Light at the End of the Tunnel

Carl Sargeant, the Welsh Minister for Local Government, announced today that he could see light at the end of the Anglesey Tunnel. The Welsh Government's intervention on Ynys Môn will begin to be phased back from the end of September, said Sargeant, from which time power will gradually be transferred back to our own councillors. A smaller number of commissioners will stay on to oversee and advise, whilst members of the Executive will begin to receive their senior salaries again.

He applauds himself at the end of his statement by saying, "if Councillors and officers carry on showing the same commitment as they have so far, we will be able to complete a fundamental and swift turnaround on Anglesey in little over two years", conveniently forgetting the two previous years of Welsh Government intervention under David Bowles when things when badly backwards.

The full statement below.

Title: Isle of Anglesey County Council
Date: 9 May 2012
By: Carl Sargeant, Minister for Local Government and Communities

Last February, I updated the Assembly on the progress that the Isle of Anglesey County Council was making under the stewardship of my Commissioners. I was cautiously optimistic about the prospects for reducing and ending my intervention in the medium term.

Events since then have shown that that optimism was justified. My Commissioners have concluded that while there remain some concerns about the Council’s governance, there are no longer any serious risks. The Auditor General has reached a similar view, and recommended that I should begin planning how to end my intervention.

I agree with and accept the views of both. There is increasing evidence that a Council that was once a byword for misbehaviour, under-performance and petty squabbling is now concentrating effectively and consistently on the issues that matter to the island. Differences remain, as they always will in any democratic organisation. But the days of petty personal rivalries dominating the Council’s business seem to be largely over.

Recent developments have underlined that. In March, the Council had to set a budget and council tax rate in very difficult financial circumstances: it has operated on a shoestring for many years and has much less scope to make savings than many other local authorities. Yet Councillors approached that challenge with real maturity. They engaged fully with the Commissioners in formulating a draft budget and passed it almost unanimously after a sensible and focused debate. That would have been impossible just over a year ago.

There have also been problems with the proposed development of Wylfa B, when the leading companies withdrew. The potential that Wylfa B has for the economic regeneration of the island means that is undoubtedly a major setback for the island. But the response from the Council has been sensible and serious, with a strong mutual interest in securing fresh involvement from another company. There have been none of the recriminations and accusations that we would have seen in the past.

Finally, Councillors have been working with the Commissioners, the WLGA and my officials to overhaul the Council’s constitution and to make sure that it embeds and sustains some of the improvements we have seen. Again, those discussions have been highly positive and productive. They have yielded some radical changes which will strengthen good governance and which other local authorities may well want to emulate. They have also been free of the jockeying for personal advantage which so bedevilled Council politics in the past. Indeed, one of the main aims of the changes is to prevent that from ever happening again. It is clear that almost everyone wants to move on.

That intention is sincere and commendable, but I am not yet convinced that the Council is able to fulfil it alone. I have said before that the recovery will not be complete until we have renewed democracy on the island, and until elections take place on terms which are more likely to yield a representative and accountable council. That cannot happen until next year.

The Council also needs to finish recruiting a new and strengthened senior management team to bring stability, capacity and expertise; and to tackle some intractable problems of service delivery. Progress so far on this has been very good, with a high level of interest from some highly-qualified and well-regarded public servants. But until that team is in place and clearly functioning well, I cannot be sure that the recovery will be sustained.

I will therefore be extending my direction to the Council from the end of May to the end of September, to allow that recruitment to finish. Commissioners will remain in full control until then. If at that point they and I are content that the senior team is ready to take charge, and if progress elsewhere continues to be maintained, then I will start bringing my intervention to an end.

That would initially mean reducing the Commissioners’ presence and responsibilities. Councillors would resume control, subject to being overridden by Commissioners if they proposed to act unwisely or unreasonably. Commissioners would also support councillors and officers; and they would continue to monitor progress and advise me on that. I will discuss with my Commissioners the level of their personal involvement under this approach; but it is unlikely to entail having five Commissioners with a continuous presence in the Council.

As a consequence, I will also be asking the Independent Remuneration Panel to consider restoring senior salaries for members of the Council’s executive. I withdrew these last year when I transferred the executive’s powers to Commissioners; it can only be right that they are returned in some form if and when those powers are handed back.

This approach will allow us to test the sustainability of change in a controlled environment. It will mean an early return to local decision-making, with appropriate safeguards. If that proves successful, I should be able to end my intervention completely soon after next year’s elections.

Those elections will take place using new boundaries, and I expect to receive the Local Government Boundary Commission’s final proposals on those boundaries shortly. Many within the Council did not support their initial proposals. They are of course also free to oppose the final proposals: they will have at least six weeks to make representations to me. I will consider all constructive representations seriously; and I trust that in approaching this issue, Councillors will display the same maturity as they have on other major issues recently.
All I am doing now is making appropriate plans to phase out my intervention. I could restore the Commissioners’ full powers at any time, and will do so if the recovery stalls or if Councillors prove unable or unwilling to resume proper control.

On the other hand, if progress continues under the Commissioners’ stewardship, and if Councillors and officers carry on showing the same commitment as they have so far, we will be able to complete a fundamental and swift turnaround on Anglesey in little over two years. I look forward to being able to do so.

I will make a further statement to the Assembly in due course.

Suspension of Island Democracy finally debated in the Senedd

Last Wednesday the suspension of local democracy in Ynys Môn was debated in the Senedd for the first time since Welsh Local Government Minister, Carl Sargeant, announced by diktat in January that local elections on Ynys Môn would be postponed until 2012 — one year after every other county in Wales goes to the polls. The debate was prompted by the Lib Dems tabling a motion to annul the Minister's decision.

The elections were postponed following the following recommendations by the Auditor General for Wales following his March 2011 re-inspection of Anglesey County Council:

"I also recommend that the Welsh Ministers direct the authority to develop and implement a strategy that promotes democratic renewal, and that Welsh Ministers provide assistance to the authority under section 28 of the Measure in pursuit of that renewal. In so doing, I also recommend that Welsh Ministers request the Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales to review its proposals published in 2010 to ensure that the changes proposed adequately address the need for democratic renewal in Anglesey in terms of the number of councillors and the introduction of multi-member wards. If it is not possible to complete and implement this review by May 2012, I recommend that the Ministers consider using powers under section 87 of the Local Government Act 2000 to delay the Council’s elections until 2013."

Whatever you may think of the postponement of elections on Ynys Môn in order to ensure that the next election is conducted under an entirely new electoral system, it is surely not right for such a major decision to have been taken on the recommendation of just one man, the Auditor General for Wales — who is, after all, unelected. I would even go further and say that Huw Vaughan Thomas, the Auditor General and former Chief Executive of Gwynedd and Denbighshire councils, went beyond his remit in:

• recommending changes to the electoral arrangements which will result in Ynys Môn having uniquely different arrangements to every other county in Wales;
• recommending postponing elections in order to facilitate these electoral changes.

