The Welsh Language – A False Dawn?

Feb 142013

Gan:
Professor Emeritus John Aitchison and Harold Carter Gregynog
Professor of Geography Aberystwyth Emeritus look at the census results.

The recent publication of preliminary results from the 2011 census relating to the state of the Welsh language has elicited responses of dismay, surprise and puzzlement in equal measure. Just a decade earlier the situation had been very different. The returns from the 2001 census were heralded as marking an historic, even momentous, turnaround in the well-being of the language. For the first time in over a century numbers of Welsh speakers were seen to be advancing after years of persistent and debilitating decline.

Between 1991 and 2001 they increased by just over 13 percent, from roughly 508,000 to around 580,000. The 2011 census would suggest that this surge in numbers has been rudely halted, and that decline has once again set in. With just over 560,000 respondents (19.9 percent of the population 3 years of age and over) now indicating that they ‘can’ (not necessarily ‘do’) speak the language, this amounts to a decennial fall of just under 2 percent. Not a dramatic reversal of fortunes, admittedly, but hardly encouraging given the efforts that have been made to maintain the momentum. Was it a false dawn after all?
Whilst the aggregate national statistics for 2011 are worrying in themselves, much more so are the changes that have taken place in different parts of the country. In an analysis of the 1991 census entitled ‘A Broken Heartland and a New Beginning’, we drew attention to a steady collapse and fragmentation in Welsh as a community language within its traditional heartland areas in the west and the north of Wales (Y Fro Gymraeg). These had long been the main linguistic redoubts; bastions that had succeeded in resisting Anglicization. But even back then it was evident that these cores were steadily weakening in the face of a range of pressures, not the least of which were those related to the frailty of local economies and demographics, all of which manifest themselves in population shifts and patterns of migration, both in and out.
Our earlier studies were based on detailed analyses at the community level, but the recent data for the 2011 census would suggest that the dilution highlighted then has continued. Between 2001 and 2011 the unitary authorities of Ceredigion and Carmarthen in particular recorded significant falls in absolute numbers of over 6%. More disturbingly, for the first time the Welsh-speaking populations within these areas were no longer in the majority. Gwynedd and Ynys Mon showed more resilience, but are seen also to have suffered losses.
Beyond the heartlands the situation is very mixed. As expected, Cardiff continued to gain Welsh speakers. Here, numbers increased by some 15 percent; bearing testimony to the attractions of the region, particularly to young, upwardly mobile Welsh-speakers seeking employment, appropriate to their skills and qualifications, in the capital city and its immediate hinterland. Significantly, nearly 50 percent of Welsh speakers in Cardiff are aged between 15 and 44 years. In the traditional heartland authorities, equivalent figures range from 32 to 38 percent. Such has been the growth in Cardiff that it now claims more Welsh speakers than the whole of Ceredigion (36,700 as compared a figure of just under 35,000).
Whilst Cardiff has asserted itself as an increasingly strong linguistic nucleus, notable gains were also recorded for a surrounding cluster of unitary authorities – Newport, Caerphilly, Vale of Glamorgan, Monmouth and, marginally, Rhondda Cynon Taff. Although numbers here (absolute and proportionate) are as yet small, strongly represented among them are Welsh speakers under 15 years of age (commonly over 45%). Together with Cardiff, they now account for 21 percent of all Welsh speakers in Wales.
Elsewhere the picture is one of general decline, with some of the largest losses, proportionately, being recorded in a contiguous block of authorities encompassing what were once centres of mining and heavy industry in south-east Wales (Swansea, Neath, Bridgend, Rhondda Cynon Taff and Merthyr Tydfil), and not dissimilar parts ofnorth-east Wales (Flint, Wrexham). Developments here are particularly significant, for these areas have long been home to large numbers of Welsh speakers.
Such aggregate statistics are admittedly crude, but they do prompt serious questions as to how the apparent reversal of fortunes at a national level has come about, given the investment that has been made in seeking to further promote the language. Without entering into detailed analyses of migration statistics or highlighting local nuances, it is evident that at the heart of the matter, at least as far as the decline in the core areas of rural Wales is concerned, is the inability of such areas to construct economic and social environments that will satisfy the needs and aspirations of young Welsh speakers. This being the case, it suggests that a new front must be opened up in the battle to secure the future growth of the language. The campaign via political means, through legislation, has been largely won. So has the effort to ensure the status of the language, both formally and informally. Bilingual education has also made great strides. But continued pursuance of the battle, mainly along legislative lines, could possibly be misplaced and, indeed, counterproductive. Take one example. There have of late been expressions of concern regarding the insufficient use of Welsh in the provision of National Health services. All well and good, but for people in rural communities (many of which are isolated) the prime issue is not that of language but of the effective maintenance of hospital and related services. In times of economic difficulty the immediate planning response is to stress economies of scale; centralisation and enlargement have become the mantra of planners. But those are the very policies which weaken the viability of rural communities, exacerbate the out-migration of the young, thus leading to language loss. It is here that the crucial confrontations are now taking place, not over rights and equality. There is the greatest danger that the language’s future will be fought on wrong, and largely irrelevant, grounds.
In conclusion, it must be added that measures to offset such problems face major difficulties. Large scale capital projects (Wylfa is a singular exception) are very unlikely given the present state of the economy, and in any case they tend to increase the in-migration of non-Welsh speakers. Small and medium size businesses have to contend with a range of problems, foremost among them being remoteness and a totally inadequate transport infrastructure. Furthermore it is not easy for such enterprises to assemble and maintain an effective reservoir of skills. Some agriculturally based businesses, in dairy products and meat production for example, have been very successful. But there, too, there have been problems and the movement of production to larger more accessible sites is all too familiar. In short, the bases for the effective sustaining of vibrant rural communities – the traditional hearth areas for the language – are weak, and could be getting weaker.
Although they have been criticised as inadequate and unreliable indicators of linguistic well-being in some quarters, the data generated in the 2011 census at least serve to prompt renewed debate and to highlight the complexity of the problems facing those who seek to invigorate the language of Wales, both as a mother tongue and as a medium of communication more widely deployed in daily life. The campaign for status and recognition has been successfully prosecuted, and much has been achieved.

The task ahead is Sisyphean – but not necessarily futile.

Books ‘Language, Economy and Society. The Changing Fortunes of the Welsh Language in the Twentieth Century’, 2000.
‘Spreading the Word. The Welsh Language 2001’, 2004.

