CAMBRIA POLITICO

The new Welsh Tories

Welsh Conservatives, Welsh Politics 3 Responses »

Nov 022011

During the Falklands war, a BBC reporter famously remarked that he had “counted” Fleet Air Arm planes in and had “counted them back”. Perhaps we should start doing the same with the significantly-enhanced group of 13 Conservative AMs.

Not that there is a fear that some might be lost in combat in a plenary session, or that they might fly off to political pastures new. that’s not a risk, particularly with Plaid (very well known to some of them) in its present state. But the party now possesses a new group leader, Vale of Glamorgan farmer Andrew RT (initials to distinguish him from the former Labour minister) Davies. And Mr Davies, regional AM for South Central, is a person who will listen carefully before deciding. Which is as a politician should do. The difference, of course, is that his predecessor Nick Bourne (Mid & West) was a man with beliefs. Beliefs so strong that he managed to rebuild the group totally from the days it was led by the lively right-winger Rod Richards, who headed an extremely strong campaign for a No vote to an Assembly, and didn’t seem to have changed his opinions much after he had won election.

Nick Bourne is the most obvious casualty of the Labour Party gerrymandering which changed the rules so that a politician could stand for either a constituency or a regional seat – not both. He was unseated when Russell George won Montgomery from the Lib Dems on Mick Bates’s retirement. Labour, of course, didn’t like the idea of dual-candidacy because it could help other parties. (When Labour changed the law they didn’t need to win any regional seats; currently, they have two, because they have won no constituency seats in Mid & West).

No-one doubts the new leader’s Welshness. He has better claims than his predecessor, who was from Worcestershire, although he had been in Wales since student days in Aberystwyth. Mr Davies’s family roots are in Newbridge on- Wye in Powys. His father moved to the Vale to start farming witha 70-acre smallholding until he became a tenant near St. Hilary, Cowbridge, before buying the farm and expanding. (Into how many acres – on two holdings, the other next door to former First Minister Rhodri Morgan at Michaelston-le-Pit – he won’t say. It’s not a done-question, apparently in the Vale!) the real difference between the pair could be over political stance. Mr Bourne was a leader in the left-wing Tory Reform Group, a grouping which fails to line up precisely with the political direction favoured by the Daily Mail and its numerous friends.

Leading members of the TRG include Ken Clarke, Michael Heseltine, former Welsh Secretary and current Foreign Secretary William Hague, a predecessor in Cathays Park, Peter Walker, David Davis (who quit as MP and then fought the subsequent by-election in protest at erosion of civil liberties), the Llanelli-born MP Robert Buckland (you might remember him from the Islwyn by-election after Neil Kinnock moved on), and Rene Kinzett, Tory group leader of Swansea council. This is the group which hoists aloft the once-discarded banner of one-nation Toryism. Prime Minister David Cameron may not be a member, but he’s certainly a supporter.

Mr Bourne never trumpeted his membership, and Mr Davies is careful not to pick sides on the issue. He talks of his need to represent a group with members from David Melding (South Central) who talks of the need for federalism, to Darren Millar (Clwyd West), who uses language Margaret Thatcher would have favoured. Mr Melding, in contrast, believes Thatcher’s name cripples the party in Wales. But then Mr Millar is a fellow federalist (though, no doubt, they don’t agree completely on that topic!). New in the post, and shadowed extremely closely in the leadership contest by party Leftist Nick Ramsay (despite claims, no recount was needed – there weren’t that many votes), it is perhaps no surprise that Mr Davies is cautious in his views. He is certainly going to be cautious about the possibility of distancing his group from the Tories at Westminster. Even talking about such issues as the Assembly’s controversial voting system.

Cheryl Gillan has already opened her mind to some sort of change to the constituency/regional system. But at present the Welsh Tory leader refuses to take the chance of forging something really radical and democratic, such as the single transferable vote – a system which could produce five-seat constituencies, withall members elected, Irish-style, by PR.

