There are around 150 workers at Ffos-y-fran who face redundancy today. Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd has let workers down. The company had many years of knowing when planning permission expired, and to retrain and support workers to find work in more sustainable industries for when that happens... but hasn't. To add insult to this injury, the company further let workers down by refusing to pay for the restoration that it's legally obliged to, and which would have provided many workers with years of work to come on site, in the green sector of nature restoration.

The final restoration plan promised to local residents since 2007 now hangs in the balance as the mining company makes off with bumper profits from both legal and illegal coal mining, but refuses to meet its obligation to pay for the restoration. It's siphoned MILLIONS of pounds of profits into related companies, and neither the Council nor the Welsh Government seems intent to challenge that. Local residents and the Welsh Government's own report warned the Welsh Government and Local Council nearly a decade ago of this exact risk - why wasn't that acted on? Sign our petition to demand the Welsh Government commits to delivering:

1. a public inquiry into this debacle
2. the original restoration promised in 2007
3. the outright ban on coal mining in Wales that's clearly needed

We obtained a letter from the Coal Authority to the Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council, in which the Chief Executive of the Coal Authority is scathingly critical of inaction within the Council and their handling of Ffos-y-fran. The Council must be held to account for its failings.

Extinction Rebellion Cymru protestors blockaded Ffos-y-fran illegal operation for over 24 hours - which is 24 hours longer than Merthyr County Borough Council managed to. Despite the illegal activities of Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd, its owner David Lewis has been left untouched. On the other hand, XR protestors were arrested, held in police cells, and have court hearings about for preventing illegal coal mining. Please donate to their legal fees crowdfunder against this gross injustice.

We also heard on the grapevine that EMR Capital PTY, the ultimate owner of the proposed West Cumbria coal mine (WCM), was attending in the desperate hope of raising the £230 million still needed to start the WCM. So local campaigners from Cumbria came all the way to London to deliver a message to potential investors in WCM—steer clear! To further ruin EMR Capital PTY’s plans, they also handed investors a risk assessment, provided by BankTrack, outlining risks specific to the proposed WCM proposal. Two other coal mining companies were present at the conference too.

There’s many alternatives we must take instead of clawing the ground up to reach the minerals beneath, and that is where investment is needed. For example, we need:

1. better closed-loop recycling and reuse
2. new technologies and the efficiencies they can bring
3. the eradication of planned obsolescence
4. a reduction and prioritisation in what we consume

This would truly be ‘resourcing tomorrow’—the strapline for this year’s Money & Mining conference. Instead, the conference encourages investment in the rush for remaining minerals, fuelling human rights abuses, land grabs, destruction of local eco-systems, and climate change.

We call out the host of this disastrous conference, the Business Design Centre, which boasts its ethical ‘B-Corp’ status. You might want to raise your concerns with the certifying body about giving these hosts any kind of ethical certification (certification@bcorporation.uk), pointing out that at least three fossil fuel companies advertising coal mines and oil production were touting for investment at the conference (BHP, ADX Energy, and Teck).

Published 25, 05, 23 Updated 27, 06, 2024

The Welsh Government already has policies against new and extended coal mines but these are caveated and confusing. The renewed call for a clear coal mining ban comes less than a month after existing policies would have failed to stop a recent bid to reopen the shuttered Glan Lash opencast coal mine in Carmarthenshire. The coal mining company, Bryn Bach Coal Ltd, applied to double the size of the coal mine over six years. Controversially, Carmarthenshire County Council’s Planning Officer advised Councillors in the Officer’s Report, and at the Planning Hearing, that "Overall, it is considered that the proposals would largely meet the criteria of the coal policy" (p66). Ultimately, the application was rejected on the grounds of local ecological impacts—but it has exposed the weakness of existing policies, with the Planning Officer adding that it is “difficult to know for certain how to interpret the coal policy” (p66).

The open letter coincides with the first anniversary of Scotland’s announcement of its own de facto ban on coal mining, in October 2022. Daniel Therkelsen, campaigner at Coal Action Network says “The Welsh Government faces a choice—align itself with the backtracking and flip-flopping of the UK Government, or regain its international leadership position alongside Scotland, as a progressive country of confidence and stability for green industry to thrive.

Welsh Minister for Climate Change, Julie James, wrote a letter to the UK Government in October 2021, lamenting the current policy situation, which “results in both the developer and the Coal Authority committing significant resources respectively to preparing and determining applications”. NGOs and businesses that signed the open letter to Ministers Julie James and Deputy Minister Lee Waters are calling for a clear coal ban that clears up the confusion Carmarthenshire Council identified and the caveats that creates uncertainty and potentially wasted resources for coal mining companies, such as Merthyr (South Wales) Ltd, which also applied for an extension in September last year but was conversely rejected due to the Welsh Government’s coal policies by Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council.

Daniel Therkelsen, Campaigner, Coal Action Network: “The Welsh Government has said their position is ‘clear’, that ‘they want to bring a managed end to the extraction and use of coal’—but their jigsaw of policies on coal is as clear as the coal dust that continues to plague communities living around mines in South Wales, ban new coal mines and extensions and be done with it. Nothing about a ban would prevent access by the Coal Authority to address safety issues.”.