Published in Cambria Magazine February 2013.
Gan:
Professor Emeritus John Aitchison and Harold Carter Gregynog
Professor of Geography Aberystwyth Emeritus

Welsh Dragon or an idle koala- which are you?

Independence, Opinion, Welsh Assembly, Welsh Politics 5 Responses »

Feb 062013

Insults Require Counter-offensives

Gan Alan Sandry.

Michael Buerk’s Christmas missive regarding the contribution made by Welsh people through their singing voices is the droll iceberg of Metropolitan resentment about Wales’ existence.

Michael Buerk in The Mail on Sunday “Wales is not another country; it’s England with an accent and a good singing voice. But it is being pulled along by Scotland in devolution’s slipstream, whether it likes it or – more probably – not.”

In his Mail on Sunday outburst – it could only be that rag, naturally, which specialises in cultivating and encouraging the xenophobic angst of, seemingly, rational and cultured public figures – Buerk despaired at the “state of Britain”. Ironically, someone really ought to have taken him to one side and told him that this is hardly innovative thinking, as the big ‘S’ “State of Britain” has perplexed many of us for decades . It would possibly have been more pertinent if Buerk, and similar mollycoddled and indulged members of the London commentariat, actually looked at the condition of themselves and their prejudices. Indeed, for several years now, Buerk has come across as the apotheosis of smug colonialism, personified by the coterie of BBC broadcasters who observe Wales as an oddity; the dog with no hair, who engenders concurrent feelings of pity and loathing. Does this matter? Well it all ultimately depends on how people in our country wish to deal with the stream of ignorant invective from Buerk and his fellow travellers, and whether they decide to act through countering these perceptions with positive action. That, however, would involve affirmative responses, and not just the shoulder shrugging that we appear to have mastered in recent times.
All of this came at the end of 2012, a year that could be described as either an annus horribilis or an annus mirabilis, depending on your ideology and outlook. Leaving aside Olympic and Royal hyperbole, the back end of 2012 saw the issuing of the 2011 Census results. However they are read, these produce some sober statistics, with, arguably, stark implications.
The results provide us with data that enable us to visualise, understand and interpret the clear sociological and cultural de-boning of Wales, in terms of how many of us have attempted to understand our nation through historical representation. For sure, facts, data, and political spin will come and go and, inevitably, a ‘New Wales’ will, in some shape or form, arise: all societies evolve after all.
Nevertheless, with the conspicuous increase in in-migration from England and the political manoeuvring to Anglicise Cardiff and its environs, and amalgamate all points east of Bridgend with a Greater Bristol ‘super-region’, it would appear that rather than a distinctive, identifiably ‘Welsh’, Wales shining through, it may be little more than a watered down Wiltshire that we are eventually left with. Mr Buerk may, indeed, have a point! However, even these changes, dramatic though they undoubtedly are, may well prove to be transient and rapidly reconfigured. By the time of the next Census – 2021 – there is a strong possibility that the UK will not exist.

Should the people of Scotland accept collective responsibility, and vote ‘Yes’ to independence, then RumpUK will be hiccupping its way into the world. In addition, by 2021, the north of Ireland may be on the verge of departing this Rump, as demographic shifts in favour of the Catholic population, and the advancement of Realpolitik, will almost certainly see the staging of a Re-Unification Referendum. Whatever the outcome, Ulster will inevitably be one or two steps nearer Dublin and a couple of
strides further away from London.
The current row regarding the flying of the Union Flag is just the start of the debate on what some observers are labelling “an Irish future?” Taken as a whole, the implications for us are enormous. Wales, and this is the part that terrifies both political and civil society alike, will be forced to consider distinct choices.
Devolution, by that stage in the constitutional process, will be a busted flush. Moreover, Federalism – the halfway house preference, favoured by some urbane politicos – will not be an option. Despite its recent converts from the ranks of ‘soft’ Plaid and ‘inclusive’ Conservatives, with a smattering of Labour progressives’ to add an air of radical, evolutionary consensus, Federalism ceased to be a viable alternative framework on 3rd May 2007, when the SNP emerged as the largest party within the Scottish Parliament. Since then, and despite their no doubt honest intent, the advocates of Federalism have promulgated an implausible solution.
So, the choice – the division – may be between independence or absorption? Nevertheless, a question rarely asked is this: is it now too late for Wales to consider independence? Whilst the cautious, sentinel voices of British statism warn us that it is far too early to consider anything remotely akin to autonomy, the converse analysis would note that Wales is ‘too far gone’ down the path of England Wales-ism (the Elizabethan State) to ever release itself and claim national political freedom and nation-state classification. One standard obstacle placed in the way of political autonomy, by British nationalists from both the left and the right, is the economy, and its perennially parlous state. Whilst it would be foolhardy to dismiss economic concerns, the notion of self-government, and freedom from extraneous influences, is a completely separate argument of positioning and empowerment. The fact that the Welsh economy – today, just as much as it was in the past – provides a testing ground for those seeking mineral exploitation, labour-force exploitation, and land exploitation is not an argument against independence. Quite the reverse! It provides an unambiguous argument in favour of self-government.

But we also require other forms of renaissance across our communities, both urban and rural. Once established, these linkages between town and country then require bold creations and radical exploration to re-invigorate our society. Some examples already exist. Unitary Urbanism, for example, which was supported by some of the Situationists amongst others, argued for perennial exploration and experimentation in urban life. Compare this with the scenario in today’s Wales – in today’s
Cardiff Bay, to use its synecdoche – which is static and constricting. Since 1999 an initial sense of progression has been gradually reduced to a state of virtual stagnation. Politicians, political parties, lobbyists, the media, and great swathes of civic society have all played their various parts in stifling any emergence of a buoyant culture: cliché or not, the crushing jackboot of ‘Old Boyism’ truly is alive and well. Disgracefully, we have settled for bland, with a distinct lack of space for elasticity. In amongst all of this, our pinnacle of hope, the National Assembly, has become a ludibrium. It has the power to shape and influence lives but it has become the plaything of a tightly knit oligarchy – the Bay-istas – who oversee and control political, social, cultural and economic interactions (most prominently in Cardiff and the Labour fortresses of the south). The madcap scheme for City-Regions, so beloved by the Bay-istas, will only mushroom this hegemony. In terms of authentic economic and social progress these City-Regions will have scant effect.
In terms of dominance by the social democratic bourgeoisie, and their progeny, the careerist crachach, they will prove invaluable. Furthermore, national integration, disguised as regional overlapping, appears to be the latest project to promote assimilation.
Exemplified by Hain’s Folly – the Severn Barrage – there is a persistent neo-liberal push for locking in the economies and societies of our south eastern corner with the western counties of England. Whilst these developments are perfect for “here today, gone tomorrow” entrepreneurs and speculators, they are disastrous for those who genuinely believe in a verifiable ‘national interest’. Wales is stagnating, but so many people in positions of power and influence seem content for this to occur as they maintain their dominion through disseminating the false promises of “tens of thousands” of (chimerical) jobs on the horizon. Sadly, we have allowed a situation to develop where the cruellest of all cons – the hope of a job with security – is shamelessly played on the unemployed with alarming regularity. Political and economic leadership – of both political parties and broader society – is culpable in this. At the precise moment that we desperately require bold leadership and vision for our nation, far too much time is being wasted on fanciful projects, which provide little real hope.