Mr Davies would rather see how the political-land lies. That’s why we’ve got to count his members in and out. How many of his group of 14 lean somewhat left-wards? It’s much easier to count those who don’t: just William George (SouthEast) and Darren Millar, surely. the Rights are easily outnumbered by the Lefties, ranging from the shadow minister (but then they’ve all got that position) whose ancestor faced the slashing sword blades of the 15th Hussars at Manchester in 1819 in a demonstration for Parliamentary reform, to the former Pleidwr.

I fancy the rest are in the middle. And middle-of-the road Tories always want to make whatever it is they are a member of, work, in the hope that the electorate will eventually give them their votes in gratitude. Which is why, of course, the (non-Thatcherite) Tories are the habitual governing party of much of Britain.

gan Clive Betts

Plaid’s Future

Opinion, Plaid Cymru, Welsh Politics 3 Responses »

Nov 022011

In little more than six months’ time, the May local elections will tell us whether Plaid Cymru has slid below the current lowly rankings of the Liberal Democrats – or will once again be aspiring to occupy the first division of Welsh politics.

In the wake of disastrous Assembly election results (which, we must recall, saw Plaid retreating almost everywhere and ceding the position of official opposition to the Tories) the signs are certainly not too good. Indeed, the Tories are on such a high at present that they are convinced they will come second to Labour in terms of council seats held. And belief can be more important than the truth – in particular among the party volunteers who do most of the local authority foot-slogging.

Andrew RT Davies, the Tories’ Assembly leader, talks proudly of controlling the same number of councils as Labour (two out of 22). But in reality, that tells us only how far Labour has sunk – no doubt to rise again under the leadership of Carwyn Jones.

The truth is, out of 1,263 seats, Plaid currently holds 207, Labour 351, the Tories 172; and the ‘Independents’ and others, 378. Of the parties, Plaid controls Caerffili and Gwynedd, and the Tories run Monmouth and Vale of Glamorgan. Admittedly, working out who else runs or controls our other authorities then becomes difficult. Certainly Labour remain top-dog, with an absolute majority on Rhondda Cynon Tâf and Neath Port Talbot; while Bridgend and Torfaen are run with the benefi t of a few ‘winks-and-nods’ from other parties, particularly in the case of Plaid in Torfaen.

Tory leader Andrew Davies is very cautious about making a forecast for May. After all, it was Margaret Thatcher who boasted (after her party’ gains in 1983) that she would, next time, field an entire rugby team of Welsh MPs. “Next time”, of course, saw her party start on its slide into near oblivion within Wales.

For Plaid, this year’s council by-elections added to May’s Assembly disaster, with the party vote down 3% to only 19%, while the Tories rose 3% to 25%, thus indicating that yet another potential disaster beckons next Spring..

In May, Plaid lost two seats, one of them (in Uwchaled, Conwy) simply because no candidate was fielded. However, in Gwynedd, the party held one (so it should, in an authority it is supposed to dominate) and gained another from the Lib Dems.

The acceptable news was that all other by-elections were fought – even in Torfaen, where the party risked voting ridicule in an area where the late-lamented Labour ‘backroomer’, John Vaughan Jones once crowed that a Plaid candidate had managed to achieve the lowest-vote ever in a poll.

One of the councils which Plaid considers to be theirs by right – because they are the largest party or group – is Ceredigion. Unfortunately, there have been no by-elections in the county to help us assess their current standings in this bastion of Plaid support. But a warning of a tough fight ahead in this area might be heeded from AM Elin Jones’s experiences last May. Both the Conservatives and Labour gained support, while the Lib Dems (who hold the Parliamentary seat) slipped slightly. But – more to the point for Plaid – Elin’s backing fell 8% per cent to 41%.

The only unalloyed good news was to be found in Carmarthenshire. There Plaid soared brilliantly to gain Llanegwad – is this an augury for winning control of County Hall, where the party is currently the largest?

