben Hodgson

Liberal Democrats Councillor for Crewkerne.

We offered him a Right of Reply. He did not respond. We have extended the time offered for a response.

 

Councillor Sue Osborne (South Somerset District Council)

Councillor Sue Osborne

Conservative Party Councillor for Windwhistle.

We offered her a Right of Reply. She did not respond. We have extended the time offered for a response.

 

Councillor Robin Pailthorpe (South Somerset District Council)

Councillor Robin Pailthorpe

 

Liberal Democrats Councillor for Crewkerne.

We offered him a Right of Reply. He did not respond. We have extended the time offered for a response.

 

UPDATE: We have also investigated North Somerset Council, Bath and North East Somerset Council and Bristol City Council. More information on all eight of our investigations is on this article here.

 

What Happens Next?

Hopefully these councillors will search their conscience and speak to the their constituents to see what they think, and whether residents think that they should resign as a councillor. 

Are any of the above councillors your councillor? Get in touch with us to tell us what you think. We have asked a lot of residents what they think about these councillors - in a democracy, residents' views are the views that really matter. 

No resident has told us that they think it is OK. In fact, many of them told us that these councillors should resign. We agree.

We will be publishing more details on each councillor's arrears and how they reacted to our investigation.

You may have noticed that they are all councillors at district councils run by the Liberal Democrats or the County Council that is run by the Conservatives. All of them except one is a Liberal Democrat or Tory. 

Only one of them was elected as an Independent (Bolton) but he is nothing to do with Somerset Independents, and if he was, we would have expelled him from our Party following due investigation.

We will expose councillors' wrongdoing, whether they are of the national political parties or of no party.

Our investigations are continuing, and we have involved the Information Commissioner's Office, as documented elsewhere on this website.

Standing Up For Residents and Taxpayers

 

Councillors in Council Tax Arrears: Information Commissioner Places Two Somerset District Councils Under Investigation

The Leveller October 2021

Above is "The Leveller" October 2021. They are reporting on our work to expose Somerset's councils and councillors, and to stand up for the vast majority residents who do pay their council tax and expect councillors to set the example.

Following action by Somerset Independents, some of Somerset's 250+ district councillors have been found to have not paid their council tax over extended periods of time, with some over years.

So why did we start this investigation?

When our officers discovered from the February 2021 Full Council Meeting that Green Mendip Councillor Francis Hayden was banned from voting on council tax due to non-payment of council tax for more than 10 months, we asked all four district councils and the County Council, about councillors who did not pay.

We sent a formal complaint to Mendip about Cllr Hayden. Mendip did not properly investigate the councillor, of whom we provided evidence that Hayden had committed one or more criminal offences in voting on council tax-related matters at the February 2021 budget meeting - despite being barred. 

Mendip District Council do not seem to investigate councillors, we have found. Instead, they cover up for them and this is another case.

We have placed some of the evidence of non-payment of councillors across Somerset, and our actions, on other articles on this website. You can obtain the articles at the link here and click the tag "Council Tax" at the top of the website. Just scroll down to see all articles.

There was a difference in response from the four councils. Two councils gave the information, whereas two other councils sought to cover up the facts. The County just passed the buck to the districts and asked that councillors confess if they were in arrears.

Sedgemoor confirmed that no councillors had been in arrears. SWT Council confirmed the details of councillors in arrears and we challenged them directly, leading to one councillor Paul Bolton paying up in full. Another, former Conservative and now "independent" Cllr Kelly Durdan, failing to provide answers to us when we challenged her.

Two councils - Mendip and South Somerset - have covered up the names and/or further details of the arrears by councillors. We challenged them. South Somerset legal officer said the names would be revealed, but nothing came of it, despite our chasing.

So we have taken those FoI requests to the Information Commissioner's Office.

The ICO has told us in both cases that:

"Your complaint has been accepted as eligible for further consideration and will be allocated to a case officer as soon as possible."

And we went to the local and national media.

Both Private Eye and The Leveller have reported on our work. In The Leveller article, Leader of Somerset Independents Andrew Pope, who led the investigation, says:

Andrew Pope

 

"Somerset Independents is a campaign group formed to stand up for residents.

When we discovered that councillors had not paid their council tax, we were incensed. So as volunteers, we investigated the councillors of all districts and the County council.