Unless people are not revealing their true selves, then the statement has to be made that Wales lacks leaders who are truly desirous of significant change. Flipping in the Assembly may be politically meaningful but in terms of societal earthquakes – paradigm shifts – it is marginal. With this in mind, it was interesting to note the commemorations of 30 years of S4C, and Gwynfor Evans contribution in forcing the hand of Thatcher’s Government to ensure that company’s establishment. Gwynfor mastered ‘gamble politics’ with his threat of hunger striking. Fascinatingly, but regrettably, this was the last of the great gestures – the grand positioning – of political figures in Wales. Whilst grassroot members of Cymdeithas Yr Iaith have consistently championed non-violent-direct action, and its consequences, few ‘household names’ have followed suit by attempting praxis outside of the political institutions. If our country is to move on, to progress, to foster a climate of rejuvenation, then more prominent people have to stand up and be counted. The reality remains, alas, that the National Assembly has manufactured Koala Bear politicians: generally assuring but hardly intrepid.

But is this what our nation needs?

The ‘koala effect’ has also filtered into business and commercial circles, with even our protest groups protesting less than they were a decade ago. Last September 1.5 million people were on the streets of Barcelona voicing their demands for independence from the Spanish State. Can Cardiff offer up a tenth of that number (150,000) to demonstrate for political freedom? It can, but to kick-start the process the leaders of Wales have to lead. We have to change the mise-en-scene of Welsh politics and society. It is time for the Koalas to awake from their slumber.

Published in February 2013 issue of Cambria Magazine

Dr Alan Sandry writes and broadcasts
on Welsh and European Politics.

INVALIDITY OF THE CASE AGAINST “INDEPENDENCE” FOR WALES

Independence, Welsh Politics 2 Responses »

Oct 242012

Gan Gwyn Hopkins

Independence is the accepted legal term for the political status of countries that are members of the UN, be they large like India and the USA or small like Norway, Luxembourg and Singapore.

It is regrettable that the issue of Independence for Wales invariably produces irrational, distorted and sometimes dishonest reactions from the “establishment”, i.e.; the pro-Unionist politicians and the pro-Unionist media. These include claims that Wales is too small to be independent, Wales cannot afford to be independent (implying that Wales is subsidised by England), the people of Wales don’t want independence, etc. These claims are often accompanied by branding independence for Wales as “separatism”, a deliberately chosen scaremongering and objectionable sounding description. The fact that they never describe the independence of other countries as separatism gives the game away. The real separatists are the euro-sceptics, particularly the euro-sceptic MPs (mostly Tories) who want the UK to withdraw from the European Union.

WALES IS TOO SMALL AND/OR CANNOT AFFORD TO BE INDEPENDENT.

Response 1 – Ample Precedence.

Politicians and the media very often resort to quoting precedence to support arguments; but never when discussing Independence for Wales. It is, of course, perfectly valid to compare Wales with other similar size countries that are already independent. Comparison with independent countries with populations up to twice the size of Wales (population 3 million) seems appropriate and reasonable. These are listed with populations at the end of this discourse. The list shows that no fewer than 88 of the 192 independent countries in the United Nations are similar in size to Wales (46%), with 60 having smaller populations (31%). Of these, the 11 that are members of the 27-member European Union are underlined (6 are smaller than Wales). The list shows that 35 of the 88 countries are members of the 53-member British Commonwealth and are shown in italics and bold print (32 of these are smaller than Wales – 60%).

Thus, unless one subscribes to the jaundiced, disparaging and basically insulting view that the people of Wales are – uniquely – not competent to manage their own affairs, these 88 countries provide conclusive evidence that the argument that Wales is too small and/or cannot afford independence is complete nonsense – not even remotely plausible. In fact many small countries in the world are independent and managing very well (particularly the European ones). Not a single country that has campaigned for and/or fought for independence during the last century or earlier considered its size or prosperity (present or future) to be relevant criteria in its quest for independence. In each case the compelling motivation was patriotism, national self-respect, the assertion and promotion of their status as a nation and a determination to escape the dominant and exploitive clutches of their imperialist rulers. No country that has gained independence has ever concluded that it was a mistake to become independent because they were too small or couldn’t afford it or for any other reason. None have considered reverting to a previous colonial or dependent status nor being party to re-establishing an earlier imperial state in which they were a small part, totally dominated, stifled and often downtrodden by the largest country of such a state be it Russia, Serbia or England.

Response 2 – Viability.

In considering Wales’ viability after independence it is essential to take into account all resources now traversing Offa’s Dyke in both directions (not just money, which is essentially a proxy for resources) and what effect independence would have on these resources. In particular, it is essential to identify what Wales contributes to now but wouldn’t do so after independence.

Currently flowing out from Wales to England/UK Treasury (the list is not exhaustive):

Income Tax

Value Added Tax

Corporation Tax (Company Tax)

Vehicle Tax

Fuel Tax (60% of pump prices for petrol and diesel)

National Insurance contributions

Enormous quantities of water daily (all current water contracts imposed on Wales, that are absolutely outrageously favourable to England, would need to be renegotiated on a “market rate” basis on independence)

Half the energy produced in Wales (this would produce substantial income after independence)

The five tax items, National Insurance and the finance earned from the other two items would, of course, be paid into the Wales Treasury after independence.

From the UK Treasury to Wales:

Barnett Block Grant paid to the National Assembly for Wales

Social Benefits

At present Wales’ tax payments contribute substantially to the cost of the UK armed forces, that includes the huge costs of the Army, the Navy, the RAF, Trident submarines and missiles, Cruise missiles, Aircraft carriers, etc. An independent Wales is very unlikely to indulge in any of these extravagances other than maintaining a small army for internal security. In addition, none of Wales’ young men and women would lose their lives in reckless overseas military adventures. This is arguably the biggest advantage of Independence for Wales.