Unfortunately, some at the top of Plaid too easily believe in the ‘swings-and-roundabouts’ theory: that sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, but it all works out OK in the end. Plaid reckons it won the battle of the Cabinet in the Assembly by forcing Labour to work rather than rest on its laurels, and to deliver policies that are good for Wales rather than purely for Labour. Plaid even forced the government to find the money to activate policies that, under Labour, were heading for delay – such as trains to Ebbw Vale; even though the promised link to Newport remains missing.

If Plaid were in government, the badger cull (aimed at curbing bovine TB in cattle) would already be under way – rather than delayed endlessly, either because Labour lack the experience of standing up and taking a lead, or they are devotedly following the London line. Unfortunately, the Tories seem better prepared for next May. They are certainly giving local government minister Carl Sargeant a hard time of the shambles of a ‘reorganisation’ that the Cabinet is inching towards. Moreover, the Tories are not scared to air their thoughts, yet when Plaid comes up with some positive ideas, it almost keeps the results under wraps. For example, the party conference debated the need for a local government manifesto based on a Valleys jobs-creation programme which would be implemented by Plaid-run councils throughout Wales. But who knows that? There was not a word about it on the party’s website: it is as if Plaid is scared of revealing its bright ideas to anyone else.

It will be a tough fight for Plaid next May. The party will sorely need leadership from the front, to make up for a lack of members on the ground in some regions. Elin Jones argues that Plaid needs a leader who will be “ambitious for Wales”: one who, while mindful of the Welsh-language activists, is also concerned for “the Swansea plumber and the retired couple from Wigan living in Pwllheli”. As she said, the party has indeed “stagnated of late”, yet with nominations for the new leader not opening until nearly Christmas, little time remains for the new leader to raise spirits and enthuse the party into believing that – come May – Plaid is no longer in retreat.

gan Clive Betts

Is the UK a Federal State? Should It Be?

Voting methods No Responses »

Oct 292011

The simple answer to the first question is “no, although it has been moving in that direction since the 1990s”. The devolved status of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales resembles true federal constitutions like the USA and Germany only superficially. Furthermore, the new redrawing of parliamentary constituencies tends to reverse the drift towards federalism.

The problem, of course, is the overwhelming predominance of England. In real federal nations there are of course great inequalities between one unit (state) and another, but there are mechanisms deliberately put in place to enhance the power of the smaller units. The most obvious version of this is devolution – certain powers are refused to the central authority and reserved to the units. The UK has been slowly and unevenly moving in this direction since the 1990s.

In a bicameral legislature there is usually a more subtle form of minority power, such that the lower house (US House, German Bundestag) is filled by election in proportion to the population of the units, but is kept in check by an upper house (US Senate, German Bundesrat) in which the smaller states are over-represented. In Britain the lower house (Commons) is elected according to population, but the upper house is filled by appointment. There is no mechanism by which Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are guaranteed a veto over the overwhelming power of the English in the lower house.

The election of upper and lower houses in a federal system can be thought of mathematically as depending on the population of each unit to some power. Lower houses, whether or not using the first-past-the-post system, are typically represented in direct proportion to the population of the district, i.e. as (population)¹. An upper house which is weighted towards the smaller districts goes as a power less than 1. In the US every state has the same number (2) of Senate seats, there is no dependence on population at all – mathematically, this is (population)⁰.

There is a slight federal tendency built into the current (“old”) Britih lower house, where seats are not exactly proportional to (population)¹ :

Nation Old seats New seats

England 533 502

Scotland 59 52

Wales 40 30

N. Ireland 18 16

Total 650 600

The new seats are as close as possible proportional to (population)¹, but a close look at the old seats shows that, relative to England, Northern Ireland follows (population)^0.99 while Wales and Scotland follows about (population)^0.93. These powers are far from the values (population)^0-0.5 which would be acceptable in a federal system, but even this small measure of federalism has now been taken away.

