Ynys Môn: the 1% Island

Llandudno conference reading matter

As the Welsh Labour Party conference kicks off in Llandudno today I prepared a little gift for delegates in the shape of the front page story of today's Daily Post.

A Freedom of Information request I made reveals that WAG business support funding has been overwhelmingly funnelled to South Wales firms at the expense of those in the North. Out of a total of £48m in business grants offered since last July (when Ieuan Wyn Jones' flagship Economic Renewal Programme was introduced) just £7m has been received by North Wales firms. Furthermore Ynys Môn -- the poorest place in the whole United Kingdom and struggling with over 2,000 job losses  -- has received just 1% of that total.

This is how the figures break down regionally when we correct for relative populations:

Total business grants per region per head of population

Whereas North- and Mid-Wales has received on average around £10 per person, South Wales has received much more - in the case of South West Wales two and a half times more. Here is how it breaks down by each local authority:

Total business grants received by each local authority per head of population
Click to enlarge.

Anglesey received just £7.05 per head -- less than half the average of £16 per head across Wales. Indeed had Ynys Môn received just the average amount of funding, we should have received another £630,000 pounds over this period -- money businesses on this Island desperately need. And I'm sure our friends at Plaid Wrecsam will have something to say about their home town having only received WAG support equivalent to 68p per head, compared to £70 per head in Newport, South Wales.

Ieuan Wyn Jones is the WAG Minister for the Economy -- the man with his hands on the levers -- why isn't he ensuring that his own constituency is getting a fair share of this vital WAG business support money? As for the Welsh Labour party: they should amend their conference slogan from "Standing up for Wales" to "Standing up for (South) Wales".

You can see the actual FoI request replies here and here, and the spend table released as part of the second FoI request is below.
FoI Response

One Wales? or Three Wales?

How we are linked by human connections
as mapped by analysing phone-calls
Source: The Economist

Wales is not one country, but three different ones when looked at through the prism of human relationships, according to a fascinating article in this weeks Economist magazine.

Researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have analysed 12 billion of phone calls within the UK in 2005 to find which regional clusters communicate with each other most and to see how they corresponds to the official administrative borders. The study's hypothesis in a nutshell is that the more and longer people in two locations talk on the phone, the more likely there are human connections binding those those places together into a cluster.

The results show that Scotland is the most cohesive region in the UK, with more than 75% of all calls originating in Scotland calling other parts of Scotland.

It is the results for Wales which are most fascinating to me -- showing that there are three distinct regions within Wales with only limited human interaction between North, South and large portions of mid Wales. North Wales in particular is much more linked in terms of human interaction with Liverpool, Manchester and the North West of England, with between 65-75% of all phonecalls originating in this area being to other places in North Wales and the North West.

What does this tell us?

GVA per head variation between regions. Following
Wales the North West is the next poorest.
Click to enlarge

• It shows that North Wales's economy is inextricably linked to that of Liverpool, Manchester and North West England. This fact is reinforced when you look at the relative GVA per head figures between regions. After Wales (with Anglesey at the bottom) the next poorest region is the North West (with nearby Wirral at the bottom). For North Wales to grow, it is essential for the North West to also grow, therefore there should be much more communication and collaboration between WAG and the North West in terms of economic development.
• In terms of tourism, it shows that the natural market to attract visitors is from the cities of Liverpool, Manchester and the North West. As there are already plentiful human relationships between us, strategically promoting Anglesey as a destination to these regions should be like pushing against an open door.

Police Authority Chief denies "twisting" results of elected commissioner survey

In response to this post and this post regarding flaws in the North Wales Police Authority's survey on the coalition government's plans to introduce police commissioners, Mr Tal Michael, Chief Executive of the NWPA has now responded in full by commenting on this blog:

"North Wales Police Authority has not received this correspondence. Get in touch and I will be happy to look into what went wrong. Our contact details are as set out on our website.

We have not misrepresented anything. The basis of the survey was made explicit: working with the other Police Authorities in Wales we have given an opportunity for the public to express a view. The timetable for consultation was very short, but this is the fault of the Home Office. We submitted interim results by the Home Office deadline, but then we re-opened the survey so that others can have an opportunity. We have now closed the survey and South Wales Police Authority will be analysing the results so that we can publish them.