THE PEOPLE OF WALES DON’T WANT INDEPENDENCE.

This is exactly what one would expect given that the people of Wales are – and have been for very many years – conditioned by a media diet dominated by pro-Unionist, England based TV and radio channels and the pro-Unionist, England-oriented daily newspapers. To this one must add the vociferous opposition of the pro-Unionist establishment over the centuries – including, and especially, the fervently pro-Unionist Monarchy. Furthermore, the imposition of our essentially pro-Unionist educational system (in 1870) designed for the children of England – not Wales – that not only banned our indigenous language, Welsh, but virtually concealed Welsh History from us, has also played a major part in the conditioning of the people of Wales. In view of this almost total monopoly of intense and relentless pro-Unionist indoctrination, it is amazing that a significant minority (some 10%) of the people of Wales now favour independence. Fifty years ago it is doubtful whether 10% of the people of Wales favoured any form of self-government whatever. By now there is a substantial majority in favour of further devolution so it’s pretty obvious which way the wind is blowing. Moreover, if the above-mentioned pro-Unionist agencies had been pro-Independence instead, the conditioning would then undoubtedly have resulted in the people of Wales demanding and achieving Independence for their country long ago.

The point I make is that the vast majority of the people of Wales are pro-Unionist almost entirely because the intense political conditioning they have been subjected to on a daily basis for centuries has been virtually exclusively pro-Unionist – with almost no exposure to any contrary pro-Independence arguments. A major effect of this indoctrination is very clearly demonstrated at local council elections. The British political “Labour v Tory” mentality found at Westminster is so deeply ingrained that many of Wales’ electors use the current popularity of the major UK parties at Westminster as their criterion for voting at council elections. Put crudely this means “if Labour is in power and unpopular at Westminster vote for the Lib-Dems, Plaid or for an Independent candidate – or stay at home”, whereas “if the Tories are in power and unpopular vote Labour”. Of course, this criterion is totally unrelated to the recent performance of local councillors and the local council which are obviously the sort of considerations which should form the basis of how electors vote at local elections. The same is true of National Assembly elections.

THE EFFECTS OF ENGLAND’S OVERWHELMING POLITICAL DOMINATION OF WALES.

Because of England’s huge population compared to the rest of the UK, the House of Commons is completely dominated by MPs representing English constituencies (English MPs). At present 533 of the 650 Members are English MPs (82%). In 2015 when the constituency boundary changes are implemented (significantly improving the Tories’ General Election prospects) there will be 600 MPs of which 502 will be English (84%). These figures represent an absolutely massive dominance of parliament by English MPs that will rise to 92% in the remaining rump United Kingdom of Southern Britain and Northern Ireland if Scotland gains independence (with a Tory majority likely at every General Election thereafter – without Scottish MPs the Tories would currently have a majority with 306 of the remaining 591 MPs). Moreover, this dominance is even greater in the current ruling coalition parties (Tory and Lib-Dem) at Westminster. They have 363 MPs between them with 340 representing English constituencies (96%) and are led by two millionaire, public school and Oxford educated, English toffs (Cameron and Clegg). It is very difficult to imagine any individuals less suitable to play such a key role in the governance of Wales. In addition there are 23 Cabinet Members (nearly all millionaires or multi-millionaires), of which 21 are MPs – 19 being English MPs (90%) but with none from Welsh constituencies.

It doesn’t much matter whether England’s huge hegemony in the House of Commons is 82%, 84% or 92% for they all represent an overwhelming dominance and controlling interest of the House by English MPs. This grossly lopsided situation is certain to mean that, in any UK state, the interests and well-being of England – as in the past – will always be paramount at Westminster. This means that English MPs will always have the last word on all matters concerning Wales (and Scotland and Northern Ireland) with the people of Wales and their MPs not being able to do anything whatever about it. Moreover, they will certainly invoke this decisive control when dealing with contentious matters that directly affect England (remember Tryweryn!). England’s “upper hand” on Welsh affairs undoubtedly perpetuates the current vulnerable, very disadvantaged, “bottom of the pile” and essentially subordinate status of Wales compared to England. It is a situation in which the Welsh Nation’s identity and Wales’ development to a fully-fledged nation is seriously undermined and impeded – and permanently so while the UK exists.

List of the 88 independent UN member countries of similar size to Wales (2010 /2011 populations given).

Tuvalu (10,000), Nauru (10,000), Palau (21,000), San Marino (32,000), Monaco (36,000),

Liechtenstein (36,000), St Kitts & Nevis (52,000), Marshall Islands (54,000), Dominica (71,000),

Andorra (78,000), Antigua & Barbuda (86,000), Seychelles (91,000), Kiribati (101,000),

St Vincent (101,000), Tonga (103,000), Micronesia (103,000), Grenada (111,000), St Lucia (167,000),

Sao Tome & Principe (169,000), Samoa (186,000), Vanuatu (234,000), Barbados (274,000),

Belize (313,000), Maldives (317,000), Iceland (320,000), Bahamas (354,000), Malta (418,000),

Brunei Darussalam (423,000), Cape Verde (492,000), Luxembourg (512,000), Suriname (529,000), Solomon Islands (554,000), Montenegro (620,000), Comoros (669,000), Equatorial Guinea (720,000), Guyana (785,000), Bhutan (721,000), Djibouti (818,000), Cyprus (839,000), Fiji (868,000),

Timor-Leste {East Timor} (1.1million), Bahrain (1.2m), Swaziland (1.2m), Mauritius (1.2m),

Trinidad & Tobago (1.3m), Estonia (1.3m), Guinea Bissau (1.5m), Gabon (1.5m),

Qatar (1.7m), Gambia (1.8m), Botswana (2.0m), Slovenia (2.0m), Macedonia (2.0m), Latvia (2.0m),

Lesotho (2.2m), Namibia (2.3m), Mongolia (2.7m), Jamaica (2,7m), Oman (2.8m), Albania (2.8m),

Lithuania (3.2m), Uruguay (3.3m), Armenia (3.3m), Mauritania (3.4m), Panama (3.4m), Kuwait (3.6m),

Moldova (3.6m), Bosnia & Herzegovina (3.8m), Liberia (4.0m), Republic of Congo (4.1m), Costa Rica (4.3m), Lebanon (4.3m), Croatia (4.3m), New Zealand (4.4m), Central African Republic (4.5m),

Georgia (4.5m), Republic of Ireland (4.6m), Norway (5.0m), Turkmenistan (5.1m), Singapore (5.2m), Eritrea (5.4m), Finland (5.4m), Slovakia (5.4m), Kyrgyzstan (5.5m), Denmark (5.6m), Lybia (5.7m), Nicaragua (5.8m), Sierra Leone (6.0m)

gan Gwyn Hopkins

The Big Independence Question

Economy, Independence, Welsh Politics 3 Responses »

Jun 102012

It’s the issue all of us who support independence want to sidestep, yet equally confront head-on. It’s summed up in one simple question – Can Wales afford independence?