Either way, to my mind it is surely entirely proper that these dramatic and far reaching decisions should be subject to proper examination and some degree of democratic accountability through the means of a debate in the Senedd. Well done therefore to the Lib Dems in tabling the motion!

This is not however a view shared by our own AM, Ieuan Wyn Jones, who told the chamber:

"I am disappointed that the Liberal Democrats have decided to bring up this issue."

...before going on to say...

"The auditor is independent, and we need to be very clear in our reasons for going against the truly independent views that he has expressed. If the auditor believes, in his advice to the Minister, that democratic renewal can best be achieved by ensuring that multi-member wards are created, the best thing that we can do is allow time for that to happen."

So, according to Ieuan Wyn Jones, there is no need to even debate or discuss a recommendation made by the Auditor General. In which case, why do we need politicians like him? Its also worth remembering that Ieuan Wyn's own Plaid Cymru councillors in Ynys Môn were unanimous in opposing the delay of elections. The Lib Dem, Peter Black, succinctly explained why Ieuan was wrong:

"I refer to the comments from the Member for Ynys Môn, Ieuan Wyn Jones, when he said that he was disappointed that this motion was being brought forward. I believe that, on principle, if we are going to defer elections, then at the very least, Assembly Members should vote on the matter. I think that that is responsible and is absolutely right.  The situation in Anglesey is unique, which is why we need to tread carefully and ensure that we do not forego the democratic principles, which is what we are doing by proceeding with this Order. The auditor general, who, by the way, is unelected, wants democratic renewal—that is precisely what we suggest and what we propose here as part of this motion."

Here are some other highlights from the debate.

Antoinette Sandbach AM (Conservative):

"People have a regular democratic right to give their verdict on their council at the ballot box, and this mandate has been removed from the voters of Ynys Môn. Meanwhile, the Welsh Government and Ynys Môn County Council have made decisions that will have a huge impact on the residents of Anglesey, and which those residents are powerless to do anything about this year because they have been denied the right to judge the council at the ballot box. 

If there was an election in May, would the council have imposed the biggest council tax hike in the whole of the United Kingdom, at 4.5%? I do not think so. Would it have decided just days after this announcement to advertise four brand new senior management posts with a combined salary of more than £400,000 a year? I do not think so. Who is footing the bill for all of this? The answer, of course, is the council tax payers—the voters of Anglesey. Clearly, there are problems in Ynys Môn, but is the democratic process one of those problems? At the last council election, 25% of the council seats changed hands. The council was refreshed by the voters, so it is not as if the electorate did not use their democratic right to give their verdict on the conduct of the council at the ballot box. The people of Anglesey have the right to ask why its council is the only one in Wales to have multi-member wards imposed on it by the Welsh Government. Does this make the system more democratic, or do multi-member wards serve to widen the gap between the councillor and the constituent? Does this make political campaigning prohibitively expensive for independent candidates? Is the imposition of multi-member wards by the Minister really happening because the Minister does not like the results of the election in Anglesey? Postponing the election does not solve any of the problems; all it does is to remove the democratic right of the electorate."

Peter Black AM (Lib Dem):

"Democracy is about empowerment and not about diktats from the centre. The question is: what do we mean by 'democratic renewal’? In my view, it means a democratic election in which voters can judge matters for themselves. Yet the residents of Ynys Môn are being denied that, which is why we believe that this Order has to be overturned. We have supported the intervention and the auditor general’s judgment on this issue, but it is argued that we cannot allow this issue to continue without elections. If elections took place, it would not mean the end of the intervention board, as the Minister indicated, but would give the board the opportunity to work with councillors with a fresh mandate and those councillors could demonstrate the support of the electorate. Decisions are being taken that would not have been considered if there were elections this year. That cannot be right and we believe that if we are to restore any credence to the democratic process, we have to have elections in Anglesey along with the other 21 councils on 3 May."

Mark Isherwood AM (Conservative):

"The Isle of Anglesey council has been dogged by scandal since its formation in 1996. Serious allegations relate mainly to planning and to grants, and specifically to the council’s senior management and corporate governance. However, only in his statement last month did this Minister finally acknowledge that these areas need radical reform. Until now, the rhetoric from Welsh Government has all been about democratic renewal to tackle 'chronic political infighting and misbehaviour’. Three weeks ago, the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales dropped a case against Anglesey councillor Elwyn Schofield on the grounds that the evidence was contradictory and largely uncorroborated. This case was brought by the former interim managing director, who also obliged council group leaders to sign terms of engagement that forced them to publicly and robustly condemn this councillor and other named councillors. That ultimately led to the appointment of commissioners, the postponement of local elections and drastic local boundary changes. Last March, the Minister announced that he was replacing the elected executive with commissioners paid £500 a day. The first two commissioners he announced were a Flintshire Labour colleague, criticised for presiding over a series of scandals at Flintshire County Council—all documented by independent reports—and the man who was chief executive of the then Labour Cardiff County Council when it was rocked by a multi-million pound scandal over unlawful expenses. When I met leading Anglesey councillors last December, they told me that
'the problem was always corporate governance in an Officer led Council, not members with horns on their heads’.
They said:
'Councils in the rest of Wales are being allowed four years to change their electoral boundaries, but Anglesey was only being given 4 weeks just before Christmas’."

Aled Roberts AM (Lib Dem):

"Our reason for bringing forward this motion is that it is our judgment that the boundaries are not the reason for the political challenges facing the county. Many county councils that consist entirely of single member wards do not face the same political difficulties that led to the imposition of commissioners. Similarly, there are multi-member ward councils that do not operate effectively.The council has just had to pass a budget recommended to it by the commissioners. Given the situation, and the fact that the council is under heavy supervision from the Government, in reality it would have been impossible for the council to reject the budget. This has led to an increase of 4.5% in council tax next year, which is the highest of any council in England and Wales. If there are no elections this year, and the commissioners remain in place, an additional budget will be passed next year by the council based on representations made by the commissioners. We believe that this denies the people of Anglesey an opportunity to vote for an administration of their choice to take the island forward for the next few years. Furthermore, there is little evidence in the council’s internal minutes to suggest any real action taken with regard to efforts of democratic renewal with the current councillors. Therefore, the position will be that, if democratic elections are held next year and the same councillors are returned, to all intents and purposes, no real effort will have been made to change behaviours that have, quite clearly, been in place in that county for a number of years.A delay of a year before elections are held on the island is unacceptable. If any council is in need of democratic renewal, it is Ynys Môn, and the best way of ensuring democratic renewal is through holding elections."

The motion was defeated 33 votes to 17.

++ Official: Ynys Môn local elections postponed to 2013 ++

Welsh Local Government Minister, Carl Sargeant, has today issued a statement saying that he WILL postpone the local elections on Ynys Môn by one year until May 2013. He further goes on to say that the Commissars Commissioners he appointed to run the council will continue in place with NO timetable for removal.

In this way he hopes to bring about the Orwellian sounding aim of "democratic renewal" on Ynys Môn by suspending the democratic process and removing any kind of democratic oversight of the Executive — possibly even beyond the delayed 2013 election.

