Montgomeryshire AM Mick Bates has written to the Heritage Minister in frustration after raising the lack of progress on the Dyfi Bridge improvements in the Chamber, to which the Minister replied that the bridge was not his responsibility, despite being a grade II listed building and scheduled ancient monument of national importance built in 1805.
In April last year Mick called for a collaborative approach between the Department for Heritage and Department Transport in drawing up plans for the future of Dyfi Bridge. Mick wrote to the Heritage Minister to highlight the importance historical value of the Dyfi Bridge which was built in 1805 to obtain the Minister’s support for a collaborative approach and was told by both the Minister for Transport and Heritage that officials from CADW were in discussions with the Transport Department, to ensure the historic value of the Dyfi Bridge was being taken into account as proposals were being drawn up.
Commenting Mr Bates said:
“I have long called for a collaborative approach between the Department for Transport and the Department for Heritage, but first it was crucial that the Heritage Minister recognised the historical value of the Dyfi Bridge.
“I am disappointed that despite acknowledging last year that the Dyfi Bridge is of significant historical importance, the Minister for Heritage has now changed his tune and disowned the Dyfi Bridge by stating it is not his responsibility.
“The Dyfi Bridge was built in 1805, it is a grade II listed building and scheduled ancient monument of national importance and last year the Minister recognised this in correspondence with me.
“Last year I was told that officials from CADW were in touch with the Department for Transport to ensure that the historic value of the Dyfi Bridge was being taken into account as proposals were being drawn up. It seems that either the Heritage Minister has forgotten this, or is out of touch with the workings of his department.
“I have written to both the Heritage and Transport Minister for an update. After over a decade of talk, we need to see firm proposals for the future of this bridge. A new bridge and road seems the most sensible option, to protect the historical value of the existing bridge by creating an alternative transport route so that traffic no longer has to flow over the bridge on a daily basis, which causes the damage that we have seen very recently.”