When analysing the issue, there are at least two questions:
1. Can Wales support itself based on its tax income?
2. Could current public spending levels be maintained post-independence?

The answer to the first question is yes. Every independent nation is run on its own tax income, macroeconomic and monetary policy, combined with public borrowing. Welsh tax revenues were estimated to be £19.3billion in 2007, a figure that’s probably higher now.
An independent Wales would also be able to borrow like any other nation. Public borrowing is hardly in vogue at the moment, but if we want a master class in using the national credit card, we needn’t look further than the UK. For 2012-13 the UK has a borrowing target of £120billion – adding to the £1trillion public debt. In simplest terms, every year the UK borrows the equivalent of over two and a half times the entire Welsh economy.
The second question is more commonly associated with the “affordability” argument. It’s also a far more complicated one to answer.
Estimates for the difference between tax revenue and public spending – the Welsh “national deficit” – vary. The Holtham Commission found that in 2007-08, £6billion more was spent in Wales than raised in taxes. The figure has been quoted at £9billion, and even as high as £16billion by Peter Hain in 2011. That’s an unacceptable margin for error in a place that prides itself on record keeping. But where does this “national deficit” actually go? If we take the UK’s borrowing figures at face value, some £6billion of it is borrowed money. There are also proportional shares of spending on UK-wide areas like defence, welfare and foreign affairs. Does this spending produce tangible benefits for Wales?
Let’s look at defence spending.
For 2011-12, £1.68billion will be spent, proportionally, on Wales’s behalf. That’s more than the Welsh government’s annual budget for rural affairs, business & enterprise, the environment, housing, heritage and regeneration combined, or 86% of the Welsh government’s education & skills budget. If Wales had a defence budget similar to the Republic of Ireland for example (0.7% of GDP), it would be around £300million.
Unless Welsh leaders have ambitions of playing Blofeld, it’s not a great leap of logic to suggest that Wales could spend significantly less on defence, as an independent nation, than the UK currently spends on our behalf. That’s £1.38billion of national deficit wiped out.
The UK currently maintains 240 or so diplomatic missions. The “Welsh proportion” of Foreign Office and International Development spending is approximately £490million – at least one and a third times the Welsh government’s business & enterprise budget. That figure includes spending on BBC World Service (until 2014) and the British Council. Would Wales need to maintain diplomatic missions in Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan and the Solomon Islands?
Wales no doubt benefits from bodies such as UK Trade & Investment, but the most successful foreign-oriented brand Wales has had in a generation was our own Welsh Development Agency. Could a streamlined Welsh diplomatic service, with a joined-up approach to foreign investment and foreign aid, not only significantly boost Wales’s international profile – out from under the shadow of the Union Flag – but cost less than £490million? Perhaps £200million? Then there’s the possible overestimates of public spending in Wales. In 2009-10, StatsWales listed out turn policing expenditure as £671million, compared to Treasury figures of £762million – a difference of £91million. The difference for fire services was £45million. Despite only having five prisons, two of them low-security, the Welsh prisons budget is listed as £228million – roughly £78,000 for every prison space in Wales, more than twice the average £37,000 cost in 2010. On paper, this looks like a £250million overestimate in only a few parts of a single UK government department – very significant if you’re dealing with a £6billion deficit. Can similar “overestimates” be found elsewhere?
According to official data, in 2010-11 some £8.8billion was spent in Wales across 20 different benefits, including state pensions, and approximately £1.34billion on tax credits. Due to higher proportions of pensioners and disabled people, Wales is on the front lines of change. Major reforms, such as the introduction of the Universal Credit, are due in the coming years. A Welsh share of the £10billion welfare cuts by 2016 will be £125million per year, perhaps higher.
We must also factor in the relative poverty line. At 60% of median income, it’s a UK-wide measure, distorted, like economic data, by London and southern England. As Welsh median income is lower than the UK, levels of relative poverty in Wales at a national level, are likely to be lower too.
Independence could reduce levels of relative poverty instantaneously – statistically at least.
There’s also an opportunity to build a new welfare state from the ground up. Could a smaller Welsh state reduce administration costs?
Could Wales underpin welfare with dividends from natural resources, sovereign wealth funds or state-run enterprises? Could friendly societies, or cooperative welfare, make a return? A Welsh welfare state should still ensure work pays and is likely to be less generous in financial terms. However there could be a new ethos based on communitarian values – seeing benefits recipients as people who need a “leg up”, instead of being browbeaten as scroungers.
How much of the : £2.2billion Border Agency budget, £2.5billion Cabinet Office budget, £3billion Energy & Climate Change budget, £4.1billion Treasury budget – is being “spent on Wales”? There’s at least £595million of “national deficit” in there somewhere.
It’s important to remember subsidy sometimes cuts both ways. Anything flagged as a “UK” or “England and Wales” project, will have a proportional Welsh contribution. These could include: Crossrail – £115million (via Network Rail), new aircraft carriers – £350million, London Olympics – at least £460million (almost the cost of the main stadium), Iraq and Afghanistan wars – £1billion, High Speed 2 – £1.9billion, Trident replacement – potentially £1.25billion.
In 2010, it was revealed that the Housing Revenue Account Subsidy (scrapped this year) resulted in Welsh local authorities paying back up to £2billion of surplus rent money to the Treasury since the scheme was established.
More recently, it was revealed that Welsh taxpayers could be paying £100million towards reductions in water bills for south west England and an upgrade to London’s sewerage system.
In most cases, Wales won’t see any extra “Barnett consequential” from this spending, but it’ll be counted as part of the national deficit all the same. That’s a lot of empty, mostly borrowed money, spent on Wales’s behalf. Is it any wonder how public spending in Wales keeps rising, but there seems to be very little to show for it?
Some fiscal levers could be on the way to Wales, dependant on the Silk Commission’s findings. It’s a sensible development. We won’t know what our AM’s are made of until they take decisions that directly affect personal or business incomes. But are Welsh economic problems too big to be solved by mere tinkering? Independence brings with it unequivocal responsibility.
The wider macroeconomic powers over taxation and fiscal policy would have a greater impact on the Welsh economy than anything devolution or federalism can deliver or promise. It’s something every single nation uses to its advantage, but something Wales shies away from.
Adam Price and Ben Levinger’s The Flotilla Effect highlighted four core advantages small nations possess: increased openness to trade, greater social cohesion, adaptability and big government’s acting as a stabiliser. In the 12 months to June 2011, Wales had a trade surplus of £5.72billion. On paper, Wales would be pushing into the top ten net-exporters of the EU. Would independence enable Wales to exploit this further? Can we shape Welsh economic policy to closely match our exporter role, as opposed to being a bit part of the UK’s global financial service machine?
The value of exports rose dramatically over the period (+31.4%) because of a statistical change. Exports were counted from the place they were produced, not where the company producing them was head-quartered. Is a significant chunk of our wealth actually accounted as having come from elsewhere? If that’s true, could Welsh business taxes or VAT revenues rise by a similar amount? We simply don’t know. The Scottish Government produces the “Government Expenditure and Revenues Scotland” (GERS) report which analyses revenues and expenditure. Wales has nothing similar, other than political anoraks armed with calculators and too much time on their hands.
If it is true, it could have a big impact on the affordability argument – increasing tax revenues and chipping away at the national deficit, which has fallen by at least £2billion since the start of this article – one third of the way to a balanced budget, notionally. If an amateur like me can do it, imagine what an economist, or a UK government hellbent on swingeing cuts could do?
Employment law, competition law, industrial relations, consumer protection, the tax code, VAT, monetary policy, research councils, international trade, financial regulation – all things that could be reformed for the better in Wales, and powerful tools only available to us via independence.
I accept that independence is, at present, a minority position. For many, the “I-word” nauseates. If Wales can’t afford anything, it’s to let cynicism cloud the potential for a economy that’s allowed to work to its strengths, taxed fairly, and possesses every single tool necessary to unleash Welsh enterprise. To enable this, we’ll need to make big decisions on the constitutional direction of Wales, and its economic future. Do we want to tinker, or do we want to take control?