The full statement is below.
Sargeant statement delaying Ynys Môn elections

Commissioners: agreeing 5% council tax hike crucial for returning democratic control to Ynys Môn

The Anglesey Commissioners roadmap to recovery

The Anglesey Commissioners released their second quarterly report to the Minister yesterday, covering the period July to September this year. Below are the key passages (emphasis mine):

4.1 During the Quarter, whilst Commissioners have continued to exercise the responsibilities previously reserved to the Executive, they have followed a process of gradual re-engagement of the Shadow Executive and Elected Members in the work of the Council. Relationships with Commissioners are good, and Elected Members have adopted a much more positive approach. 

4.2 Commissioners have involved Shadow Portfolio Holders in regular meetings with Officers and this has been received well, allowing constructive relationships to develop and providing mentoring for Officers and Executive Members. In this way the Executive has been re-engaged to work alongside Commissioners to observe the way in which they are operating. 

4.3 Members have also contributed effectively to building a consensus around the Corporate Plan and Budget Planning process. [...]

4.5 The experience to date is that the majority of Councillors have been supportive and have demonstrated a willingness to work with Commissioners and Officers to put the Council on a more business like footing for the future. Re- engagement will progress during Quarter 3 in order to test sustainability. 

6.0 The issues to be addressed during the next Quarter (September to December) and the longer term prospects up to May 2012 and Beyond 

6.2 The milestones for Quarter 3 will be to:- 

• Prepare the budget strategy for 2012/2013;
• Agree the strengthened corporate management arrangements; Establish the Improvement Board and implement the Performance
• Management Framework;
• Make substantial progress to improve poor performing services; Progress citizen engagement;
• Make further progress in economic renewal;
• Strengthen the Constitution;
• Establish constructive relationships with Regulators;
• Develop an agreed plan to develop the Corporate Centre; Implement risk reporting for the Council.

7.2 At this stage there are positive signs that the improvement process has commenced, but there is still a great deal of work to be done to deliver against the recommendations of inspection reports, as well as further developing the fundamental strategic issues.

7.3 The most urgent issues have been addressed and a stable platform for improvement has been created. However, the limited capacity of the corporate centre has meant that some important developments have taken longer than the Commissioners consider ideal and action has been taken to secure additional capacity. 

7.5 The Commissioners are satisfied that their 10 Key Themes will address the concerns of regulators and the perceived weaknesses identified by Commissioners, in order to secure improved services to the people of Anglesey. It is too early to say when sustainability will be achieved, but Commissioners will continue to work with Officers and Elected Members in developing their capacity and capability to resume control of the Council. 

7.6 Progress against the tasks agreed for Quarter 3 will be an indicator of when the Council is likely to be ready to return to democratic control. 

59.0 It is too early to say when sustainability will be achieved, but Commissioners will continue to work with Officers and Elected Members in developing their capacity and capability to resume control of the Council. Progress with the tasks agreed for Quarter 3 will be an indicator of whether the Council is likely to be ready to return to democratic control in the Spring of 2012.

For me two key points come out of this document:

1. There are continued references throughout the report to the weakness of the 'corporate centre' and how this has delayed improvements. The report enlarges on this point in the following section.

"The limited capacity of the corporate centre has been a factor in delaying progress in key areas. There have been continuing issues in ICT and HR and the need to make a number of interim appointments in Finance at short notice have delayed important milestones The improvement process in Children‟s Services was slowed down by the need to make interim appointments and to obtain external advice. These risks have been mitigated to some extent by the excellent quality of those inputs but this highlights the need to create a staffing structure for the future which will attract suitably skilled employees, able to met the challenges of the improvement agenda."

So this is not a problem with the councillors but with weaknesses in the permanent corporate functions themselves. Which begs the question what on earth was achieved by the two whole years of Welsh Government intervention in Ynys Môn prior to the introduction of the Commissioners — including the highest paid civil servant in Wales, David Bowles, and a whole 'Recovery Board' staffed by the Great and the Good?

2. The Commissioners will not make a recommendation as to whether the improvements are sustainable and the council is ready to return to democratic control until the end of the third quarter (i.e. after the period from October - December 2011). Furthermore, the decision will be based on councillors accepting without too much fuss the Commissioners recommended budget for 2012/13 which will controversially see council tax on Ynys Môn increasing by 5% — very likely the highest percentage rise in Wales. By witholding their decision until after December (and by making it contingent on Councillors agreeing to large council tax rises) the Commissioners seem to be purposely making a May 2012 election extremely unlikely. The lack of certainty means that with just five months until the local government polling day in May (remember Carl Sargeant hasn't yet said that the election on Ynys Môn will definitely be postponed), possible candidates aren't able to prepare properly. Indeed just this week I received an email from a someone who wants to stand as an Independent candidate at the next election. She said:

"...uncertainty about the date would make it more difficult for new people who did not have party political back-up, as they will need to start their campaigns early but they could not be certain as to the area they needed to canvass, and could not make plans to ensure that they timed their door-to-door campaign to best effect. As there are currently few women elected to the Council that would also discriminate against women being elected for the next term."

So, even if the Commissioners do decide in January that the council can be returned to democratic control, it seems likely that the very fact there will be so little time between that point and the official Wales local election date in May, it will be used as an excuse to force a very unsatisfactory postponement. 

The full report and annex are attached below.

Quarter 2 Report to Minister Appendix 3 Corporate Governance Priorities (Q2 Position)

Schism: Ieuan Wyn Jones and Ynys Môn's Plaid Councillors

IWJ: deliberately avoiding
the question

As reported in yesterday's Daily Post, Ieuan Wyn Jones has sought to completely sidestep the question of the whether he supports the postponement of local elections in Ynys Môn or not. This is what he is quoted as saying:

"Plaid Cymru’s Constituency Committee for Ynys Môn is carefully considering the plans for local government electoral changes on Anglesey. The document presented by the Boundary Commission needs to be thoroughly evaluated in view of the far-reaching proposals contained within it.
"We will not give a knee-jerk reaction like some other parties but give the proposals the consideration they deserve. We will be presenting our response before the deadline early in the New Year."

There is no question that the proposed boundary changes need to be considered carefully and in detail — nobody disputes that. However the issue is why is Ynys Môn only being given four weeks (over the Christmas period too) to consult on them whereas the rest of Wales will have four years? If Ieuan Wyn Jones considers that they should not be responded to in a "knee-jerk" manner and, indeed, that they will lead to "far-reaching" changes then why would he accept that we are only being given four weeks to consult on them? 