We asked councillors directly at their February Budget meetings to not increase council tax during the Pandemic. But they did. Yet some councillors did not pay themselves - some of them did not pay over many months and even years. They hold public office but have brought it into disrepute.

Residents told us that these councillors should resign. We agree."

 

We will continue our investigation and continue working with local media to expose Somerset's rogue councillors and MPs.

 

Is Mendip District Council Corrupt? External Auditor Agrees Governance Failings For Second Year Running

 

A Failing Council

 

The Lib Dem-run Mendip District Council (MDC) has been found to have serious failings in how it is run, for a second year in a row.

Following our success in exposing MDC's failings of governance last year, as reported on this website and also by SomersetLive, another investigation by Somerset Independents has challenged how the Council is being run for a second year in a row. 

We have shown the results of our investigation to MDC's External Auditor, Ernst and Young (EY).

EY have agreed, for a second year in a row, that there are governance failings.

They have asked Somerset Independents officer Denise Wyatt for more information to support our findings.

Denise Wyatt

Denise is providing this information to EY. She says:

"Ernst and Young warned MDC's councillors and their Finance Officer last year, after Somerset Independents objected to the Council's accounts.

But councillors have not learned their lessons and have repeated the same mistakes in how the Council is run.

Worse than this, officers of the Council have not made sure that the Council is run properly. 

Mendip councillors seem to think this is a green light to disobey the Nolan Principles in Public Life.

Private Eye have reported on the failings that we have exposed, as has local newspaper The Leveller. 

Somerset Independents have provided our investigations to local and national media.

The Lib Dem councillors at Mendip seem to have made worse "oversights", but due to the huge numbers of these "mistakes", it seems that it can only be deliberate.

The culture of Mendip District Council is totally ingrained and is totally sick.

The governance failings at MDC allow wrongdoing to thrive. And it has thrived at MDC.

Council officers have even tried to protect Mendip councillors who have not paid their council tax, and have allowed councillors to be absent for months while still claiming taxpayers money in the form of their councillor allowance.

Before the Lib Dems came in, the Tories were no better at running this Council.

And it is another case of Lib Dem or Tory, same old story."

UPDATE (22/3/22): P & O Ferries and Clark's - Like the Tories - Wrap Themselves in the Flag But Are Foreign-Owned and Run!

 

Standing Up For Somerset Residents

UPDATE (23/3/21): P & O Ferries write open letter back to the Conservative Minister Kwasi Kwarteng...

... and P & O CEO Peter Hebblethwaite uses many of the same phrases that Somerset's Conservative MPs and Ministers have been quoted by us as saying.

We said that Tory MPs parroted employers and this proves it.

For example, Hebblethwaite writes, in the letter published by the BBC:

"We saw no other viable means of preserving our iconic British business, saving the 2,200 remaining jobs it provides and protecting the 15% Britain's trade capacity it facilitates."

It's British and iconic, P & O Ferries, Hebblethwaite claims. 

Is P & O British or Not British? 

It is well-documented that P & O Ferries is owned by DP World, based in Dubai, which is not British.

In the same letter, P & O state that "all relevant vessels are registered outside of the UK". The names of the ships sound British. Let's have a look at each one...

Spirit of Britain is registered in Cyprus - not British

Pride of Hull in Bahamas - not British

Pride of Canterbury in Cyprus - not British

Pride of Kent in Cyprus - not British

The employees that were dismissed were from three companies - all registered in Jersey. Is Jersey British or not? Jersey is a Crown Dependency, has its own Parliament, its own identity internationally, and is not part of the United Kingdom.

Conclusions

You can make up your own minds on whether P & O Ferries is "British" or not.

P & O Ferries operate to and from ports in Britain and some of its workers are British residents. But that seems to be about it.

P & O Ferries seem to be as "British" as the foreign-owned Premier League football teams, one of which - Chelsea - has been forced to be sold off by the UK Government after sanctions were applied to Chelsea's owner.

Whether P & O Ferries will continue to operate to and from British ports, or whether another operator will take over, will test P & O's claim that their ferries are "iconic" or not.

Will UK Governments - Labour, Lib Dem or Tory - do anything to stop it being the same old story, when it comes to workers at sea?