Whether the UK should be a federal state is of course a matter of opinion. On the one hand a defined federal constitution would give more protection against the overwhelming power of England; it would also give the smaller nations a limited say in issues such as defence and foreign policy which are outside the scope of devolved legislatures. On the other hand, a federal constitution will usually be set up by a mutually binding agreement whose basics cannot be altered. In particular secession by the sub-units is specifically forbidden (this was proved in America by the outcome of the Civil War). Federalism should therefore not be seen as a half-way house to independence – divorce can only occur by mutual consent in this marriage. Federalism is an end in itself. So, is half a loaf better than no bread? My opinion, for what it is worth, is that federalism is no substitute for Welsh independence, and that out-and-out nationalists should be very wary of accepting a binding federal constitution for the UK even as a compromise.

Quick Look at the Proposed Electoral Changes in Scotland

News, Opinion, Voting methods, Welsh Politics 6 Responses »

Oct 182011

The new Conservative bill on elections passed last year reduces the number of seats overall from 650 to 600. The breakdown is as follows:

Nation Old seats New seats

England 533 502

Scotland 59 52

Wales 40 30

N. Ireland 18 16

Total 650 600

I have estimated the effect on the parties if the last (2010) election had had the new boundaries, by simply assigning the percentages of the 2010 vote according to the way the 2010 constituency was split up:

Scotland: Old New (estd.)

C 1, Lab 41, LD 11, SNP 6 C 0, Lab 38, LD 8, SNP 6

England: Old New (estd.)

C 298, Lab 191, LD 43, G 1 C 291, Lab 183, LD 28, G 0

N. Ireland: Old New

Nationalist 18 Nationalist 16

Wales: Old New

C 8, Lab 26, LD 3, PC3 Available Jan. 2012 (see also my article ”The Taffymander” in Cambria).

The most interesting case is Scotland, where the SNP are the only part not to lose. This recalls my findings in the article “The Taffymander” that Plaid Cymru would lose less in the new seat distribution for Wales than any other party. I showed that this was due to the geographical distribution of the Welsh language, which is strong in “promontory”-type constituencies, and also in the neighbouring “mainland” regions. When seat numbers are reduced, promontory seats have to be expanded, and this can only be done in the direction of the neighbouring mainland, which only brings in more Welsh-language (i.e. Plaid) votes. The “promontories” involved in Wales are Ynys Mon, the Llyn, and Penfro (which can only expand into Welsh-specaking Arfon. Gwynedd, Ceredigion and Carmarthen).

It looks like the same is true in Scotland, where the “promontory” involved is Aberdeenshire (ignoring the Western Isles, which are given special treatment in the new law). Since they cannot expand into the North Sea, as the number of seats decreases, the promontory seats expand into a broad arc from Moray Firth to the Tay which is rich in SNP voters, and so the SNP do not lose.

But this leaves one big question unanswered – why are SNP voters so heavily concentrated in the north-east of the country? In the case of Plaid’s promontory seats, it is because of an underlying social variable – the Welsh-speaking vote. But what is the social variable underlying the SNP vote in North-East Scotland? Not language (Gaelic), nor religion (“Wee Free” Presbytreianism, by analogy with Welsh Nonconformity). Does anybody have any suggestions as to why this sector of Scotland is so strongly Nationalist? I’d like to hear from you.

State of the Welsh Assembly

Opinion, Welsh Politics No Responses »

