Guest Blog: The Decline and Fall of Plaid Cymru in Four Acts

During better times in Act 1 and before the
Llanwnda scene in Act 3.

Now that the dust has settled on this weeks local elections, one of the most revealing and largely unreported vignettes from polling day was the re-election of Aeron Jones, a Llais Gwynedd councillor, to Llanwnda despite an energetic campaign led by Plaid Cymru 'royalty' Dafydd Iwan and Dafydd Wigley to unseat him. Llanwnda was just one example of the declining support Plaid is currently experiencing in its Gwynedd heartlands. On a larger scale, at a time when the personal ratings of the leaders of the Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems are all in negative figures and at an all time low, why wasn't a party like Plaid Cymru able to capitalise on the general dismay with politics-as-usual?

Here in a Guest Post, a seasoned and anonymous veteran of local politics in Gwynedd and beyond charts the decline and fall of Plaid Cymru in Four Acts.

----------------

YMLAEN! YN OL. I LAWR.

Last Thursday 10 million people voted in an election of 15,000 candidates contesting nearly 5,000 wards across England, Wales and Scotland. The eyes of most commentators, as ever, were drawn to London and a reaction from No 10 – or here in Wales, to events in Cardiff. It is understandable that with 70% of the population in Wales living within 60 minutes of the capital this will happen. But the latest unreported episode of a story with real significance for Wales unfolded in Gwynedd: the drama in four parts which depicts the rise and fall of Plaid Cymru is now moving into its final Act.

ACT I: SMALL BEGINNINGS

Act I saw the formation of Plaid broadly in response to poor governance and threats to our Welsh nation-hood and culture – especially our language. Even today the constitution reflects this, promising to secure social justice, equality, a bi-lingual society and nation-hood. Some 90 years later, in part through their actions and voice, the Welsh Language enjoys protection and promotion from an Act of Parliament and Wales has its own Assembly with some significant devolved powers. Many regard this progress as a success (many do not – both as too little and too much, but that is not the point of this piece). 

However, these achievements have presented Plaid with two big questions over its identity. The first is simple: what do they stand for now? Polling on support for Welsh autonomy barely moves into double figures who favour separation from the UK. This removes nationhood as a serious campaign platform for any Party with national ambition. We might compare it perhaps to the status of UKIP campaigning on withdrawal from the EU – irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the issue, the largest amount of voters just don’t care enough. 

The second question is raised by the fact that both of these achievements came through mainstream UK parties. It was a Conservative government, moved by Conservative MP for Bangor and Conwy, Wyn Roberts, who introduced the Welsh Language Act. Labour introduced the Assembly. Once again, this defines Plaid in the role of cheerleader and agitator. It is a sobering truth that having secured an Assembly for Wales (albeit by the narrowest of margins in a national referendum), the closest Plaid have come to power is brief tolerance by a grateful Labour administration that they propped up for four years. 

Which brings us to Act II of this period that Plaid shared power in the Assembly.

ACT II: POWER AND GOVERNMENT

This is a short Act and not a very happy one. Not just for the period of time it represents – just one term out of four so far – but for another reason. A big, awkward, question that won’t go away and can never be hidden from anyone who wants to know the answer.

Can anyone think what was achieved during that time? 

What did having Ieuan Wyn as Anglesey’s representative (for a quarter of a century), the Deputy Leader of the Assembly, and Plaid’s own Party Leader achieve for Mon man? What vision was shown, what benefits gained, what resources were wrestled from the outstretched hands of a populous, needy, South? What evidence is there of strong local leadership and careful investment for the future wellbeing of Anglesey and its residents? An airline. A failing local authority. And the lowest GVA of any county in the UK. 

To be fair, this is to ask a lot of both IWJ and Plaid. But for the LibDems inability to organise themselves, it might have been a rainbow coalition against Labour. After eight years, people were already well aware of their failures. The Daily Post and Western Mail both ran big spreads on the 10 year anniversary of the Assembly, reviewing progress, celebrating achievements and asking people what the Assembly had done for them and for Wales. How had the billions of pounds spent made a difference to them? The answers? Bus passes and free prescriptions. I can only imagine the discussion in the Editors’ offices. The stark and simple truth is that under a Labour led Assembly, Wales has plummeted down international rankings for economic competitiveness. Worse still, under the management of our own Assembly, outcomes in health, education and more are now worse than our nearest neighbour, England. In the Welsh valleys we have managed to cultivate some of the most impoverished places in the UK. 

ACT III: A NEW DAWN

At this point of the play we are ready for the entry of a charismatic figure to herald a new dawn and lead the oppressed out of gloom into sunlit uplands. 