Their track record suggests that they will not, because they are still not serving the people that they are supposed to serve - the British people.

Instead, these Westminster parties accept money from all sorts of the wrong sources and serve the wrong interests - themselves and their rotten parties.

---

UPDATE (20/3/21): According to ITV News reporting on The Sunday Times, Conservative Ministers "knew of P&O Ferries" plans to slash jobs.

The report says:

"The Sunday Times newspaper said it received a leaked memo apparently written by a senior Whitehall official which tried to “justify” the mass redundancies, stating that “without these decisions, an estimated 2,200 staff would likely lose their jobs”...
"The newspaper said it was “widely shared across government” and recipients included the Prime Minister’s private office while Transport Secretary Grant Shapps is understood to have received a copy."

This attitude by Tory MPs echoes the response that Somerset Independents received when it asked Somerset MPs about the Clark's dispute here in Somerset (Clark's is now Chinese-owned).

Liam Fox (Tory, North Somerset) and James Heappey (Tory, Wells) made pronouncements about the Clark's dispute. And both seem to think sacking workers or attacking their rights is OK - as long as the employer claims they are struggling and claims it is done to save other jobs.

Somerset Independents stands up for residents and for workers. We want to see good employers thrive. But P & O and Clark's are clearly not good employers.

Like Liam Fox - himself a former Minister - and Wells MP James Heappey - currently a Minister - both displayed a terrible attitude during the Clark's dispute in Heappey's constituency (see our earlier report below). Fox mentioned Heappey in his response to us.

In relation to P & O, Heappey told Sky News: 'that the government "cannot force an employer to continue to employ people that the employer has said it doesn't want to employ." 

Leader of Somerset Independents, Andrew Pope, himself a former union representative and negotiator, says: 

Andrew Pope

"The way the Whitehall memo is written - Heappey is a Minister - mirrors the way Somerset MP Liam Fox attempted to justify attacking Clark's workers, when we asked him about the Somerset dispute.

Mr Fox told us and I quote: 'It is clear that they are trying to maintain jobs at a time when they are losing money.  The alternative to the current plan seems to be increased redundancies which I am sure people would want to avoid.'

Whether it is James Heappey or Liam Fox, the attitude is very similar.

Both Clark's and P & O are struggling, and both have attempted to use the management failures to cut jobs and attack workers. And according to Tory MPs and Tory ministers, it seems it is OK to sack 800 workers to save 2,200 workers.

No, it isn't OK.

Poor strategic decisions from management failures should not lead to sackings or reductions in terms and conditions of employment.

It seems that whether it is here in Somerset or out at sea, Tory MPs put the needs and claims of employers first and the needs of employees a very distant last.

But Grant Shapps and other ministers have expressed their false horror at the treatment of P & O workers.

Tories pretend to care and say they are "reviewing" the legality of the actions of P & O.

Were Tory ministers aware, and are Labour MPs aware, that the law at sea is not the same as UK employment law?

When workers are at sea, they would surely be covered by international maritime law, not UK law? An example is the 2014 Maritime Labour Convention on Seafarer working and living rights.

As a former councillor in a port city, I asked similar questions when I heard from workers on cruise ships. I heard all about the undermining of workers and their rights at sea.

I understood that treating workers at sea in such a poor way, was commonly done by seafaring employers.

Does maritime law apply or UK law? Government ministers should be honest about it - surely they would be able to say - or are they so incompetent that they don't know?

If they did know about it, what did they do about it?

Labour had 13 years of Government to sort this out. The Tories have had 12 years in Government. The Lib Dems even had the Coalition.

But Labour, Tories and Lib Dems showed that they cannot be trusted to stand up for Somerset residents or stand up for workers.

They pretend that they care but when it comes to the crunch, neither used Government to change international maritime law to protect workers at sea.

It's yet another case of Labour, Lib Dem or Tory, it's the same old story."

---

UPDATE (25/10/21): Conservative MPs including Somerset's Conservative MPs voted down the Private Members Bill that Somerset Independents asked them to support. The Bill would limit Fire and Rehire, which the new owners of Clark's propose to use to attack the company's workers.

Worse than this, only two Somerset MPs have responded to our challenges. At the time of writing, no other MPs have responded. And even these two lame responses do not help Somerset's workers.

