Media coverage



BBC Wales report on Waterfront Action Group Meeting on 21st July 2016;                           click here to see the report


September 3rd 2014 Holyhead and Anglesey Mail

TVG article


Cllr Redmond article


Comment from the Waterfront Action Group: A fair Holyhead Town Council should have mentioned our campaign and given our website alongside their own and Conygar Stena’s information.

May 7th followed by May 21st 2014 Holyhead and Anglesey Mail



img255Comment from the Waterfront Action Group: It is good to see that maintenance is being carried out and Stena Line take its duty of care seriously. However, we understand that there is a considerable amount of repair required, not just maintenance, the cost of which has been said to be several million pounds. If Stena Line publish their survey reports it will stop speculation about the state of the Great Breakwater.

May 11th 2014 Mail on Sunday


Comment from the Waterfront Action Group: We urge potential investors to read through our website to make their minds up as to whether or not they should invest in the  Holyhead Waterfront venture.

May 7th 2014 Holyhjead and Anglesey Mail


Comment from the Waterfront Action Group: We contacted Anglesey County Council about this matter. What the Council did not say in their statement was that following an explanation by the Council, most people remembered that they had sent the letter. We examined the letters at the Council Offices with an officer. We all agreed that all signatures were made onto original letters. We examined carefully Mrs Wood’s letter. An original signature has been written directly onto the original letter in ink; turn the letter over and the indentation of the signature is clear. We find it difficult to believe that someone, somewhere and somehow has taken the trouble to superimpose Mrs Wood’s signature. There are approaching 600 signed letters. It appears that a handful of people cannot remember signing the letter or believe that they did not sign the letter. We also asked the Holyhead and Anglesey Mail if they contacted Holyhead Town Council or the Mayor for a statement. The answer was ‘no’. So why did the Mayor contact the newspaper to express his view? Does this look like an opportunity taken to discredit our campaign?

April 16th/23rd 2014 Holyhead and Anglesey Mail

img249Comment from the Waterfront Action Group: We think it is very interesting and bemusing that our Town Council finds it necessary to single out the potential cost of a Village Green application amongst all the other costs incurred by our Town and County Councils, and to announce it in a Council meeting with the press present. An opportunity to smear our campaign again?



Daily Post 8th March 2014


Daily Post 18th February 2014


Daily Post 12th February 2014



Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 12 February 2014


N W Chronicle 15 August 2013

img040There are more photographs of the above protest event on our ‘latest news’ page.

Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 7 August 2013

The article ‘War of Words Rages’, to which the following letter refers , is shown further down this page.


This letter refers to the article ‘Who will bury our dead’, which is shown below.

img032Comment from the Waterfront Action Group: This is a brilliant example of how naive and misinformed some people in Holyhead are about the Waterfront Development. We agree Holyhead needs jobs but at any price? Mr Shepherd, please read our response to DY 31/7/2013 on our COMMENTS page about jobs and ask yourself ‘who is behaving responsibly’. The Waterfront Action Group is pursuing a well researched, objective and responsible campaign on your behalf and for everyone in Holyhead. We are campaigning to save our heritage and ‘the jewel in the crown’ of Holyhead, Newry Beach. With innovatory thinking the development can achieve the benefits we all want, real jobs not just pie in the sky numbers that the developers extoll to get planning approval and at the same time we can preserve our natural environment, heritage and culture. We have sought to meet the developers, our MP Albert Owen has tried to broker a meeting between interested parties, but the developer does not want to meet. Ask yourself why. Also ask why, when given the opportunity to broadcast the virtues of their development on BBC Wales national television, they refused to do so. Comments relayed to us by a recent AM candidate from the developers show how uninterested they are in engaging in any dialogue. Can’t you see that they are only interested in themselves, lining their own pockets and that they are not interested one little bit about the benefits to the  people of Holyhead (otherwise they would have met us). Why don’t you come to our meetings and find out what exactly is going on and you can then make your own mind up.

Also it would have informed the reader more if you had declared your connections with the Town Council. Were your comments Mr Shepherd, about how good the Town Council are,  related in anyway to contracts we understand you have had or currently have with the Council? Also to get the facts straight, no councillor on the Town Council was elected. There were no elections and all candidates were instated unopposed. It has been like this for years. See the letter below ‘How are the Town Cllrs elected?’