The fact remains that these boundary changes are being rushed through by the Minster in order to facilitate a postponed election in 2013 under new electoral arrangements designed purposefully to eliminate Independent councillors. This is not how proper, sustainable, organic "democratic renewal" should be brought about. Even Plaid Cymru's Ynys Môn councillors — those who notionally will gain the most from the proposed changes — have taken a principled stand against them. Furthermore Plaid Cymru's former Party Chair, John Dixon, has said unequivocally that he thinks the proposals amount to "rigging the electoral system" and has spoke out against them. Yet it seems clear from Ieuan Wyn Jones' side-stepping response to the Daily Post that he is prepared support a postponement and in so doing is ignoring both his own local Plaid Cymru councillors, and the best interests of Ynys Môn, in favour or securing narrow party advantage at a rigged and postponed local election in 2013.

In the meantime, certain commentators on this blog and elsewhere continue to support the proposed boundary changes and delayed elections on Ynys Môn. Below are the reasons why I feel they are wrong:

• The proposed reduction down to 30 councillors leaves too few for the council to operate effectively. Although a smaller reduction in numbers is warranted, a council of just 30 members will require that, on top of their duties to constituents, virtually all of them will need to take executive and portfolio positions, staff the various committees, attend to statutory obligations on police and fire associations, etc. This will mean in the short-term that being a councillor will become a full-time job; and in the long-term it will simply pave the way for rolling Anglesey up into Greater Gwynedd — something that is not in the best interests of Ynys Môn residents.
• For the above reason, younger people with jobs, mothers with small children etc. will not find it possible time-wise to fulfil their obligations as councillors and will thus be discouraged from standing for election. Reducing the amount of people able to stand for election is not conducive to 'democratic renewal'.
• A reduction down to just 11 new multi-member 'super-wards', spanning both urban and rural areas, could mean that all the elected members in one ward could come from just one small part of the ward (likely the urban parts) and thus be unfamiliar with the rest of their ward. This is not in the best interests of constituents.
• Similarly, these larger wards make it impossible for Independent councillors without Party backing to get elected. For example, the proposed ward of Central Anglesey has 5,829 electors and therefore approximately up to 3,000 households. Independent members will have no chance to canvass all of these households and sending out a leaflet would could cost upwards of £2,000 in printing and postage charges. Again reducing the pool of people able to stand for election is not conducive to 'democratic renewal'.
• As already discussed, why are these proposals being rushed through? The rest of Wales will get four years to consult on their boundary changes, Ynys Môn is getting just four weeks (over the Xmas period too thus effectively making it shorter). 
• Postponed elections will not allow issues like next year's council tax rises, cuts to services etc to be discussed and debated, nor will it allow all the Parties and candidates to set out their policy stalls in an election.
• Finally, as the WLGA says, all Welsh counties should be treated equally. The Minister is attempting to introduce an electoral system unique in Wales to achieve his own desired election result. That is wrong.

Decision time for Ieuan Wyn Jones

At an Extraordinary Meeting of Ynys Môn council this morning councillors unanimously agreed to resist both the proposed boundary changes and mooted postponement of next year's local elections on the Island. Significantly the two Labour councillors present, J Arwel Roberts and Raymond Jones, went against both Senedd colleague Carl Sargeant and their (absent) Labour leader on the Council, John Chorlton, in supporting the motion to reject the proposals.

Most importantly however for Carl Sargeant's chances of pushing his measure through the Senedd, Plaid Cymru's Ynys Môn Leader Bob Parry, and members of his group, also spoke passionately against the Welsh Government's proposals. Ieuan Wyn Jones told the Daily Post today in response to the news that both the Welsh Conservatives and Lib Dems will oppose the move, that he was "in discussions with Plaid councillors on Anglesey to consider a response". Now that his local councillors have clearly shown on which side they are on, will Ieuan Wyn Jones listen? And if so will he join the Welsh Conservatives and Lib-dems in blocking these proposals in the Senedd?

So, to help Ieuan Wyn Jones make up his mind, here is a ready reckoner of who is now for and against Carl Sargeant's proposals:

Against:

• The Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA)
• The Welsh Conservative Party
• The Welsh Liberal Democrats
• All Independent councillors on Ynys Môn council
• All Plaid Cymru councillors on Ynys Môn council
• At least two of the five Labour councillors on Ynys Môn council
• A clear majority of Ynys Môn's town and community councils
• The former Plaid Cymru National Chair, John Dixon

For:

• Carl Sargeant
• The Welsh Labour Party (presumably, though Labour members in the WLGA unanimously voted against the proposals, as did at least two Labour councillors on Ynys Môn)
• Holyhead Town Council

Those who apparently can't make up their mind even three weeks after Carl Sargeant made his announcement:

• Ieuan Wyn Jones

Crushed: Ynys Môn and Carl Sargeant

Carl Sargeant crushes local democracy on Ynys Môn

Welsh Local Government Minister, Carl Sargeant, will be in Ynys Môn tomorrow to meet with his Commissioners — no doubt to "consult" with them on whether he should do what he has already decided to do anyway, i.e. postpone the Island's local elections for 12 months. This will allow him to ensure that when Ynys Môn residents are finally entrusted to once again exercise their right to vote — a full year after everyone else in Wales — they will vote within rushed through but entirely new boundaries and according to an electoral system which uniquely throughout Wales will be made up of only multi member wards. You see, Mr Sargeant does not like who Anglesey residents have been voting for in the past, therefore his solution for "democratic renewal" is to simply rig the electoral system on Ynys Môn so as to make it exponentially more difficult for those he doesn't like, the Independents, to get elected.

Some defend Mr Sargeant's questionable methods by arguing that it is a price worth paying to get rid of the "rot", forgetting that there are some hard-working, excellent Independent Councillors on one side and some awful Party-affiliated Councillors on the other. Unfortunately the new system will see the former punished and the latter prosper. Mr Sargeant's defenders also forget that the Island's political problems were exponentially exacerbated by the Welsh Government's previous attempt at intervention through the forced appointment of 'local government troubleshooter' David Bowles, who unfortunately did far more harm than good — indeed his highly-paid two year reign as Interim MD led directly to the appointment of the Commissioners themselves. Though to be fair to Mr Bowles at least he only said that the Commissioners should stay until 2012:

"I recommended commissioners should be appointed until elections in 2012, together with investment in democratic renewal."                                                                                     — David Bowles in March, 2011

Accordingly, the genius idea of pursuing "democratic renewal" through (a) postponing actual elections, and (b) reducing the pool of people who will find it possible to get elected is Mr Sargeant's alone. 

In the meantime, between now and when we are eventually allowed to vote again, too many important and irreversible decisions affecting everyone on Anglesey will be made by Commissioners with no democratic legitimacy or accountability. For example, successive administrations on the Island, mindful that Ynys Môn is the poorest region in the UK, have successfully managed to keep Anglesey's council tax amongst the lowest in Wales — now we discover that the Commissioners want to impose a 5% rise in our Council tax next year, quite likely the largest rise in all of Wales. Similarly, Anglesey residents will have no democratic say in what services will be cut next year, or on controversial plans to erect a rash of wind turbines across the Island, and so on and so on until May 2013.

Is this really a price worth paying in order to achieve a sham "democratic renewal" achieved through the dubious means of purposefully manipulating the Island's electoral system?