There is a difference between consultation and research. “Opinion polls” or “Representative Surveys” use sampling techniques to find out what the general public think. Statistical theory suggests that by setting quotas for gender, age, work status, social class and spreading those selected for interview randomly across an area, we are able to question about 1,000 people across an area and find out what they think with a margin of error up to 2 or 3 percentage points either way.

Consultation is when we invite people to express a view. By its very nature, consultation attracts more responses from those people who take an interest in a particular subject. Those responding will not necessarily be representative of the wider public. 

We never suggested that this was an opinion poll. The press release was explicit: we have invited people to express a view on the Government's proposals and offered to pass this on to Government. The all-Wales analysis undertaken by South Wales Police Authority does not twist the results - we said they showed that "According to the survey, 41 per cent were opposed to the introduction of a commissioner while less than 30 per cent were in favour". You have misinterpreted the results and said that 45 percent are either in favour or somewhat in favour. It would be equally valid to say that 56% of respondents were either against or somewhat against. We have given full information on the respondents including where they live, gender and ethnicity. The information given on ethnicity is the same as the information given on gender.

North Wales Police Authority has been clear about its own views on the Government's proposals. We are not opposed, but we do have serious concerns. We recognise that there is room for improvement and we are open to change, but we believe that changes should be focused on ensuring high quality, accountable policing, with the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders in agreeing policing priorities and agree that this is best achieved through governance arrangements which promote a consensual, involving approach with appropriate safeguards. See www.nwalespa.org for full details."

Whereas I thank Mr Michael for getting in touch via this blog, and am happy to accept his description of the poll as a 'consultation' rather than a 'representative survey', I continue to take issue with this part of his reply:

"The all-Wales analysis undertaken by South Wales Police Authority does not twist the results - we said they showed that "According to the survey, 41 per cent were opposed to the introduction of a commissioner while less than 30 per cent were in favour". You have misinterpreted the results and said that 45 percent are either in favour or somewhat in favour. It would be equally valid to say that 56% of respondents were either against or somewhat against."

Mr Michael's argument entirely rests on how you interpret the following results:

My interpretation is that the number of respondents either "in favour" (29 percent) or "somewhat in favour" (16 percent) comes to a total of 45 percent -- a larger number than those against (41 percent).  However, according to Mr Michael, the pinkish wedge in the top left labeled "somewhat" does not mean "somewhat in favour" but actually "neither in favour or against". Accordingly Mr Michael asserts that it is equally valid to say that the total number of respondents against the proposal is 57 percent, including "against" (41 percent) and "somewhat against" (16 percent). 

I'm sorry, Mr Michael, but this is clearly not the case. Even your own Executive Summary of the survey (page 2) states that the 16 percent figure represents "somewhat in favour":

If, as you assert, I have "misinterpreted the results", then I'm afraid that the author of your own report has also "misinterpreted the results". 

It seems clear to me therefore that my interpretation is the correct one and more respondents favour the proposal for elected police commissioners than are against it -- in direct contrast to how the results are presented. I will leave it to readers to decide whether the SWPA and NWPA have tried to "twist" the results of the survey to create a false impression of the level of support for the Police Commissioner proposals in Wales.

I also note, Mr Michael, that your reply does not address the fact that there was only 82 respondents to the poll from North Wales -- yet following a briefing by the NWPA this is how the Daily Post reported the interim survey results on 18th September:

"OPPOSITION is growing to the idea of having an elected commissioner in charge of police in North Wales. The interim results of a survey show a majority of people are against the proposal which is part of a package of reforms being put forward by the Government"

Can you kindly explain how a survey of just 82 people throughout North Wales -- which shows even according to your own executive summary that more people are either "in favour" or "somewhat in favour" than against -- gets written up as "OPPOSITION is growing to the idea of having an elected commissioner in charge of police in North Wales"?