To say that Leanne’s election as leader was a “surprise” is not strictly true. Her cry of “Ymlaen!” and her ability to mobilise young people invigorated the Party membership and boosted its numbers. However politics and the fortune of nations turn on wider support. As a federalist and an avowed Marxist she occupies two of the smaller constituencies from which to build a majority. “Outflanking Labour from the left” is not a credible political strategy and the warm endorsement of the Welsh Communist Party will not feature on the Party’s letterhead. 

And so the to the Leader’s first test in battle. Setting the broad paint brush of strategy aside, could the finer brush strokes of local elections on local issues prove this analysis wrong? Would the devil be in the detail? Could personal politics and the handfuls of votes cast in remote, rural polling stations demonstrate a deeper connection and broader appeal to Welsh citizens? Could she reach good, honest, hard working Welsh folk, wanting a bit of help for their families in touch times, hoping for a lift in the local economy? Would she win the support of those proud to be Welsh and proud to vote for the “Party of Wales” in a local election? 

The results suggest otherwise. Plaid it could be argued, held its own. Indeed it remains the majority party in several counties. Net gains/losses might suggest little movement. But in truth, it failed. This was a huge setback. When dissatisfaction was deepest, hopes were highest, the simple truth is that by midnight on May 4th not a single Welsh council is run by Plaid. Anglesey of course had no election and only Labour can claim success and gains. The independents and NOC (“no overall control”) continue to be a big player in Welsh local politics. However, it is in Gwynedd that we see the true reflection of the demise of Plaid.

Back in 1925, Gwynedd was the birthplace of Plaid Cymru. Today some two-thirds of residents are first language Welsh speakers. If not Leanne’s personal politics then surely this is the safe ground from which a movement could be rebuilt?

In truth, this has not been safe ground for Plaid for years. Llais Gwynedd is a story worth telling but better told by others. However, what was dismissed as a narrow, single interest group that sang songs on the steps of Cyngor Gwynedd Council in protest at the closure of rural village primary schools has turned into a stone in the shoe of Plaid Cymru. The harder they stamp, the more it hurts them.

The 2010 general Election in Gwynedd heartlands also revealed the wobble in Plaid’s support base. Hopes for a “magnificent seven” seats in the UK parliament were revealed as baseless and they did well to hang on to the three they had, including the new Arfon seat. With proposed boundary changes we may never know what could happen in Arfon’s boundaries over time, but the general election was dominated by a two prong tactical pinch: voters calculated who was most likely to beat Plaid in Caernarfon and who was most likely to beat Labour in Bangor. Plaid’s majority tumbled. Labour came within touching distance. The Conservative vote grew dramatically, through the middle, a local candidate drawing on dissatisfaction with both and memories of the effective Lord Roberts.

Plaid’s majority on Gwynedd Council – never the strongest and always under threat – is now gone. Its hopes for a majority reduced to the outcome of a by-election in a ward where neither they (nor any other Party) could manage to raise a candidate. This is as damning an indictment of local political governance in Gwynedd as any economic statistic. Seasoned Gwynedd watchers will also know this is not an isolated event. Several more urban wards were decided on less than a few hundred votes cast.

And what of the fight itself? In Llanwnda, a leading Llais figure was targeted by Plaid. They rolled out their local man and an intensive campaign, blessed by the aging, but iconic Dafydd Iwan as Agent and Lord Dafydd Wigley as canvasser-in-chief. To no avail, as the result was an increase in the Llais majority.

In Deiniolen a long serving, senior Plaid Councillor very active in the Gwynedd administration was defeated by a local independent who was “well liked” in the village. The Plaid candidate's list of activity, every Chairmanship and senior position held filled a side of paper. The independent noted that he lived with his parents and enjoyed playing snooker in the evenings.

Bethel ward was perhaps the biggest shock, lost to the diligent work of an active Labour candidate.

ACT IV: AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE

So the “narrative arc” of our drama comes full circle and Act IV has returned us to where the story started. We all care deeply for Wales and things Welsh. I am the first to acknowledge the importance of a Party built on national interest and the preservation of language and culture. These are valid perspectives and vital – in its truest meaning, they are “essential for life” for Wales.

From its humble origins “Y Mudiad Cymreig” (the Welsh Movement) has made huge gains and left a permanent and proud mark on Welsh politics. But the high water mark has been reached and that tide is now running out. With just one Welsh EU seat, less than one-tenth of Welsh Parliamentary seats, one-sixth of local government and Assembly seats, Plaid may always have a proud voice. But it has not proved its ability to govern and by overlooking leaders with the potential to influence and appeal beyond the Party, not just within, it has settled for the Opposition benches. The results confirm this.

This Act is still being written, but it appears the plot line is set. The inconvenient truth is that gains we have in Wales have come from mainstream parties. Not English parties, but Welsh. Voted for by Welsh people.