Owen Donovan, a life scientist from Bridgend, blogs regularly on Welsh affairs, nationalism and Welsh independence at Oggy Bloggy Ogwr.

Published in Cambria Magazine Summer 2012

Time for Wales to Unlock?

Independence, Welsh Politics No Responses »

Jan 052012

Scotlands Brave New Future

A week is a long time in politics, a Gannex-clad politician once said, but in terms of international affairs a decade is the equivalent of about 100 light years. As our Celtic cousins to the north of Hadrian’s Wall fastidiously prepare for their ‘Independence Referendum’, the rest of the people of the United Kingdom look on (depending on where they reside) with a mixture of jealousy, fascination, bemusement, and Home Counties anger.

Alex Salmond’s great achievement is that he has seamlessly repositioned Scottish nationalism and forged, in its wake, a universal, ecumenical sense of Scottish nationhood. The rhetoric of ‘the nation’ has now become ‘the national rhetoric’. Patriotism, and ‘the Scottish will’, is now an essential part of not just the Scottish body politic, but each Scottish person’s body politic. Be they born in the Highlands, in the Lowlands or be they recent arrivals, Salmond’s SNP has created a national mood that simply, but firmly, says “Scotland First”. Even many life-long, instinctive conservatives, those most upstanding advocates for the retention of the Union, now see not supporting the SNP – tacitly at least – as tantamount to ‘putting Scotland down’. Hence, the primary hurdle in the way of achieving independence has already been leaped. Scottish people are thinking Scotland. Indeed, things have moved so far that the Scottish Conservative Party, celebrating its centenary next year having been set up in 1912 to bolster the Unionist voice, is now navel-gazing and wondering whether, in 2012, they’ll be reduced to waving the Scottish ship out of Port UK, at the very moment that ‘Britishness’, in whatever guises that still remains, has its own valedictory celebrations at an athletics stadium in East London.

Whatever some people may argue, history, and especially contemporary history, has taught us that movements towards constitutional and societal change – movements activated by that most stirring of concepts ‘freedom’ – are almost always irreversible. The clichés about the genie being out of the bottle since the arrival of devolution will certainly be the mantra of the status quo brigade, though the decline and collapse of Internal Empire(-ism) has a longer genealogy. Point to Gwynfor in ’66 or Winnie in ’67, if you wish, but the Union itself, fabricated in the post-Absolutist milieu of 1707, was never a truly settled political project. As time went by, and through the bonding agents of wars and colonialism, more and more people certainly did buy into the adventurism of Empire. However, there remained a sturdy band of renegades – Irish Free Staters, and Chapel attending Cymru Fydd members amongst them – who never accepted, or at the very least did not fully buy into, ‘England’s Glory’. Furthermore, flashes of the Scottish Enlightenment sporadically stirred, and memories of Bannockburn were occasionally summoned. The SNP’s recent ascendency owes much to earlier feelings of Scottish distinctiveness, though, in fairness, they have also been calculating in their eschewing of some of the more over-the-top, dewy-eyed representations of Scotland and the Scottish psyche.

So where does Wales stand in this evolving political geography? Will Wales be a player for change, or will it be a peripheral bloc, shaken and stirred by constitutional upheavals but unwilling, or unable, to discard torpor and drift; unsteadily floating as events overtake it and shape its ultimate destiny. What can, or what should, it offer?

One suggestion may be the re-invigoration of the notion of ‘Welsh Europeans’. It may be time to think once again about this concept of duality. As a nation, and as a people, we have enough skin and bone to allow both identities to live and flourish. But it is a choice, and like all choices it requires some degree of knowledge, a forum for rational debate, and a certain amount of prescience, commitment to seeing the bigger picture is also a pre-requisite, especially so as the discussion on ‘Internal Enlargement’ within the European Union resonates across the mainland of our continent, and is being vociferously advocated by emerging states such as Catalunya, the Basque Country and Flanders. Thus, cases have to be made, and arguments won, if Wales is to attain ‘nationhood’ within the European context; a context that must feel natural and not forced nor false. If that happens, then people will begin to acclimatise themselves, before they start to envisage a ‘Day One’ scenario wherein Wales is a fully-enlivened nation.