Overview and key facts on Glan Lash opencast coal mine extension application. The extension application was to extract a further 95,038 tonnes of coal (more than the original coal mine, licenced for just 92,500 tonnes).

Key Welsh Government policies relating to coal extraction include:

Planning Policy Wales (Edition 11) s.5.10.14 “Proposals for opencast, deep-mine development or colliery spoil disposal should not be permitted. Should, in wholly exceptional circumstances, proposals be put forward they would clearly need to demonstrate why they are needed in the context of climate change emissions reductions targets and for reasons of national energy security.”

Minerals Technical Advice Note 2: Coal “Government policies and planning guidance on the provision of coal have previously been set out in Mineral Planning Guidance Note 3 (MPG3) published in 1994 for England and Wales. MPG 3 (1994), apart from the Annexes, was cancelled by MPPW. This MTAN supersedes the 1994 Annexes, which are hereby cancelled… This coal MTAN sets out how impacts should be assessed and what mitigation measures should be adopted, and seeks to identify the environmental and social costs of coal operations so that they are properly met by the operator.”

Coal policy statement, 22 March 2021: “The opening of new coal mines or the extension of existing coaling operations in Wales would add to the global supply of coal, having a significant effect on Wales’ and the UK’s legally binding carbon budgets as well as international efforts to limit the impact of climate change. Therefore, Welsh Ministers do not intend to authorise new Coal Authority mining operation licences or variations to existing licences. Coal licences may be needed in wholly exceptional circumstances and each application will be decided on its own merits, but the presumption will always be against coal extraction.”

The UK Government is providing £500 million, and Tata Steel is expected to provide another £725 million. Most of this money will go to converting the sprawling steelworks from its current Basic Oxygen Furnaces to Electric Arc Furnaces. The former produces virgin steel from iron ore, heavily relying on coal for the chemical reaction. Electric Arc Furnaces recycles scrap steel without needing coal. Currently, the UK exports a considerable quantity of scrap steel abroad (over 8 million tonnes in 2021), and scrap steel is expected to greatly increase in abundance globally.

Port Talbot steelworks is currently the 2^nd highest source of CO2 from any single site in the UK. Transitioning this steelworks is expected to make a significant impact on the UK’s emissions. Steelworks around the world contribute 11% to global greenhouse gas emissions… rapid decarbonisation globally is essential to limit climate chaos and, alongside electric arc furnaces, alternatives are under development and testing that removes coal from the process of making virgin steel.

However, steelworks employ many thousands of people around the world, whose labour has been essential for everything from vehicles and renewable energy infrastructure to household appliances. It’s essential steel workers and their unions are centred in the changes needed to decarbonise steelworks to ensure a just transition that doesn’t leave these workers behind. The planned decarbonisation of Port Talbot Steelworks has been reported not to follow the principles of a just transition. Instead, the company has reportedly shut unions out of its negotiations with the UK Government and there aren’t any reported programmes of retraining or support packages to equip workers facing redundancy with realistic prospects of finding alternative work that suits their experience or ambitions.

Steel companies in Europe may be amongst the first to decarbonise their steelworks, so it is essential they set a good example for steel companies elsewhere to follow. European steelworks, therefore, must meaningfully engage with their workers and workers’ Unions from the outset of plans to decarbonise steelworks, focusing on those most impacted by potential changes. We are sceptical of top-down consultations on changes which often have foregone conclusions—engagement must be in the form of equal partners around the table. For workers, this can have the advantage of securing packages of support that are appropriate for their needs, whether that is to stay within the company or gain employment in another industry. Worker creativity may also reduce their own job losses and impacts—if they are able to meaningfully shape the transition process. Companies benefit from the creative capacity of workers who have on-the-ground expertise, greater trust in the changes ahead, reputational impacts, better worker morale and loyalty, and the wider fallout that structural unemployment can drive.

• We've created a form and encouraged Carmarthenshire residents to share their feelings about the proposed coal mine extension with Councillors through it. This can be used up until the meeting on morning of the 14th September 2023.
• We've obtained drone footage showing the full scale of the coal mine to help residents and Councillors visualise it.
• We've created a key facts and figures run-down of the coal mine so anyone can get clued up on the numbers around the Glan Lash opencast coal mine proposal.
• We've emailed each Councillor who'll be deciding the fate of the Glan Lash opencast coal mine application, highlighting the weaknesses and flaws in the Planning Officer's Report.
• We've worked with local residents to gather a crowd outside the Carmarthenshire County Council offices at the time of the decision meeting at 1000 on 14 September 2023.

Amongst other important ammendments, the wording of the two amendments your MP needs to support are:

NC2 Tabled by: Chris Skidmore & Wera Hobhouse
To move the following Clause—“Prohibition of new coal mines
(1) Within six months of the day on which this Act is passed, the Secretary of State must by regulations prohibit the opening of new coal mines and the licensing of new coal mines by the Coal Authority or its successors.
(2) Regulations under this section are subject to the affirmative procedure.”