One way or another, mainstream politics and parties are the future in Wales. We must grapple with their agendas to secure the best deal for Wales.

For all our sakes, the debate must move now towards the damage done by a fourteen year experiment in socialist politics here in Wales. In Anglesey alone the loss of aluminium production and power generation goes beyond metaphors such as “asleep at the wheel”. We still rely on Objective 1 EU funding, seemingly locked into deprivation and dependency.

Plaid does not have an answer and as a result, is rapidly losing its relevance and meaning to those who should care the most.

And “most” is what is counted in politics.

£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.”

The nuts and bolts of a merger with Gwynedd

In order to throw a little light on what exactly is behind the rumours that the Welsh Assembly Government is looking to merge Ynys Môn with Gwynedd, lets take a look at the actual last minute WAG amendments to the Local Government Measure which have sparked these stories. They have now been published (and are attached in full below this post) but this is the key passage:

"Welsh Ministers may, if they are satisfied that it is necessary to achieve effective local government, make an order ("an amalgamation order") for the constitution of a new local government area by amalgamating two or three local government areas."

The amendment goes on to stipulate that, before using the amalgamation powers, Welsh Ministers must be satisfied that local authorities have not achieved sufficient collaborative arrangements. However, although these powers are intended to be a last resort measure, it does look as though WAG Ministers will be able to amalgamate two or three local authorities where they feel it is necessary -- without, it seems, the need for any consultation.

There had been some questions about whether these amendments were legal as they were seen to significantly change the purpose of the Measure as it was originally tabled. However the legislation office and the Presiding Officer have ruled that they are within "the general principles" of the Measure and therefore it appears that WAG's intention is that they should be voted on next Wednesday (2 February) in Legislation Committee No. 3's meeting.

It is worth noticing that WAG has a majority in both the Committee and Plenary, so unless Plaid Cymru were to rebel, there is little chance of these amendments being blocked.

With regards to a timescale when these Measures would be implemented, it would not be for some time. The Local Government Measure still has to go through a third stage of having amendments tabled and voted on in Plenary, a fourth stage of the Measure being passed by the National Assembly, and a final stage of receiving Royal approval -- which will take several months. Even after that, the Minister would (should his amendments be approved in their current form) have to produce an amalgamation order which again could take some time.

Given the limited legislative time left in the Assembly (it will be dissolved in April prior to the election), it is unlikely that the Minister will be able to use any of these powers before May -- even if the Local Government Measure receives Royal Approval before then. Therefore, although these amendments will be voted on next week, there will be no immediate changes, and it is by no means certain that they will become law before the elections in May.

Who knows what will happen after May though...

UPDATE: The Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA) leader, John Davies, has slammed WAG's handling of these amendments:

WLGA leader John Davies said publishing amendments "at the eleventh minute of the eleventh hour does fundamentally call into question the effective scrutiny of such an important piece of legislation both within the assembly and by stakeholders".

He welcomed [WAG Local Government Minster Carl Sargeant's] assurance that the amendment does not pave the way towards a wholesale reorganisation of local government.

Mr Davies added: "While this provides reassurance, it does bring into question why this did not form part of the extensive 18-month policy debate and evidence gathering sessions on the [Local Government] measure that have been undertaken within the assembly on which the WLGA were asked to give evidence.

"Clearly this is not only a matter for the WLGA but for assembly members who from recent headlines have also expressed a significant measure of dissatisfaction in this process.

"It is concerning that legislation as fundamental as the future structure of authorities can be done without scrutiny and wider engagement or consultation."

Ammendments Local Government Measure

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.

Not with a bang but with a whimper...

All Anglesey Councillors have this afternoon received an email from the secretary of Elan Closs Stephens, Chair of the Recovery Board, to inform them that the planned governance workshop scheduled for next Monday in the Treaddur Bay Hotel has been cancelled. Normally that wouldn't mean very much, but after yesterday's sackings and the last minute amendments to the WAG Local Government Measure possibly designed to bring about the merger of Anglesey and Gwynedd being reported by the BBC, it looks like this cancellation is prima facie evidence that the Council is to be suspended.

If it is all over for Anglesey County Council, let us all remember that we have reached this point at this particular time for no good reason other than petty politicking by people wanting to become Leader, and with no plan or manifesto of what they would do differently if they did obtain that position. 

"This is the way the world ends

Not with a bang but a whimper."

                                  - The Hollow Men, T.S. Eliot

What next for Anglesey County Council?