Notwithstanding this, and however much we plan and prepare for this eventuality, it is not too fanciful to visualise some of the semi-surreal events that may take place on that momentous day when mature Wales finally positions itself, eye-to-eye, with the other nations of Europe and beyond. For instance, it will be a foregone conclusion that the uncompromising voice of Dr Kim Howells will be heard on Jason Mohammad’s Radio Wales phone-in talking about “the disaster” of self-government.

“A total shock to us all….a retrograde step”, he will no doubt proclaim. But will it be? A shock, that is, and a retrograde step. Well it hasn’t got to be on both counts, though preparation will be the key.

Scotland’s ‘Yes’ vote may induce a myriad of responses and reactions. There could be calls for federating the remnants of the UK. This may be the position emanating from the Unionists, as the Conservative and Labour parties will seek, probably using desperately archaic rationales, to forge a ‘New Britain’ concord from the ashes of the old state: even though the moniker ‘Britain’ has no political meaning unless it includes the land of Scotland, which it evidently will not. In all of this flux and confusion Plaid Cymru may boldly designate immediate independence, which its grassroots members would enthusiastically endorse, or the party may adopt the more cautious, gradualist option of Devolution Max (short-term), then parity with Scotland (medium to long-term). This ‘either or’ will probably come down to the direction, ambition and vehemence of Plaid Cymru’s new leader, and the pace of political events in the years and months leading to the Scottish Referendum. Plaid Cymru, therefore, has to decide how transformative it wants this process to be, and at what speed it wishes to travel. It also needs to think a lot harder about what could be termed the ‘Welsh-ification’ of Welsh politics and society. How ‘Welsh’ would an autonomous Wales really be? But all of this may be overshadowed by two other conceivable developments.

The first of these is a potential lesson from the recent past. The Berlin Wall was an edifice, like the UK state, which was seemingly indestructible. The Berlin Wall was a symbol of state control and rigidity. It also represented outmoded patterns of thought: the totalitarian hand over the mouths of the subjugated. But once challenged, and upon being toppled, the ‘domino effect’ of change – albeit that the change was in unknown directions and into uncharted waters – proved to be rapid and widespread. It was a visible pandemic of alteration. The UK, post the Scottish ‘Yes’, may follow the same path of express disintegration and metamorphosis. If it does, and this possibility cannot be lightly dismissed, then all of the political parties and politicians in Wales will have to postulate their contingency plans. Some, possibly many, ‘Brit Nats’ will disconsolately cling on to the crumbling UK apparatus in the pitiful hope that Wales could become some sort of ‘Greater England’ appendage in a concocted UK Mark 2. But, in all reality, when this moment does arise it will be far too late for those deniers of national selfdetermination, from all parts of the political spectrum, to merely bury their heads in the sand, or to heckle their disapproval from the Commons benches or Senedd swing-chairs.

However, the other arrangement that could materialise, and one which may well prove to be the paramount, and most potent, driving force in all of the reconfigurations, will be the inevitable development of a progressive ‘radical centre / centre-left’ in England. Though currently relatively inconspicuous, the Commonweal of Albion – The Guardian letter-writers, the old SDP’ers, the Hampstead intellectuals – must at some stage offer a cogent and structured view of what an independent England, unshackled from Britannia, could look like. Fairly inevitably, a resurgent England, fostering civic nationalism and offering an honest critique of its own political traditions and history, would act as a catalyst for re-assessment and subsequent socio-political and cultural restructuring. So, though England currently slumbers, it must, and will, eventually realise it has to wake up, address the Realpolitik, and show its hand of identity and intent. Till that time comes, however, it is left to the nationalists’ imaginaire to conjure up a picture of a deconstructed UK state, which will begin to emerge once the Scottish people say ‘Yes’ and the Penny Sterling drops, clankingly, on the peoples of its three contiguous nations.

gan Dr Alan Sandry

Republished from Cambria December 2011

Is Wales Economically Viable?

Economy, Independence, Welsh Politics 7 Responses »

Aug 012011

Siôn Jobbins argues that small nations can and do survive economically.

‘An independent Wales would not be economically viable.’ Funny, were Wales given a penny every time somebody said that, then Wales would certainly pay its way!
Yet this ‘can’t afford independence’ is a common refrain by commentators and politicians alike, and is currently used with great gusto as an argument against Scottish independence. But a quick glance through the articles, editorials and letters pages of the past make it clear that Wales and Scotland haven’t been the only European countries ‘which can’t afford independence’.
Malta was one example. An editorial in The Times on 7 January 1959 noted gravely: ‘Malta cannot live on its own … the island could pay for only one-fifth of her food and essential imports; well over a quarter of the present labour force would be out of work and the economy of the country would collapse without British Treasury subventions. Talk of full independence for Malta is therefore hopelessly impractical.’
The Times published a letter on January 21st, 1964 by Joseph Agius of ‘Ta’ Xbiex’ who feared ‘… the folly of giving independence [to Malta] when we are not economically prepared for it.’
Yet Malta gained independence on September 21st, 1964: essentially a city state on a barren rock; which – from a British point of view – was no more than a very large dock. By 2009 its GDP – at $23,800 per capita – was similar to other former imperial port cities like Liverpool, Newcastle or Marsailles.
Norway was another country which – in the eyes of many – couldn’t afford the independence it eventually gained in 1905. At the time it had limited selfgovernment within Sweden and one of the great bones of contention was that the consular service and tariffs were biased towards the more agrarian Swedish economy rather than the export-biased Norwegian one. Calls for greater independence were widely felt across Norway, but there were still some who were afraid its consequences, as was illustrated by a letter from ‘R.H.’ in The Times of July 6th, 1892. Headed ‘A Warning from Norway’, it argued:
‘… as regards the immediate point of consular representation, the opinion of the commercial class in both kingdoms, as expressed in the chambers of commerce, beginning with the Norwegian capital itself, is decidedly hostile to it. … At the same time it seems scarcely possible that the leaders of the movement can clearly realise the fate they are preparing for the country by what may well be termed a suicidal agitation … would not be a free national existence but subserviency, not to say bondage to Russia … [Norway] reduced to conditions of a central Asian khanate.’
More than a century later, it is certainly obvious to all that an independent Norway has not become a ‘central Asian khanate’.
To bring us closer to our present time, Slovakia gained independence in the famous ‘Velvet Divorce’ of 1993, an event which – in an otherwise generally balanced editorial – The Independent of December 31st, 1992 foretold with some gloom. ‘ … There is no shortage of potential disputes,’ it noted. ‘Currency union is doomed, with the Czechs determined to balance their budget and the Slovaks expected to head down the road of deficit financing and inflation.’ Continue reading »