A curious form of 'Democratic Renewal' (updated)

The Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA) has come out against Carl Sargeant's proposed postponement of Ynys Môn's local elections in May next year. Despite the specific circumstances of the Welsh Government's intervention in Anglesey County Council, the 22 Welsh local authority leaders who attended the WLGA's Co-ordinating Committee last Friday felt it vital that ALL electors throughout Wales, without exception, should have the right to exercise their right to vote. The WLGA will be writing to the Minister accordingly.

Quite right too — it is a curious form of 'democratic renewal' which denies people the right to vote in a timely and normal manner.

UPDATE: Apparently even the Labour group within the WLGA voted against postponing the poll on Ynys Môn  — which is fairly substantial vote of no confidence in Carl Sargeant's actions from within his own Party.

UPDATE 2: The WLGA's letter to Carl Sargeant AM opposing the postponement of local elections on Ynys Môn:
WLGA letter to Carl Sargeant

Anglesey's new electoral map? (Updated)

40 single member wards replaced with 30 multi-member wards, returning 30 councillors
Click to enlarge

The Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales has released their "further review" (after their first effort was scrapped by the Minister) into carving up Ynys Môn — this time into eleven multi-member wards returning a total of 30 councillors. An illustration of how this will change Anglesey's council election map is above. The details are below:

Detailed summary of the proposals
Click to enlarge

These proposals will lead to a reduction in the number of councillors from 40 to 30, resulting in a councillor to electorate ratio of 1:1,649 (up from the current 1:1,237). Considering that seven current councillors (20% of the total) were returned unopposed at the last local elections I am not against a reduction in numbers as this can only improve democracy on the Island, however I would note that a Local Authority of just 30 members would become very vulnerable to being rolled-up within a larger super-authority at some point in the future (e.g. Greater Gwynedd).

What does concern me greatly however is the fact that if these proposals are accepted in their entirety, then Ynys Môn will be the only Local Authority in Wales who's members will be entirely returned by multi-member wards. Why should this be so? Well, because in his direction to the LGBCW, the Local Government Minister Carl Sargeant specifically told them to do so:

Carl Sargeant's specific directions to the Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales

The charitable explanation would be to suppose that Carl Sargeant believes that introducing multi-member wards might help shake certain incumbents out of what could be termed 'rotten boroughs'. The more cynical explanation is to note the eerie similarity between the above direction to the LGBCW for Anglesey, and Welsh Labour's proposals to replace the current arrangements for electing Assembly Members throughout Wales with 30 two-member (i.e. multi-member) constituencies, with all AMs elected first-past-the-post. The Electoral Reform Society had this to say today of those proposals:

...under the system proposed by Labour, the party would have won 11 more seats - 41 instead of 30, giving Labour 70% of the Senedd on 42% of the vote.

 Steve Brooks, Wales director of the Electoral Reform Society, said: "While this may be good news for aspiring Labour candidates, it's bad news for Welsh voters.

  "Two member first-fast-the-post would rob thousands of voters of a choice and voice." 

He said the Conservatives, Plaid Cymru and the Liberal Democrats would have less than a third of seats, despite getting more than half the votes in May.

"That would be damaging for democracy and damaging for devolution"

Anyway, the full report from the Local Government Boundary Commission is below. Members of the public have up until January 3rd to have their say, and can do so by emailing: lgbc.wales@wales.gsi.gov.uk

UPDATE: John Dixon, respected former Chair of Plaid Cymru, has just written the following regarding Carl Sargeant's decision to force an entirely new and different electoral system on just Ynys Môn:

"But is it right to have a different approach in one council area from that being implemente deverywhere else, where the main reason for that difference appears to be to facilitate the election of different people? There is no doubt in my mind that the Minister has acted in accordance with the powers conferred upon him, because those powers don’t seem to require that he provides any reason or argument for adopting a different approach in one area, or place any constraints on what considerations he might apply.
And that’s where my concern lies.  There is a dangerous precedent here, under which the Minister has directly interfered in the work of the boundary commission to instruct them to take a particular approach in Ynys Môn,largely because he doesn’t like the result of the elections there.  I don’t like them either – but I’m simply not convinced that rigging the electoral system is the right way to deal with that problem. "

Isle of Anglesey Further Draft Proposals e

Changing Allegiances? (updated)

In his statement to the Senedd on Wednesday, Carl Sargeant made a great deal of how Commissioners were necessary because Anglesey Council was unstable due to Councillors changing groups in order to support the latest plots. His exact words were:

 "...the membership of political groups changes on a whim, as members back or oppose the latest plot.  In the last 18 months, around a third of all councillors have changed their allegiance between various groups at least once, with scarcely any attempt to justify their actions to those they represent.  Imagine the uproar if 20 AMs or 215 MPs did so."  

Today's Western Mail unquestioningly repeats this 'fact' in painting the antics at Anglesey Council as the "ugliest example of cynical politics". However the truth is that a third of councillors (i.e. 13 members) have not changed allegiance – and not a single one has done so more than once as claimed by Sargeant. Furthermore the single largest change of allegiance came about in June 2010 when WAG appointee David Bowles himself engineered the split of the Original Independents by encouraging Clive McGregor to form his four man Llais i Fôn group.

Since then Llais i Fôn was bolstered by one more member following the Rhosneigr by-election – but that surely doesn't count as a member changing allegiance.

More recently another member of the Original Independents was coaxed to leave the Independents by both David Bowles and Clive McGregor, though its unclear whether he is now a member of Llais i Fôn or just unaffiliated left of his own free will to become an unaffiliated councillor due to disillusionment with the direction taken by the group [Updated 19 Mar @22:15 following contact from the Councillor in question]

One member of the Menai Group left to become unaffiliated several months ago. That was certainly not in order to support any "plot".

And finally the three members of Anglesey Forward/Môn Ymlaen joined the Original Independents at the beginning of this year.

That makes a total of just nine 'changes of allegiance', the majority of which were instigated by and supported by WAG appointee David Bowles. Why does WAG feel it needs to embellish the truth in order to justify suspending local democracy and sending in the Commissioners?

Carl Sargeant's Statement on Ynys Môn in full

Mr Llywydd, I would like to make a statement about the future of the Isle of Anglesey County Council, and about the actions I am taking following the Auditor General’s re-inspection of it, which he reported today.

Last month I made a written statement to the Assembly which described the situation within the Council following Brian Gibbons’ intervention in 2009.  That intervention tried to help the Council help itself, with the support of a high-calibre Recovery Board and a Managing Director with a strong track record in corporate recovery.

That yielded some progress.  But the basic problem remains.  There are too many Anglesey councillors who are more concerned with pursuing their own advantage than with delivering for the island.  The pervasive political culture puts making and breaking political deals ahead of the needs of Anglesey’s citizens.

That makes the Council critically unstable.  As soon as any administration takes office, its rivals start plotting to undermine or supplant it.  There is and can be no trust, no consistency and no stability.  And that means the people of Anglesey can have no confidence in their elected representatives, or hold them effectively to account.