North Wales Police Authority: no response (updated)

Actually we do: 45% were in favour and 41% opposed

Just over a month ago I wrote about the North Wales Police Authority's shameful misrepresentation of the results of an statistically invalid internet survey which they conducted together with the South Wales Police Authority to supposedly gauge the Welsh public's opinion on elected police commissioners. Despite only 884 people taking part (and only 82 of them coming from North Wales) the NWPA then released their interim findings to the Daily Post, stating categorically that residents of North Wales didn't want a elected police commissioner -- except that they actually did, with 45 percent either in favour or somewhat in favour, compared to 41 percent who were against. In so doing the NWPA were clearly guilty of wilfully misrepresenting the results of a sham public consultation in order to oppose the new policy and protect both the status quo and their own sinecures.

In response a regular commenter to this blog then contacted both the NWPA and SWPA by letter asking them to comment on why they had released the results of a survey which breaks so many elements of good practise on polling, namely:

"(1) The sample is not representative of the population because it is self-selecting. In other words, only those who feel they have an opinion on the topic will trouble themselves to respond. There is some background information gathered about respondents, but this is not complete, and crucially lacks information on socio-economic background. There is therefore no robust means of correcting for the sample that you do gather.

(2) The poll asks for the respondents' sex, but the responses are not broken down by sex. In contrast, and perhaps in a nod to political correctness, the fraction of 'ethnic minority' backgrounds is quoted (but not how they 'vote' on the poll).

(3) The response rate per head of population is exceptionally low; Anglesey (population ca. 70,000), has only 7 respondents - 1 in 10,000. Even as a total, 884 responses is well below the accepted minimum representative (which it anyway is not) poll size of about 1000 respondents.

(4) You do not provide the margin of error (the confidence intervals) for the poll. If it were quoted, the confidence in the results would appear to be low.

(5) There may be bias in the questions asked, and so stray into a 'push-poll'. It is not clear who drew up the poll, but it is clear why it is was drawn. From the general content of the report so far, there seems to be a bias against the concept of elected commissioners within the NWPA."

The response almost one month later?

NWPA: no acknowledgement, no response.
SWPA: acknowledgement received, no further response.

So there you are: you can choose between (a) a number of unelected appointees/quangocrats who clearly do not feel they have to respond to reasonable questions from members of the general public; or (b) an elected commissioner who will be held directly accountable to residents for police priorities and performance. I know which option I would choose.

On a side note, the acknowledgement from the SWPA said that the letter would be passed on to the Chief Constable -- which begs the question of just how independent the Police Authorities really are. Why would the chief constable of South Wales need to be informed about a complaint regarding the methodology of an internet poll carried out by a body supposedly at arms length from the Police?

The BBC 'devolution' poll - what makes North Wales different?

  
The BBC has carried out a poll to gauge the level of support in Wales for the Welsh Assembly. The headline results, with only 13% of respondents wanting the Welsh Assembly abolished, show how much Welsh public opinion has swung behind the concept of some kind of devolved government in Wales over the past 30 years:

click to enlarge

As the Druid is a 'Gog Blog' it is always interesting with all-Wales polls to see how the opinions of North Wales residents differ from those of Wales as a whole.

North Wales: pro-Assembly, anti-Westminster

North Wales residents are much more pro-Assembly and anti-Westminster than any other part of Wales: only 17% of North Wales respondents thought Westminster should have the most influence over Wales - much less than the 25% of West & Mid Wales respondents or 27% of SE Wales respondents. Similarly 69% of North Wales respondents thought that the Welsh Assembly should have the most influence over Wales - more than the 63% of West & Mid Wales respondents and just 57% of SE Wales respondents. Furthermore, just 6% of North Wales respondents agreed with the statement "Wales should remain in the UK and the Assembly should be abolished", compared with 12% and 16% of West & Mid Wales and SE Wales respondents. This is actually quite surprising as it has commonly been thought that there is a resentment in North Wales against the Assembly being located in a 'distant' South Wales - this is obviously no longer the case with the most unequivocal support for the Assembly actually coming from North Wales.

North Wales: comparatively anti-Labour, pro-Conservative except in reference to the economy

In response to the question "Putting aside your own party preference, which of the four main party leaders in Wales do you think has the qualities to be the best First Minister for Wales?", only 28% of North Wales respondents named Labour's Carwyn Jones compared to 43% of West & Mid Wales respondents and 40% of SE Wales respondents. Surprisingly the support for Plaid Cymru's Ieuan Wyn Jones at around 16% was virtually the same in North and South Wales, whereas the Conservatives' Nick Bourne was named by 15% of North Wales respondents compared with just 9% and 7% of West & Mid Wales and SE Wales respondents.