A drama from S4/C’s crisis

Language, Opinion, Press and Media No Responses »

Jun 232011

What of it’s future?

gan Eifion Lewis

Touring a show they had devised themselves about S4C’s on-going crisis my students had quite a shock. The drama – 4 waleS/C england – was the product of intensive discussions they organised on behalf of a channel that they infrequently watch. Indeed, they infrequently watch any television channel. Facebook and other social media applications have generally taken the place of television with regard to this age group. The response of audiences in the village halls and chapel vestries of our Welsh speaking communities was quite a shock to them. Audiences presented them with a depth of feeling and concern about the potential fate of S4C that they were just not prepared for.
At the beginning of this year I took part in an open discussion in my own community about the channel’s crisis. Two emotions were prevalent: anger and anxiety. The anger emanated from the UK coalition government’s high-handed treatment of our one and only Welsh medium channel. The anxiety was focussed on its future. Does S4C have one?
It’s a good question and one that has almost as many answers as there are interested parties. Some media analysts are concerned that the contractual arrangements between S4C and the small group of largely Cardiff based companies that supply the bulk of its output will make it very difficult for the channel to manage the severe budget cuts that the government has enforced.
Although they are too wary to say it out aloud what they infer is simple: S4C does not have a sustainable future. Not, that is, in its present form. Their worst day scenario is a complete – call-in-the-receivers style -shutdown.
Their best guess is that a much smaller and very much less active S4C will be rescued from the ashes. Less active would mean a return to limited hours broadcasting – from 6.00pm until 10.00pm nightly, for example. Such a reduced schedule would mean the end of S4C’s substantial children’s output – an output that is widely acclaimed not only for its high production standards but also for its tangible contribution towards delivering a bilingual Wales. Such a reduction would also raise questions about S4C’s presence at our main communal happenings which include the Royal Welsh Agricultural Show as well as the Urdd and the National Eisteddfodau. Whereas television coverage tends to have an adverse effect on sporting events Wales’ principal cultural festivals have doubtlessly enhanced their appeal and effectiveness since the advent of S4C and its comprehensive coverage.
Ned Thomas, a veteran of the battle to establish a Welsh channel and an academic with wide experience of international media, has commented that whilst many European broadcasters are heavily dependent on the dubbing of American drama and films to fill their schedules S4C, from the start, has managed to provide us with television that is home-produced through and through. But whilst the harbingers of doom warn us that such a service cannot be taken for granted in the future other, more radical voices say that cutting S4C’s working budget does not necessarily mean a less virile service.
Indeed, they argue to the contrary. A slimmer S4C could be more invigorative and much more exciting. Such an argument is based on a presumption that the channel’s guiding figures will translate the funding crisis into an opportunity to re-imagine its role and re-define its raison d’etre to take account of the very different current context of television as a national media and its relationship with the whole issue of the Welsh language in comparison to the days of its inception, almost 40 years ago. In 1982, the Welsh fourth channel was allowed to join BBC 1, BBC 2 and HTV’s collective monopoly of home entertainment. Within the last 10 years the advent of multi-channel digital television followed by the social networking revolution has consigned that situation well and truly to history.
Similarly, the day-to-day status of the Welsh language has changed considerably over the same period of time.
Forty odd years ago hardly any one of the many professional agencies that now plan and promote the language at national, regional and local level existed. Most importantly of all, there was no Welsh Assembly Government to take political responsibility for the language and to instigate progressive initiatives across the boundaries of all devolved matters.
The students who wrote and performed 4 waleS/C england are from a variety of linguistic backgrounds. They would not have gathered together on a Welshmedium university course were it not for the bilingual educational provision whose widespread blossoming is indicative of the changes Wales has undergone since S4C was first launched. Language commentators attribute much of the success of the bilingual schools movement to the change in attitude towards the Welsh language effected by S4C’s early success. From being the language of all our yesterdays it became the lingua franca of a confident and ambitious young and creative energy.
Doomsday could still happen – not least if S4C is to become merely an esoteric department within the BBC’s vast and hierarchical empire. Surely the radicals’ approach is the only possible way of ensuring a meaningful future for the channel. Such an approach would engender the development of a broadcasting strategy that is based on the multi-channel and multi-platform reality of the moment. Such an approach would ensure that S4C, and its world-wide potential, is seen as an essential component within the burgeoning framework of a bilingual nation. In Welsh, ‘language’ opinionis idiomatically partnered by ‘culture’ (iaith a diwylliant). The radical re-imagining of S4C would re-establish the symbiotic link between the language and distinctive culture of Wales. Such a step could be very far reaching. It could even provide us with the power of self-belief.
It was understanding the battle fought by a determined few that enthused my students to create a drama out of S4C’s crisis.

Eifion Lewis

Eifion Lewis is a proud product of the Rhondda Valley. However, it is the rural communities of the west that have provided him with a base of creativity and energy with which to question both the fragility and resilience of Welsh culture. During his time as Lecturer in Charge of Theatr Felin-fach he instigated radical projects that
sought to develop a creative dialogue between cultures. Subsequently he established Cwmni Cydweithredol Troedyrhiw – a co-operative company that produced, in 2010, a whole year of multi-media work dedicated to the re-telling of how the community of Epynt was lost, 70 years previously. In May, 2010 he was appointed Performance and Script-writing Fellow at University of Wales, Trinity St David’s. He has one son, Rhodri, and his wife, Eleri, is part of Tinopolis’ Wedi 3 production team in Llanelli.

Rhodri and the tax raising question

Independence, Welsh Politics 3 Responses »

Dec 092009

AN INTERESTING answer from Rhodri Morgan on how the Assembly should fund its programme in his final press briefing before retiring, writes Clive Betts from the Assembly press gallery.

Should the Assembly have tax-raising powers.

The sort of right that almost every democratic body possesses, right down to ecommunity councils.

As he so often does, Rhodri gave us a general tour around the landscape. Particularly when he doesn’t want to answer a question.

On the one hand, it was surely wrong for a body which spends £16bn a year to possess no powers to raise even a penny of that money.

On the other, the German Laender are generally similar to Wales. But they depend entirely on money from central government in Berlin.

Mr Morgan said that light may be shed on the entire issue when the position in Scotland is clarified over the next couple of years.

Mr Morgan said there was a “strong feeling” that, because Scotland possesses such strong powers, “it must be able to raise taxes”.

And of course that is the way that things are going for Edinburgh, with London even thinking of Scotland taking powers over half of the income tax sector.

Older Entries