NC3 Tabled by: Chris Skidmore

To move the following Clause—“Prohibition of energy production from coal
(1) The Secretary of State must by regulations provide for the UK to cease energy production from coal from 1 January 2025.
(2) Regulations under this section may amend primary legislation (including this Act).”

The report stage for the Energy Bill is currently scheduled for Tue 5th September 2023, the day after the House of Commons returns from summer recess, at which point MPs will debate the various amendments tabled to the Energy Bill. The amendment will almost certainly be debated, however there’s no guarantee that it will be pushed to a vote – this depends on a range of different factors, including MPs’ priorities and whether the amendment is selected by the Speaker for a vote.

THE ASK: write to your MP, asking them to speak in favour of amendment NC2 and NC3 during the debate, and to vote for it, if it is "pushed to a division".

We are now able to reveal correspondence between Welsh Minister for Climate Change, MS Julie James, and then UK Government Minister Minister of State for Energy, Clean Growth
and Climate Change, MP Greg Hands. In a letter dated 07 January 2022, Minister Greg Hands states:

"I do agree that the Coal Authority’s statutory duty to promote an economically viable coal industry, as set out in the Coal Industry Act 1994, is at odds with our climate leadership ambitions and policies on coal so we are looking at measures to review that duty. I understand our officials have agreed to meet to share our thinking on a future licencing regime that reflects our different administrations net zero and climate change goals."

The amendment(s) proposed by MP Chris Skidmore (and Wera Hobhouse) would achieve what Greg Hands admits is necessary to meet the Government's climate commitments. So why did the UK Government remove Lord Teverson's amendment to achieve the same? What has the UK Goverment done to change the "future licencing regime"?

Welsh Labour Minister for Climate Change in the Welsh Government Julie James wrote to then Secretary of State Department of Business, Energy & industrial Strategy Kwasi Kwarteng in the UK Government on 26 October 2021, stating:

"...we consider the statutory duty of the Coal Authority to develop and maintain a viable coal extraction industry must be removed if we are to achieve our policy ambitions." adding "I seek to understand how the [Coal Industry] Act will be amended to reflect the need for the Coal Authority to consider climate policy in its decisions". Julie James is looking for reform rather than dissolving the Coal Authority, saying "....the Coal Authority has an important role to play in rapidly winding down remaining mining operations and delivering long-term environmental protection. In doing so, the Coal Authority has an important role in ensuring those communities affected by the legacy of coal mining receive a just transition."

Welsh Labour clearly indicate the need to reform the Coal Authority in a way that would stop new coal mine applications being licenced and support existing operations winding down, with a just transition for workers involved.

The need for law change: This year, Coal Action Network took the Coal Authority to the Cardiff Courts in a judicial review challenging the Coal Authority's insistence that it cannot consider matters such as climate change in determining whether to award a coal mining licence. The judge agreed with the Coal Authority, which confirms that legislative reform of the Coal Authority is needed to bring its licencing function in line with climate commitments - such as that proposed in amendment NC2 to the Energy Bill.

Time's running out: Since senior UK and Welsh Government Ministers admitted the need to cut off the pipeline of new coal mining applications, both the UK and the planet experienced its hottest ever days (2022 & 2023), June 2023 was the UK's hottest ever, and July 2023 was confirmed the hottest month worldwide since records began, and this year the world has been rocked by wild-fires, flooding, and storms. So the sense of urgency to ban coal mining and use has become even stronger.

Security of supply concerns: Alongside increasing this escalating urgency, TATA Port Talbot steelworks announcing it will imminently transition to recycling steel or else face closure, and British Steel reporting it will close its coke ovens. A credible home insulation plan would remove any energy security issues for keeping warm this - and future - winters, rather than spending more of my tax money propping up dirty coal power stations again. These are the only significant consumers of coal remaining in the UK so there is no energy security case to be made for continuing to mine coal in the UK.

On 15th and 16th March, Coal Action Network took the Welsh Government and Coal Authority (UK regulator of coal mining) to the Cardiff Court in a judicial review over their respective handling of the Aberpergwm application to extend workings by up to 42 million tonnes of coal and until 2039.

On the 19th of May, The Hon. Mrs Justice Steyn DBE decided in favour of the Welsh Government and Coal Authority, but granted us permission to appeal the decision about the Welsh Government less than 2 weeks later, on 31st May. Our court hearing for the appeal will be 06th February at the Cardiff Court!

The grounds for this appeal are:

1. The Judge erred in law in finding that the Claimant’s interpretation is not retrospective to a degree that would be caught by paragraph 6 of Schedule 7 to the Wales Act 2017, but was nonetheless retrospective because it attached a new disability to “existing rights”.
2. The Judge erred in law when treating a coal mining licence, with an authorisation which was not in effect, as a possession within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol 1 of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights (“A1P1”).
3. In the alternative, the Judge erred in law in:
   1. assuming when considering the degree of unfairness that there would necessarily be a deprivation and, if there were, that the deprivation would necessarily be unfair;and
   2. failing to address proportionality when considering potential application of A1P1and/or the need to strike a balance when applying the common law principle of fairness to statutory provisions with potential retrospective effect.