As a result, the membership of political groups changes on a whim, as members back or oppose the latest plot.  In the last 18 months, around a third of all councillors have changed their allegiance between various groups at least once, with scarcely any attempt to justify their actions to those they represent.  Imagine the uproar if 20 AMs or 215 MPs did so.

To compound the problem, a high proportion of councillors are not opposed at election time: they are repeatedly returned by default, because no-one stands against them.  That might be testament to their local influence, but it is not democratic.  It means the members concerned feel immune from challenge and can behave as they please.  They do not need to be accountable to those who elected them, because no-one elected them.  It also means that Anglesey has one of the worst gender imbalances anywhere – only 2 out of 40 councillors are women.

I accept that in politics different allegiances are often formed, usually in order to bring stability to an elected body.

But this persistent instability, shifting loyalties in pursuit of personal advantage and neglect of the public good cannot continue.   It is not democracy – it is the politics of the playground.

It would be wrong to tar all councillors with the same brush.  I know that some are fully committed to change and recovery, and have tried to take a stand.  But they are too few, and their approach does not seem to have any chance of prevailing.  Equally, there may be many who would prefer things to change but feel unable to act.  As my Recovery Board put it, if there is a silent majority which supports recovery, it is still largely silent.  That is not good enough.

The people of Anglesey will know better than me that the island faces some severe challenges.  It is one of the most isolated parts of Wales, with high levels of deprivation in both urban and rural areas.  It has suffered from very significant job losses in recent years as major employers have collapsed or left the island.   The population is ageing and declining, causing serious over-capacity in some of the Council’s services. The current financial climate will present a huge challenge in protecting the frontline services residents need. I will require responsible and decisive action from the council.

 The potential development of Wylfa B may offer an opportunity to address some of these problems, but it is an opportunity that needs to be pursued sensibly and strategically.  This has been very difficult given the large number of changes within the executive.  The constant changes in portfolio holders  responsible for driving this forward in the last few years and presents a damaging impression of the council’s credibility in leading this major inward investment.

Enough is enough.  I have been more than patient in giving the Council a chance to sort things out itself.  I have been more than generous in providing them with the support to do so.  But it is clear that these councillors are unwilling to accept the responsibilities that their public office requires and instead wish to continue acting in a way which is destructive and dangerous to the future of Anglesey and its citizens.
I am not prepared to continue in this way.  I will therefore be bringing our current intervention to an end that sought in vain to support the Council to resolve its own problems.  Despite that, I would like to thank my Recovery Board for the very considerable efforts they have made.  They have been instrumental in the progress the Council has made over the past 18 months and it is with the greatest regret that I have to conclude that their current role is largely over. It is unfortunate that even the valuable advice, commitment and dedication of seven very high-calibre individuals has not moved the Council forward in key areas, which underlines the need for a stronger intervention.   I am very pleased that the Board has agreed to lend its very considerable knowledge and expertise to help us move to that new intervention.

I am therefore giving a further and much more stringent direction to the Council, effective immediately.  It will bring stability to the council’s politics, ensure consistency in strategic decision-making and protect front-line services.   The main terms of that direction will be as follows.

Firstly, I accept the Auditor General’s recommendation that I should appoint Commissioners to run the Council.  They will assume all of the functions of the Council’s executive.  The Commissioners will be scrutinised by the Council and its committees in the same way as the executive is now.

I am pleased to announce that I have appointed 2 commissioners to exercise the Council’s executive functions on my behalf. They are:

◦ Mr Byron Davies - former Chief Executive of Cardiff County Council;
◦ Mr Alex Aldridge – former Leader of Flintshire County Council and the Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA)

I intend to appoint Mr Mick Giannasi - current Chief Constable of Gwent Police after his retirement from the Police Service at the end of the month.  I also plan to appoint a further two commissioners shortly, and will announce their names as soon as possible.

Secondly, last month I commended the Council’s staff for continuing to provide services in the most difficult of circumstances.  That has to continue, and the existing delegations to the Council’s officers will remain in place.

Thirdly, I will retain the power to appoint the Council’s chief executive.  I will also withdraw from the Council the power to appoint other statutory officers concerned with corporate governance – the monitoring officer and the chief finance officer.  It is vital that these posts are occupied by high-calibre individuals who are immune from attack by members.  It is equally vital that the council pays heed to their advice.  So I am also directing that any decision of the Council or its committees which goes against the advice of statutory officers must be referred to the Commissioners for confirmation or overruling.
The Auditor General also recommended that I should consider instigate a review of electoral boundaries on the island As an alternative, he suggested that I should direct the Council to hold a referendum on an elected Mayor, and that I should consider directing the Council to develop and implement a strategy that promotes democratic renewal.

I will be immediately instructing the Local Government Boundary Commission to undertake a review of the electoral boundaries of the Authority and will be considering what action can be taken to support democratic renewal.

  
I also agree fully with the Auditor General and with my Recovery Board that a wider programme of democratic renewal is absolutely essential on the island.  More people need to stand for election, and Council politics needs a much greater focus on delivering for citizens. I will be writing to the Electoral Commission to ask them to be involved in this work.

In light of the reduced role of councillors within the Authority which will be brought about by my directions, I will be asking the Independent Remuneration Panel to conduct a review of the allowances of councillors in the Authority with a view to them reflecting their diminished roles.   I will be writing to them immediately to ask them to undertake this work.

The actions I am outlining today are not decisions that any Minister can take lightly.  Indeed, they are decisions that I can only take with a profound sense of sadness.  I would much prefer to trust local authorities and their members to discharge their considerable public responsibilities effectively, accountably and conscientiously.   Virtually all of them do.  But where they do not, we have no alternative but to act.

When I addressed the Council a year ago I said that I didn’t want to be there under those terms.  I didn’t want to be intervening in their affairs.  And I didn’t want to be spending large sums of public money on helping them to recover.  I offered them a simple challenge: sort yourselves out, act responsibly for the people you represent and we will leave you alone.   It is a challenge that they have clearly failed to meet.
Mr Llywydd, the actions and attitudes of too many of Anglesey’s councillors have indeed left me with no alternative.   They have demonstrated that they care more about their personal standing than about securing recovery.  They have spurned the chance to help themselves which Brian Gibbons gave to them with his original intervention, and the intensive support which they have received as a result.  Most importantly, they have betrayed those who elected them, and those that they are supposed to serve.
The direction I am making today will help restore effective governance; it will ensure better strategic leadership; and it will protect vital services from the damage that continued petty political bickering causes.   I intend that it will continue at least until the next local elections.   But it is clearly not a long-term solution.   That can only lie in the sort of democratic renewal that the Auditor General and my Recovery Board have advocated.  So if Anglesey Council has a future, it is in the hands of the people of the island.  All I have done today is to protect them for now from the harmful influence of those who have unfortunately consistently let them down.   The people of Angelsey deserve better and this action intends to see that they get it.