Aug 252011

There’s not a single doubt that Plaid leader Ieuan Wyn Jones is dog-tired, although he puts in a stout and dogged performance during the weekly ritual of First Minister’s questions. But, behind the public bravado, Ieuan is sad and disappointed. He is a gentleman – although that’s not quite the right term for the son of a Welsh nonconformist minister – who has been dastardly traduced during six months of bear-baiting by those who claim to represent what’s left of the unthinking working class.
In the meantime, First Minister Carwyn Jones is desperately keen to avoid any repeat of those troubles in past Assemblies which could so nearly cripple an administration that relies on only 30 votes (however unstable and rocky some might prove) in a house of 60 members. But after the treatment Ieuan Wyn Jones has received, it looks as if Carwyn Jones will have to whistle for the support of Kirsty Williams’s Liberal Democrats if he is ever in need of help.
In the Senedd, Plaid is a sorry sight. In a crisis, you need to show strength, and Plaid’s London press office know that, and they succeed in getting their message across. Cardiff’s staff should really go back to their mother’s apron strings as it’s a tough world out here. To some extent, the situation in Cardiff is a reflection of how Ieuan works: he’s too much the son of a minister who preaches to the saved and the faithful, and avoids the sinners. Unfortunately, there are times when it seems there are more of the latter than the former. Plaid AMs agree that Dafydd Wigley – Ieuan’s predecessor, whom he prevented from returning as leader when medical problems proved far less serious than feared – would not have put up with the treatment that is now crippling both Ieuan and his party. Instead, someone would have ended up with a metaphorical bloody nose.
Fortunately, a revival is at hand. It’s being planned for Llandudno, where Plaid’s annual conference meets in September. And, it’s being planned by our ‘lord on earth’, none other than Lord Elis-Thomas, the AM for Dwyfor-Meirionydd, and recently the pioneer, longserving and deservedly-feted Presiding Officer of the Assembly.
Elis-Thomas is 64 and is spoiling for a new challenge. Plaid needs rebuilding fast and Dafydd has the background, knowledge and overall perspective to realise that the party’s tactics must be much broader and cleverer than believing that Labour voters are the only group House of Lords worth attracting.
Two other Plaid AMs are also stern critics of Ieuan’s belief that he can chose when he departs sometime during the next two years over the next two years when he departs. The mobile phone-shy Elin Jones is justifiably annoyed that her party’s failed election tactics have ensured that the farmers she fought for as a well-regarded minister are now suffering from Labour’s shilly-shallying on badger culling. Certainly the Ceredigion AM has for a long time been quietly thinking she could do a good job as party leader, but has always refrained from coming forward for fear of the intrusiveness into an individual’s private life which fighting for and holding that position nowadays involves. Also considering his position is the Mid and West AM, policy-wonk Simon Thomas. While Elin suffers from the public view that she is too rural and Welsh-speaking, Simon is a son of Aberdare who can trade it with the most-unreconstructed in the Labour Party.

Tory leadership
Angela Burns waxed eloquent in the closing days of the contest to replace Nick Bourne as the Assembly’s Conservative Party.
“We need someone to appeal to all parties, not just to our own faithful,” opined the AM for Carmarthen East and South Pembroke in the Assembly canteen. And her man is Nick Ramsay, Monmouth AM. Thanks to his speaking and debating ability, Nick has apparently wiped the floor with his opponent Andrew Davies during the party hustings,. But Nick is 36, and most of his life has been spent in politics, which the party faithful sometimes despise. However, Andrew is 43, and boasts the outside occupation of farming, which appeals more to the faithful. Nick lost, although closely (53-47). Which means the issue is still open.

Jocelyn
Jocelyn Davies (Plaid Cymru regional list AM for South Wales East) doesn’t sport the highest profile in the Assembly, but she has several quiet victories to her name. For example, it was the coalition’s deputy housing minister who helped highlight the idiocy of the Labour-authored farce of Cardiff passing laws only after Westminster had acted as a detailed second chamber. Jocelyn doesn’t throw all the blame at Westminster’s door for what was essentially one bill being rejected in London and another having to be submitted. The replacement Legislative Competence Order (LCO) was, indeed, a big improvement. It included a load of items not covered in the original – such as a reinstatement of the requirement that councils have to provide accommodation for gypsies and travellers.
For those with long memories, this requirement was “thatchered” when that particular lady was Prime Minister – so suiting the prejudices of the Tory shires and middle classes. Although the issue became one of the first to be investigated in detail by the Assembly in its very early days, at the time, our AMs could do little more than talk. Little wonder the gypies complained there was too much talk and nothing much (if anything) happening.
But in 2006, the Assembly was allowed to grow a bit and apply for LCOs – and for MPs to object to this new power. The gypsy provisions went into the second version of the LCO. Of course, even now that LCO has been passed, the detailed legislation has still to follow …. but at least that can now happen under the Assembly Acts that Cardiff
can implement without interference.
If necessary, the Assembly can even cock a snook at Tory right-winger David Jones, the Clwyd West MP, minister at the Wales Office, who forced Cardiff to cut back (for purely doctrinaire Tory reasons) on its attempt to restrict right to buy of council houses in regions of housing pressure (such as pretty coastal villlages where David’s friends from England tend to buy up anything for sale, pricing out the locals). But Jocelyn is one of those who doesn’t know whether she wants again to be part of a Labour coalition.