The article below is factually incorrect and misleading. Please see our comments below the article. We have written to the Reporter and his Editor to complain and asked for an article in the next edition of the H&A Mail to put the record straight accompanied with an apology.



Talk about sensationalism. “Who will bury our dead?”… “This and many other questions will be asked during ‘war’ over the future of HolyheadTown Council…” Who will bury our dead! War! What on earth is this all about?

Mr Hearn has made a good job of confusing the reader with his reference to “a group of determined people” because this is confused in his article with the “Waterfront Action Group”. It appears that it is the Waterfront Action Group who is instigating this matter. Also saying that I am the Chairman of the Waterfront Group further leads the reader to assume it is our Group that is perpetrating the action.

The important issue in the article which is incorrect is the reason given for why people are thinking about taking this action. Elgan Hearn writes “…because of their (Town Councillors) support for controversial developments in the town”…Wrong. I told Mr Hearn that any action relating to votes of no confidence in the Council or even dissolution of the Council, would not be because of the Council’s support for developments that we oppose, but rather it is because of the disgraceful and incorrect way the Council has conducted itself (see articles and letter in the H&A Mail and posted on our website). What the Council meeting of 1 July 2013 has done is to catalyse the views and feelings of many residents of Holyhead leading them to say ‘enough is enough; something has to be done to stop what has been going on for years’.

I made it clear that any action being considered was not being instigated by the Waterfront Action Group.

In essence the ‘Who will bury our dead?’ article is a story about ’nothing’ as nobody, as far as I know, has said that they are about to take any kind of action against the town council. We have an article based on pure speculation!

I have yet to confirm the implications of dissolution of a Council but I do not believe for one minute that bodies will be left unburied and town council employees will lose their jobs. As far as I am aware it is the Town Council (councillors) who will be dissolved. The services will continue and no council employee will lose their job. Look what happened when the commissioners came in to run Anglesey Count Council when it was effectively dissolved. The services carried on as normal and no council worker lost their job!               Terry Looker, Chairman

Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 31 July 2013. Letter; This must never happen


Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 24th July 2013

The following letter published in the Holyhead and Anglesey Mail on 24 July 2013 describes the conduct of Holyhead Town Council at the meeting which included motions on the lease at Newry Beach/Greens and the proposed development at Penrhos. It is this same council who voted overwhelmingly to support the waterfront development. Serious questions need to be asked as to why these councillors voted too readily to support the Conygar Stena proposal and why they go on the offensive and obfuscate when this issue is raised for discussion.


This letter was published on the same page as the Monty Python letter and may give you some insight into why we have a Council that conducts itself in this way.


Chronicle 18th July 2013


AM campaign letter from Tal Michael July 2013


AM Campaign letter from Rhun ap Iorwerth. July 2013


Neil Fairlamb Conservative AM Candidate July 2013                                               Neil Fairlamb, the AM Conservative candidate, has talked with our Group and he has voiced his concerns are similar to those shown above.

Nathan Gill UKIP AM Candidate july 2013                                                                   This the picture of Nathan Gill at Newry Beach, taken from his AM campaign leaflet. He has expressed his concerns about the development in much the same way as the other candidates shown above.


Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 10th July 2013


img003Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 10th July 2013


THE WALES REPORT BBC ONE WALES. 16th June 2013                                             David Williams reports on the Conygar Stena Waterfront Development.                               This programme is no longer available on BBC iPlayer.  We plan to have a copy of this programme available for you to view here so please return here to see if it available. Thank you.                                              

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 20th March  2013

img067 img068* please note that the Holyhead Mail thought Shaun Redmond was commenting on behalf of the Waterfront Action Group. Mr Redmond is not a member of the Waterfront Action Group. He is an independent campaigner against the destruction of Newry Beach.

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 20th February  2013

Letter Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 20th February 2013

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 13th February  2013

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 13th February  2013

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 30th January  2013

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 23rd January  2013

Letter Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 16th January 2013

Letter Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 9th January 2013

‘These proposals must be opposed’

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 16th January 2013

Letter Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 21st November 2012

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 19th September 2012

Article Daily Post 14 July 2012


Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 2nd February 2011

Letters Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 9th February 2011

Article Holyhead and Anglesey Mail 1st December 2010

Article Chronicle 3rd December  2009

Comments are closed.