Vaughan Gething tried to prevent disclosure of lobbying details

Legend, Welsh Labor denied Mr Gething did not want the information leaked

Author, Gwyn Charger
Role, Chief Correspondent, Newyddion S4C
June 4, 2024

Updated 3 hours ago

Premier Vaughan Gething tried to prevent the publication of details he had lobbied for on behalf of a company that had broken the law and whose holding company then donated to his leadership campaigns.

Emails, obtained by Newyddion S4C, show Mr Gething twice attempting to persuade Natural Resources Wales (NRW) not to disclose information requested under the Environmental Information Regulations.

Mr Gething, who faces a vote of no confidence on Wednesday, was criticized over a donation from the Dauson Environmental Group, controlled by David Neal.

A Welsh Labor Party spokesperson said “there is nothing to suggest that Vaughan Gething did not want the information leaked.”

Atlantic Recycling and its director David Neal were prosecuted in 2013 for illegally dumping waste on the Gwent Levels, and in 2017 for failing to clean up the waste.

Mr Neal was fined £10,000 and given a three-month suspended sentence in 2013, then given an 18-week suspended sentence in 2017, along with fines and costs of £230,000. £.

Companies controlled by Mr Neal donated tens of thousands of pounds to Mr Gething’s campaigns to become Welsh Labor leader, including two donations totaling £200,000 during the campaign which ended in his victory earlier This year.

In a statement, Mr Neal said: “All donations made come from an account separate from those used for the development of our business; we have never asked or expected anything in return.”

Acting on a tip-off, Newyddion S4C requested correspondence between Mr Gething and NRW following BBC Wales’ initial request for information regarding Mr Gething’s lobbying on behalf of Mr Neal’s companies.

Emails released by NRW show the company contacted Mr Gething on March 4 to ask if there was any reason why the information collected should not be disclosed under environmental information regulations.

Vaughan Gething responded for the first time the following day, saying the request was a “fishing expedition” and that his constituents would expect correspondence on their behalf by an elected representative to remain confidential.

He also questioned whether disclosing this information would constitute a breach of data protection laws.

An NRW representative responded by saying the disclosure was legal and required by environmental information regulations.

Mr Gething then responded again saying that he “did not understand how my correspondence, whether in whole or in part, constitutes environmental information”.

He said releasing the information “would have a material impact” on how he did his job serving his constituents.

The requested information was published by NRW on March 8. Mr Gething was announced as leader of the Welsh Labor Party on March 16.

Legend, Vaughan Gething claimed the request was a ‘fishing expedition’

Opposition parties criticized the prime minister’s responses revealed in the email exchange.

Plaid Cymru MS Mabon ap Gwynfor said: “This latest revelation is further evidence of Vaughan Gething’s aversion to control and transparency. »

“If the Prime Minister has nothing to hide and does not care about any perception of acting on behalf of a major donor, he would surely have been more than happy to cooperate with a reasonable request for information.”

The Welsh Conservatives said: “Vaughan Gething’s perceived conflict of interest is one of the main reasons he is fighting for his political life. »

The leader of the Welsh Liberal Democrats, Jane Dodds MS, called the emails a “disturbing revelation” which “raises further questions about the Prime Minister’s ability to fulfill his role”.

“The scandals which surrounded Vaughan Gething during his brief tenure have muddied the waters of Cardiff Bay. For the sake of our devolved institutions he must go,” she added.

Welsh Labor denied Mr Gething did not want the information leaked, saying he was “simply clarifying the principle of what information was being leaked and how it impacts member states’ work for their constituents”.