Dr Liam Fox

Dr Liam Fox, Conservative MP for North Somerset did not answer our questions. Instead, he produced what amounts to an attempt at an excuse for the owners of Clark's to do what they have done to the company's workers, and for what they propose to do - to cut terms and conditions of employment without consent from the workers themselves.

Dr Fox told Leader of Somerset Independents, Andrew Pope:

"I have been in touch with Clarks and the local MP, James Heappey.  I am not sure whether you are aware of the following facts.

There have been some employees working in the factory on superior contracts from pervious owners.  In order to avoid further redundancies, they have brought them all (potentially) to the same hourly pay.  Some getting a rise and some getting a reduction.  It must be noted that Clarks’ figures have recently been published and last year they lost £180 million.  The investment they have received was £100 million and that secured the future of Clarks and jobs for their employees.   It is clear that they are trying to maintain jobs at a time when they are losing money.  The alternative to the current plan seems to be increased redundancies which I am sure people would want to avoid."

James Heappey, Conservative MP for Wells, has told campaigners that he is negotiating with the company on behalf of constituents. 

Andrew Pope responds to the two Conservative MPs by saying:

Andrew Pope

"Most Somerset MPs, all of whom are Conservative, seem too busy or too ignorant to prioritise our challenges on behalf of Clark's workers.

Somerset Independents and other campaigners have asked Mr Heappey what alternative he suggests to strikes. He previously stated on the BBC that strikes are not the answer. But he does not seem to have any alternative course of action for the workers who are under attack by the owners of Clark's. He claims to be negotiating for them - where are the results of his "negotiations"?

As for Mr Fox - yes, I told that him that Somerset Independents were already aware of these "facts". Mr Fox seems to think it is OK for workers' pay and conditions to be attacked, after management made the wrong strategic decisions for Clark's. It is not the fault of these workers, but they are made to suffer for the management failures. It's not on.

Why do these Tory MPs think this is OK? It just isn't. Fire and Rehire just is not an acceptable way to treat Somerset's workers."

Somerset Independents will continue to challenge the owners and management of Clark's and Somerset's MPs who appear to back this appalling behaviour by Clark's.

---

Somerset Independents has been supporting the Clark's employees and their representatives, in their ongoing dispute with the employer, as reported in our article here. 

The Protests at Clark's

Mendip Trades Union Council (TUC) has asked us to support the Private Members Bill being proposed by Barry Gardiner MP.

Leader of Somerset Independents, Andrew Pope, has responded positively to their request. Andrew says:

Andrew Pope

"As I said in my previous statement, Fire and Rehire should not be allowed. I have been of this view ever since I was an employee and union representative in the UNIFI union. Yet despite 13 years of Government, Labour failed to ban it.

Having listened to the views of other Somerset residents and workers, and listened to Mendip TUC's request to support the Bill, Somerset Independents supports the broad aims and objectives of the Bill, but believes that due to flaws in the Bill, that it may lead to unintended consequences such as dismissal without any new contract being offered.

However, on balance, some of the provisions in the Bill are very important, and would help in the dispute at Clark's, so we are asking Somerset's MPs to support the Bill when it is voted on."

Somerset's Worrying Covid-19 Trends: We Challenge The Authorities Again

 

Standing Up For Somerset Residents

During the entire Global Pandemic of Covid-19, Somerset Independents has challenged councils, councillors, MPs and national Government.

Unlike the national political parties and their elected representatives, we actually have stood up for residents.

It is in our Constitution that as residents ourselves, that our officers and supporters work together with other residents, to stand together.

Residents are extremely concerned at the Covid-19 infection trends in Somerset and the West of England.

So our officers Andrew Pope and Denise Wyatt wrote again to the Director of Public Health for Somerset, Trudi Grant.

We said:

"Further to our earlier correspondence with you and your staff, for which we thank you again, we are writing to express our great concern at the Covid-19 data for Somerset, especially for the Mendip District Council area.

For much of the Pandemic, Mendip and the other council areas for which you are responsible, have been in the lower part of the infection rates for our region.

However, Mendip is now the worst area, as presented by the BBC two days ago on BBC Points West and shown in the official figures as documented by the BBC here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274"

The questions followed in our letter. 