IWJ: Words versus Deeds

Tucked away on page 20 of yesterday's Daily Post was a (somewhat long) Op Ed by Ieuan Wyn Jones setting out his position on the future of Anglesey County Council. I welcome that in response to some prodding in the press he has finally come out and explained his position, the essence if it being that although he feels "further intervention in the workings of the council is ... inevitable", he does not believe that "we have yet reached the position that the best interests of the council or the people of Anglesey would be served by the complete withdrawal of powers from elected councillors and the appointment of commissioners". However most importantly Ieuan Wyn Jones unequivocally states that he does "oppose a merger between Ynys Môn and Gwynedd, since it would not be in the best interests of either council". He has been very clear in words, but lets see if he will also follow through with action.

As it happens the new report on Anglesey Council by the Auditor General will be completed shortly and passed to WAG Local Government minister, Carl Sargeant. We don't know what it will say, but its possible that it could recommend that the problems at Ynys Môn are so intractable that a merger with a neighbouring authority should be looked into. That would be convenient for Sargeant as just next week the WAG Local Government Measure -- which currently includes the controversial powers to forcefully amalgamate local authorities -- will be debated by AMs again. An independent report from the Auditor General recommending the merging of Ynys Môn and Gwynedd would be useful ammunition for Carl Sargeant. The Conservatives and Lib Dems however are pledged to oppose the powers which would allow WAG to force council mergers -- therefore Carl Sargeant will only be able to get it passed if Plaid Cymru AMs support it.

If Ieuan Wyn Jones truly believes that Ynys Môn and Gwynedd should not be merged, will he instruct his AMs not to support this part of the Measure? That will be the true test of his commitment to preserve Ynys Môn.

£128,466.59 (updated)

According to this FOI request, that's how much in total the Anglesey Recovery Board has cost the public purse to date.

What have we had in return for £128,466.59?

Well, we've got the seven reports from the Recovery Board to the WAG Local Government Minister which they have made public here. That works out at just under £20K a report then.

(Incidentally, according to its terms of reference the Recovery Board is obliged to produce a report to the Minister after each of its meetings. Why then, you might ask, have no new reports been produced since last July despite the board having met on 15th September, 8th December and most recently on the 31st January? Well, according to this FOI reply, they didn't bother in September as the Minister attended their meeting (therefore there is no need for any public record apparently). They also didn't bother for the December meeting. Why? Because of, and I quote, "the proximity of Christmas"...)

What else have we got? Well apparently not much because, as you know, despite Plaid Cymru and Labour in Cardiff Bay having spent £128K on the Recovery Board and a further £270K a year on an interim MD, the recovery has stalled and the auditors have been sent in, again.

In conclusion: plenty of public money has been spent but we are back to square one. Its like déjà vu all over again.

UPDATE: To further underline the failure of WAG to turn around Anglesey Council, Gwynedd Council have today announced that they are suspending their involvement in the scoping study imposed by Carl Sargeant in December to find areas where Anglesey and Gwynedd councils can cooperate.

Harry Thomas, the Chief Exec of Gwynedd, is quoted in the Daily Post as saying:

“Since Gwynedd Council agreed to the Minister’s request in December 2010, Anglesey Council has experienced considerable political turmoil which has created uncertainty regarding its future political leadership.”
He added: “Such a climate of instability and uncertainty is not conducive to successful large-scale collaboration. Gwynedd Council has consequently had to reconsider its position.
“Despite these developments, Gwynedd Council will continue to work with Anglesey to explore smaller scale, specific collaborative opportunities providing the benefits substantially outweigh the risks.”

McGregor to Sargeant: "I do not believe that investing further money in the recovery process is justified"

A Freedom of Information request has now elicited the below letter which the Leader of Anglesey County Council, Cllr Clive McGregor, sent to Carl Sargeant, WAG Minister for Local Government, on January 24th -- the day he sacked two group Leaders from the Executive:

(NB: the names have been removed)24 Jan 11 CMcG to CS

IWJ and Sargeant: no communication, no trust

Anglesey County Council Leader, Clive McGregor, has released the below statement setting out in considerable detail his side of the story.

Much of it is familiar, but for me the most striking revelation is how little Ieuan Wyn Jones and his WAG coalition partner Carl Sargeant must communicate with or trust each other. According to Clive's document both Ieuan Wyn Jones and Albert Owen sanctioned the new 30 member coalition (comprising of Labour, Plaid, Original Independents, and Menai Group -- and excluding Clive's Llais i Fôn group) which was announced last week. However it was the very formation of this coalition which was the impetus for Carl Sargeant to call for an immediate and emergency audit by the Wales Audit Office.

Is there no communication whatsoever between Ieuan Wyn Jones and Carl Sargeant? It is farcical for the WAG Deputy First Minister to "approve" a coalition and then for the WAG Local Government Minister to immediately veto it. Utter shambles.

Read the whole document below:
Clive McGregor Press Release1

++ WAG makes urgent statement on Anglesey Council ++ (updated)

110217angleseyen

UPDATE: David Bowles' press release concerning Carl Sargeant's statement is below:

MINISTER CONSIDERS MORE STRINGENT INTERVENTION

The Minister for Social Justice and Local Government, Carl Sargeant, in
a written statement issued today, whilst praising staff, says that
Anglesey County Council’s political problems have not gone away.

He has now instructed the Auditor General to conduct an urgent
re-inspection of the Authority to help him consider ‘a new and more
stringent form of intervention’.

Anglesey’s Interim Managing Director, David Bowles, said “I agree
entirely with the Minister’s assessment of the County Council’s
current political predicament.  This is fundamentally an issue about the
personal values, conduct and behaviours of individual members entrusted
with £150m of public money.  Unfortunately in spite of very extensive
development, support and very blunt advice the majority continue to let
the people of Anglesey down.”

“The Minister has himself pointed to hollow assurances given by some
members to the Recovery Board. Unfortunately, this has been my
experience of how some councillors operate in Anglesey with no less than
five reneging on their own signatures on written undertakings and
agreement. I was appalled at the latest so called new alliances in order
to allegedly take this Authority ‘forward’. This formation has
completely ignored advice that I have given and goes against the
principles of good governance, as demanded by the Minister. It is no
more than a desperate attempt to try to prevent something more dramatic
happening rather than face up to and solve the Council’s long standing
political problems. Shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic is no
solution.”

Mr Bowles continued, “How can inward investors, other Councils or
partners have any confidence in dealing with a Council dominated by a
number of unprincipled politicians who have a reputation for hollow
promises. There are some members here who have had the moral courage to
make a difference.  One hopes that there is a silent majority who at
some time will stand up to be counted and join them but I fear time has
run out.

“The population of Anglesey and its 3,000 strong workforce are
entitled to expect better of their elected representatives, who cost the
taxpayer in excess of £800,000 a year. Staff here genuinely feel that
they are the ones who will pay the price for political turmoil and
political failure by loss of jobs as a result of a possible merger with
Gwynedd and that clearly is not acceptable. It is the councillors who
should seriously consider their positions.”