In terms of the economy, however, North Wales respondents showed the same levels of support for Gordon Brown and Carwyn Jones (47%) as the rest of Wales. Strangely, however, despite their greater willingness to support Nick Bourne as First Minister, less North Wales residents thought David Cameron & Nick Bourne where stronger on the economy (21%) compared to West & Mid Wales (26%) and SE Wales (23%). Clearly David Cameron's personal standing is not as much of an asset in North Wales as elsewhere.

You can download the poll data yourself here (pdf).

Anglesey Council Tax set to rise 4.5%

The Anglesey County Council Executive have announced that they will propose a Council Tax rise of 4.5% to the Full Council on March 4th. This will be slightly less than the 5% previously predicted. The North Wales Police precept, part of the total Council Tax, has already been set at a rise of 3%.

Most councils will be finalising their council tax rises for 2010/2011 over the next month but with regards to North Wales, this is what we know so far:

• Anglesey County Council - 4.5% (proposed)
• Conwy Council - 4.7% (confirmed)
• Flintshire County Council - 3.3% (proposed)
• Gwynedd County Council - 3.9% (confirmed)

The reason for these quite large increases are rising inflation making the provision of services more expensive and the generally derisory settlement increases from the Welsh Assembly Government for many councils in North Wales compared to those in South Wales. For example both Anglesey and Conwy councils received a rise of just 1% from the Welsh Assembly Government compared to rises of 3.1% for Newport and 2.9% for Cardiff City in South Wales. These WAG settlements are determined by some formula which takes into account the various demographics of each area, but there is obviously something wrong with this calculation when the poorest county in the UK, Anglesey, had to negotiate a floor of 1% or it would have received even less. Why isn't Ieuan Wyn Jones fighting harder for his 'home' seat in the Welsh Assembly?

For comparison, the Local Government Gazette surveyed councils in England last November on expected rises to council tax in their areas. Below are the results:

The average rise was predicted to be just 1.6% with 34 of the 81 councils surveyed revealing they were actually planning to cut or freeze their rates! If only we could be so lucky here in Wales!

If you know by how much Council Tax will rise in your area, please do post in comments.

UPDATE: Now includes Gwynedd CC's rise.

A note on Plaid Cymru's Election Strategy

  
Following on from the Druid's recent post on Ieuan Wyn Jones's pensions announcement, I thought it would be interesting to add a short post scriptum on the symbology behind this announcement and its significance in illuminating Plaid Cymru's election strategy.

Of course Ieuan Wyn Jones gave his speech in Mountain Ash which is smack bang in the middle of the former constituency of 'Merhyr Tydfil and Aberdare' - a seat once held by Keir Hardie, one of the founders of the Independent Labour Party and their first MP. Even to this day, this area is proudly Labour supporting as the recent YouGov Wales polls shows:

The figures above also show that it is one of the areas where Plaid Cymru struggles the most - probably through failing to find traction for a nationalist agenda in a mostly English speaking area. The people here vote Labour because they always have - its part of their Valleys, working class identity. However, there aren't many ex-miners in the more metropolitan inclined Labour party of today, dominated by such people as Peter Mandelson, Harriet Harman, Alastair Darling, the Miliband Brothers and so on - all from wealthy and privileged backgrounds. No doubt people in Mountain Ash and elsewhere in South Wales are struggling to identify with the party they were always brought up to believe they should vote for - and it is this, coupled with the general current unpopularity of the Labour Party, which Plaid Cymru is obviously trying to exploit.

They have realised that the 2010 General Election is an opportunity to extend their vote from beyond their normal heartlands of Anglesey, Gwynedd and West Wales - but only if they can broaden their appeal by stealing some of Labour's traditional values. Hence Ieuan Wyn Jones's speech on "fairness" and "a living pension" given symbolically in Keir Hardie's old constituency.

Its a clever strategy and could well work - it also means Labour has to work harder for the South Wales votes they have increasingly taken for granted. But, as per my previous post, it would probably be much more effective if Plaid Cymru focussed on promoting policies which they at least have some chance of implementing - to do otherwise just makes them look silly and not serious.