You can see the full questions and Ms Grant's responses to our questions, below.

Tell us what you think of the questions and the answers.

 

"Dear Mr Pope and Ms Wyatt

 

Thank you for your email.  To follow up your queries, please find responses below;

 

Q1. Please can you provide an explanation for this, with the evidence that you have to support your explanation?

 

Case rates in Mendip as you reference have been higher, but for the last 7 days reporting 1-7^th October, rates are beginning to decline now 466.3/100,000. This is still higher than regional average. I believe in part this is probably caused by lower population immunity levels, acquired through natural immunity due to previously low levels within this district.  School age children and staff linked to education settings made up 68% of Mendip’s cases (30/9-6/10/21)

 

Q2. Please can you tell us why it is deemed, as reported on BBC Points West, that schools are deemed the source of infection, and the cause of the high infection rates? The BBC report seemed to suggest that schools were at fault. Why is this thought please? 

 

Schools are in no way at fault, but the school environment is one of the main sources of transmission currently, 68% of cases in Mendip the last week were linked to school children or staff.  Our local schools have been brilliant and SCC Public Health are working very hard with them to help put control measures in place within each school,  as per the DfE Contingency Framework. 

 

Q3. Please can you tell us what influence, if any, the mass gatherings at the Bath and West Showground have had, and what evidence there is that these are influential, or no influential on infections?  

 

Based on the information gathered through the National Test and Trace system, we have no evidence that the Bath & West Showground is featuring in the common places visited by cases prior to their disease onset.

 

Q4. What data on infections, and what actions to control infections, are Bath and West REQUIRED to carry out and what involvement do you have as DPH? 

 

SCC has funded a Covid event officer post for Somerset, hosted by Mendip DC, to work with event organisers and ensure events go ahead as Covid19 secure as possible and relevant to their setting.  This officer engages early with event organisers to review their event management plans with specific reference to controlling the risk of transmission of Covid-19.  For larger events, members of my team also attend pre-event planning meetings to ensure the public health advice is part of the consideration.  To note, that it is the event organiser, rather than the Bath and West Showground itself, which devises and implements the plan. 

 

Q5. Would you agree therefore, that the cancellation of the Pilton "Equinox" Festival had a positive effect on reducing infection in the Mendip area, and Somerset more widely?  

 

We cannot say for sure that by cancelling these events, there was a positive effect on reducing infection as it’s always hard to count what has been prevented. However, the more people we mix with, the more chance the virus has to spread. Under the new national CONTAIN framework, it is for individuals to make these choices. As DPH we make information materials available to help people make informed choices. We are about to launch a public health campaign to help inform people decisions. If you follow my twitter account, it would be great if you could help spread the reach of the campaign by retweeting these messages to your members.

 

Event organisers have worked very productively with us throughout the pandemic and have listened to public health advice.

 

Q6. And similarly to Q4, the same for the Nass Festival? 

 

Please see the above reply regarding the Equinox Festival.  The same answer applies to the NASS Festival.

 

Q7. Somerset Independents campaigned against both Nass and Equinox from going ahead, because of the threat to Somerset residents' health, and we were very disappointed that Mendip Council officers treated both events as if they were not a danger. Why did you as Director of Public Health, allow them to do so? 

 

Nationally the decision has been taken to allow events of all forms and sizes to go ahead.  Obviously, as previously stated, where there are gatherings of people there is always an increased risk of infection, but we can mitigate risks as much as possible.  As you know, this whole pandemic has been a balance of risk, in the case of events, balancing the risk of infection with the risk to the events industry.  We need to learn to live with this virus, and part of that has to be opening up events.   As mentioned above, Mendip District Council hosts the event officer and works proactively alongside SCC Public Health, and with event organisers, to support events going ahead with appropriate covid19 mitigations in place in accordance with the legal framework.

 

Q8. If you do not have the data to answer the above questions with credibility, please can you tell us why you do not have the data, and what you are doing about it?  

 

We do have all the available data.

 

Thank you for your ongoing support, it is greatly appreciated.

 

With best wishes

 

Trudi

 

 

Professor Trudi Grant,  MSc, UKPHR, FFPH

Director of Public Health

Somerset County Council

 

Visiting Professor, Centre for Public Health and Wellbeing, UWE Bristol"