“I’m very mindful, however, that in spite of everything they
endure Anglesey’s staff continue to provide good services. This was
recognised in a recent Wales Audit Office report, which praised the
commitment and dedication of a workforce which has been let down by its
elected representatives.  I hope the public recognise and praise our
staff who deliver good services day in and day out.”

David Bowles concluded, “Members have lost the trust of our staff;
they clearly have a long way to go to regain the confidence of the
Minister.”

Carl Sargeant to Anglesey Council: you're in the "definitely the last chance and this time I'm serious" Saloon

Yesterday David Bowles circulated the below letter from WAG Local Government Minister, Carl Sargeant, to all councillors. Writing about the recent sackings of John Chorlton and Hefin Thomas, Sargeant notes that this could "easily destabilise the Council's recovery" and "indicates that the issues [the] Council has had in the past in relation to internal disputes and personal rivalries have still not gone away".

In response Sargeant has asked the Recovery Board to give "an urgent and frank evaluation of the actual progress of [the] Council over the past 18 months and the possibility of [it] achieving a sustainable recovery" -- which is what presumably the Recovery Board's meeting with David Bowles on Monday in Treaddur Bay was all about. If the Board feels that a recovery is unlikely Sargeant warns he will take "further decisive action" which will have "grave implications for the Council as currently constituted". As this letter was written on 27th January -- the day after he forced through last minute amendments to the WAG Local Government Measure allowing for the amalgamation of "two or three" Local Authorities --  this clearly means that WAG will pursue the forced merger of Anglesey and Gwynedd councils if recovery cannot be achieved.

So what do we have to show for 18 well-paid, expensive months of David Bowles and the Recovery Board? Clive McGregor started off with a coalition of 27 councillors as head of a coalition of Original Independents and Plaid Cymru. That was reduced down to a coalition of 20 following the "coup" in June when the Original Independents were split and a new coalition was formed between Llais i Fôn, Plaid Cymru, Labour and the Menai Group. Those numbers have eroded gradually over time as Keith Evans left the Menai Group and, lets be honest, some Plaid Cymru members never really had their heart in it anyway as they refused to sign the Terms of Engagement. Clive's recent sacking of John Chorlton and Hefin Thomas from the executive (but not from the Alliance) means that their actual number of supporters is now well below a majority level -- which almost guarantees the kind of conflict we are now seeing. In response Ieuan Wyn Jones and Albert Owen, having belatedly woken up to the problems at the Council, have tried to engineer an Alliance between Labour and Plaid Cymru with either Bob Parry or John Chorlton as Leader -- they then seemed surprised that the Independents, who between them have a majority, do not see why they should have a Leader and Deputy forced on them from a Labour and Plaid alliance that anyway only has 13 members... It appears we have mostly been going backwards not forwards on the political front over the last 18 months.

Anyway, one thing is clear: if Councillors do not wish to see their numbers dramatically reduced as part of a forced merger with Gwynedd Council -- which will also have severe consequences for both Anglesey County Council employees and Anglesey residents -- then now is the time for them to put the greater good of Ynys Môn ahead of all other considerations. Past grievances must be put aside and all councillors must find a way to work together and show that Ynys Môn as a unitary authority is worth saving. 
Carl Sargeant Letter

Quote of the Day

A senior councillor's reply today when I asked whether the conclusions of Monday's Recovery Board away day meeting with David Bowles at Treaddur Bay were known yet:

"What do I know? I'm just a county councillor..."

So we're all still in the dark then. One thing does seem clear though: with each day that passes the likelihood of the commissioners being sent in seems to be diminishing (touch wood). So much for Carl Sargeant's stern warning eleven months ago that Anglesey County Council was in the "Last Chance Saloon"...

WAG reaches for powers to forcibly merge Ynys Môn and Gwynedd

According to the BBC, the Welsh Assembly Government DID table several last minute amendments last night to the Local Government Measure which would allow WAG Ministers to forcibly merge councils, notably Ynys Môn and Gwynedd:

"The future of the troubled Anglesey Council is in doubt following new legal steps in the assembly.

Late amendments to the Local Government Measure would allow ministers to force councils to merge.

It is thought the island council - already with its management under special measures - faces a merger with nearby Gwynedd

Local Government Minister Carl Sargeant told AMs on Wednesday he had ruled out wide-scale mergers.

But he said it was his duty to 'step up to the mark' in the case of failing authorities to 'do something about them'.

His comments will strengthen speculation that an announcement about the future of Anglesey council will be made in the near future."

More to follow.

UPDATE: The Anglesey Telegraph has a great story about our councillors falling out live on BBC Radio Cymru this afternoon. Read it here.

Carl Sargeant: conspicuously not coming to Ynys Môn

Despite the WAG Local Government Minister Carl Sargeant visiting Gwynedd tomorrow he will be conspicuously NOT crossing the straits. Not to worry, I hear that a number of Anglesey councillors will be crossing the bridge to see him instead. One of them apparently will have a list of 22 names in his pocket -- all of whom are willing to take over from the currently daily diminishing minority alliance and form a new administration. Will this make any difference -- or has the Minister already made up his mind to send in the Commissioners? The fact that he attempted and failed today to include last minute amendments to the Local Government Measure currently going through the Assembly which would allow him to order the merger of councils by diktat suggests that his mind is already made.

My personal view is that any merger with Gwynedd (and now I am hearing that Conwy may also be in the mix too) would be disastrous financially for Ynys Môn for the following reasons:

• Gwynedd Council currently has to find savings over the next few years of approx. £28.8 million, compared to 'just' £10 million at Ynys Môn (Conwy must find £21.9 million). A fully merged council would see these cuts shared between both councils. We have already seen something similar with the amalgamation of Local Health Boards across North Wales to create the Betsi Cadwalladr University Health Board. This led to the red ink at Glanclwyd and Maelor hospitals being shared throughout the region thus causing cuts at previously fiscally well managed Ysbyty Gwynedd. 
• Average Council Tax is much higher in Gwynedd than Ynys Môn and a harmonisation of rates would undoubtedly result in a large rise in Anglesey (Average Band D council rates in Ynys Môn are £825.30 compared to £960.79 in Gwynedd -- a difference of £135).
• Anglesey County Council has the second largest estate of small holdings in Wales. These are valuable assets which a cash strapped Gwynedd would seek to disperse in order to reduce their own financial problems.
• Gwynedd Council has 75 councillors compared to just 40 in Ynys Môn. This imbalance would ensure that the merged council would operate in the best interests of Gwynedd not Ynys Môn.
• Gwynedd Council is dominated by Plaid Cymru (36 Plaid Cymru members out of 75 councillors) meaning a merger would lead to Plaid Cymru dominating both councils (in Ynys Ynys Môn there are currently only 8 Plaid Cymru members out of 40). As Plaid Cymru are completely opposed to nuclear energy a potential merger would not be a helpful development at this crucial stage in Horizon's decision making process regarding Wylfa B.