Despite the sacking of Labour leader, John Chorlton, from the executive it is far from clear yet whether the Labour group itself will withdraw its support from the Alliance. Indeed it appears that John Chorlton's portfolio of Planning and Environment has been offered to another Labour councillor. With the budget yet to be finalised and a host of other important decisions just down the road, Labour now have the messy business of deciding whether to act in the best interests of the Island, or to continue to support a leader who has been sacked for apparently trying to undermine Council Leader, Clive McGregor.

Having said that, even if remaining Labour members continue to support it can the minority ruling alliance now limp on like this until the Council AGM in May? Will perhaps the Original Independents step in? The events of the next few days will be crucial in determining what David Bowles and Elan Closs Stevens will recommend to the Minister in Cardiff.

So what happens if they decide that the "recovery" has irrevocably broken down? Following WAG's instructions last month for Ynys Môn and Gwynedd to "cooperate" together, the simplest way forward for WAG would be to proceed with a full merger of the two councils. Indeed, rumours suggest that Plaid Cymru in particular is very much for this as the strong Plaid support on the mainland would pretty much guarantee Plaid control of the merged council.

Although I see no problem with greater cooperation between the two councils in delivering services, I would completely oppose any loss of sovereignty for Ynys Môn. Not only for cultural or historical reasons, but also because of the more practical reason that Gwynedd Council currently has a budget black hole of almost £30 million -- compared to 'just' £10 million on Anglesey. With 75 councillors in Gwynedd against just 40 in Ynys Môn, I'm sure it wouldn't be long before various Anglesey assets such as our exceptionally large smallholdings estate would be sold off with planning permissions in order to fill the budgetary hole on the other side of the Straits.

In my opinion the political problems by themselves are not a good enough reason to seek the full merger of Anglesey and Gwynedd. Internal governance procedures have been strengthened significantly since David Bowles's arrival and, with just a few exceptions, it is undeniable that Anglesey County Council actually provides remarkably good services -- the news last week that IoACC recycles more waste than any other council in Wales is just one example of this. An influx of new blood into the Council at the local elections in 2012 -- and a campaign to ensure that -- would be the best remedy for our political problems, not a rushed and short-sighted merger with Gwynedd.

WAG orders Anglesey and Gwynedd to collaborate

WAG Local Government Minister Carl Sargeant has told Anglesey and Gwynedd councils to find ways of collaborating and sharing resources together in order to jointly deliver services and save money. If that sounds like a merger of the two councils, Carl Sargeant in a written statement (below) is at pains to point out that that is not the case, stressing the following points:

• it is not about merging the two authorities;
• it is not a "take over" by Gwynedd; 
• and it is "not primarily a response to or a solution to Anglesey's [governance] problems." 

Its worth noting however that the use of the word 'primarily' does clearly indicate that WAG sees some form of greater collaboration with Gwynedd as a partial solution to Ynys Môn's issues. This is reinforced by this section of the statement: "if Anglesey’s members and officers show the leadership and commitment necessary to make it succeed, it will be powerful evidence of progress towards a sustainable recovery." Presumably the implicit message here is that not showing such "leadership and commitment" would indicate the opposite.

What will this mean in practice? Well, Carl Sargeant notes that Anglesey and Gwynedd already have a good record of working together, having operated a single education support service for many years and are currently also cooperating in developing a new joint Local Development Plan. However he wants both counties to go much further and look at "the full integration of major services" and "moving towards a shared senior management team". This means that in all probability there will be no direct successor to Anglesey's Interim MD, David Bowles -- the highest paid civil servant in Wales.  Instead it is now far more likely that Gwynedd Council chief executive, Harry Thomas, could become the joint head of both Councils. Furthermore in order to unlock the kind of savings which Sargeant is after, there would also presumably need to be further rationalisation of Service Heads between the two councils.

Councillors will not be effected -- Sargeant's statement says, "I have no wish to reduce democratic autonomy; I want to help safeguard essential services. If this programme is implemented, both councils would continue to exist as separate democratic entities. Councillors would have the same range of responsibilities as they do now, and would be accountable to local people in the same way."

The Leaders of Anglesey and Gwynedd councils, Clive McGregor and Dyfed Edwards, have already issued a joint statement indicating their "willingness to consider" moving forward, and a joint 'scoping study' will now take place to identify exactly what collaboration of services and senior management is possible. The results of this study will be reported back to WAG in February 2011.

Personally I am in favour of greater collaboration and greater sharing of resources between the two councils. It is clearly not acceptable for taxpayers in the UK's poorest locale to pay the wages of Wales's most expensive civil servant. However, as I have often argued in this blog, I would be against any kind of more wide-ranging merger of the two councils. It is imperative that Ynys Môn retains its separate identity as I don't believe that its quite specific needs and problems could be addressed as effectively by a larger, 'super-council'.

You can read the full statement by Carl Sargeant, and the terms of reference of the scoping report below.
Written Statement by the Welsh Assembly Government