The mindset of the assembly
Once, the Welsh Assembly’s sophisticated information systems were world class. But, it seems, less so. Indeed, the place is going seriously backwards. Many of you will have heard of wi-fi – essentially a radio system which enables computers to work without being plugged into a phone line. Well, during my day at the Assembly preparing this column, an AM asked me to confirm our proposed lunch venue.. he had found me by wandering around the buildings. He had, in fact sent me an e-mail, but I could only read that once I got home. Why? Because the Assembly office building is not provided with wi-fi. There are no means by which e-mails sent to and from AMs can link up with lap-top computers within the building. Worse, when I asked the then head of news at the Assembly why this was so, the reply came back: “What’s wi-fi ?” I fear, also, that Assembly is developing into a mindset which exists purely for the happiness of the permanent ‘village’ itself. Paper versions of agendas are no longer provided: you are supposed to use either download them onto your personal computer before you arrive, or view display screens outside committee rooms. Unfortunately, those screens may not display all the details you require – and without wi-fi, you can’t pick up them up from your own e-mail account. And when the Assembly first opened in 1999, the parties were delighted to provide lists of who was who and their contact details. But not now. Is this because someone has decided their revelation poses some spurious security risk? Have our AMs become too self-important? Or has someone stupidly decided that Google can provide for all our needs?
I have written before about the lack of physical contact between the public and AMs (we have no Westminsterstyle Lobby, for example). The situation is worsening rather than improving. Nowadays, a clear ‘them’ and ‘us’ feeling pervades the Assembly, and we are the excluded ones. Cardiff has tried to ape Westminster, often without
good reason. Hopes for Cardiff being an open institution are being steadily dashed.

gan Clive Betts (republished from the current issue of Cambria magazine)

Is Wales Economically Viable?

Economy, Independence, Welsh Politics 6 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 »

The Taffymander

Welsh Politics No Responses »

Jun 232011

The first democratic nation in the world, the United States, came into being in 1789. It tells you something about democratic politicians that it only took them 20 years to work out how to thwart the voters and rig the voting system in their own favour.
In 1809 Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry realized that his opponents got most of their votes from the outlying parts of the state (which is roughly square in shape). His own voters were mostly in the centre of the square. So he drew the boundaries of the six constituencies to which Massachusetts was then entitled in such a way that one huge, long, very thin district curled around the edge of the square. It contained almost all his opponents, and of course they won it by a huge majority. The other five constituencies – central and compact – each had a small majority for Gerry, since the opposition voters were almost all in the long thin outer edge district. This outrageous long thin monstrosity was called “Gerry’s salamander”, from whence our term “gerrymander”.
While most people are presently focussing on the AV referendum, the new Conservative government is also planning to reduce radically the number of MPs in Parliament. The details are not yet completely settled, but the principle is that all seats should have exactly the same number of voters, as near as possible. What this means for Wales is (a) that, since Welsh seats are much smaller than average, Wales will lose a lot; not knowing the exact details yet, it will go down from 40 seats at the last election to somewhere between 18-26 seats at the next one; and (b) there are going to be amalgamations,divisions and other surgery on the existing seats to make
this reduction. This will give scope for rigging the voting system geographically, i.e. for gerrymandering.
There is an easy way to calculate the approximate effects of this, which is the point of this article. Welsh seats are so small at present that, if you combine them two by two, without any other surgery, they come out almost exactly equal. So I simply draw a map of the present Welsh seats, combine each one with one of its neighbours, add the votes for each party in the two seats, and predict the winner in the combined seat. The
number of seats goes down from 40 to 20.
But which seat to combine with which neighbour? The answer turns out to be surprisingly simple, the reason basically being that Wales is such a peculiar shape, with a lot of “sticking-out bits”, and a “thin bit in the middle.” American political scientists (who know all about gerrymandering) speak learnedly of “corner” seats
and “isthmus” seats. I prefer to say “promontory” seats like Lly^n, and a “Mid-Wales bloc” in the thin middle.
The most extreme promontory seat is Ynys Mon, whose only connection with the mainland is with the Arfon seat across the Menai Strait . There is no other natural way of combining it with any other part of Wales. The “natural” way of amalgamating seats is to add the votes in these two:

2010 Seat    PC    Lab   C    LD
Ynys Mon   9029 |11490 |7744 | 2592
Arfon            9383 | 7928 | 4416 | 3666
New Seat 18412 | 19418 | 12160 | 6258

I will explain shortly what I mean by “natural”. For now, notice that one Labour seat and one Plaid seat are folded into a Labour marginal. The map then dictates that, if promontory seats can only be combined with the neighbouring mainland, the next promontory (Lly^n = Meirionnydd & Dwyfor seat) can only combine naturally with the Tory seat of Aberconwy. The adding-up procedure then gives a marginal PC seat with the loss of one Conservative seat.
The next promontory is the Penfro peninsula in the South-West, which is big enough for two seats (Pembroke S. & Carmarthen W., and Preseli). The only natural combination is to put them together. Since both are held by the Tories, the new seat will be safe for them.
The Mid-Wales bloc at present contains four seats. Given the way the six promontory seats are forced to combine as above, there are only two ways of pairing the Mid-Wales four: an east-west pairing (Ceredigion + Montgomery and Brecon-Radnor + Carmarthen E.-Dinefor) or a north-south pairing (Ceredigion with Carmarthen E., Brecon-Radnor with Montgomery).
The Cambrian mountains are a natural dividing line; there are cultural differences between the borderlands of Powys and the Welsh-speaking west. The natural pairing is thus the north-south one. If so, the new Ceredigion+Carmarthen E. seat is marginal for Plaid Cymru, and the Powys seat (Brecon-Radnor-Montgomery) is Lib-Dem.
The remaining 30 present-day seats can be paired in almost any way you please. However, they have one thing in common – they form compact blocs in the North-East and South-East which are so strongly Labour that, whichever pairing you choose, all pairs except two will still be won by Labour after pairing. The current Liberal Cardiff Central seat and Conservative Cardiff N. and Vale of Glamorgan will be swamped by any possible neighbouring Labour-held partner. The two exceptions are Clwyd W. in the North-East and Monmouth in the South-East, which are both strongly Conservative enough to overcome possible Labour partners. The possible partners for Monmouth are the two Newport town seats and Torfaen; I regard the Torfaen option as the only natural one.

The situation is less obvious for Clwyd W.; I have rather arbitrarily chosen the Denbighshire pairing Clwyd W. + Clwyd S. In any case, the new seat is again Tory. I won’t go into detail about any other pairings in the North-East and South-East, because they will all be Labour.

My predictions are:
Party Old New Loss of Possible Marginals
Seats Seats seats (incumbent)
PC 3 2 33% Ynys Mon + Arfon (Lab)
Labour 26 4 46% Monmouth + Torfaen (Con)
Conservative 8 3 63% Dwyfor-Meirion. + Aberconwy (PC)
Lib. Dem. 3 1 67% Ceredigion + Carmarthen E. (PC)

So, while Wales as a whole of course loses, within Wales Plaid come out relatively well. This may appear surprising, but it is due to the way Welsh speakers are distributed, since they are Plaid’s core. They form a compact bloc (the “Bro”) in the west and particularly in the promontory seats. The promontories lose by being forced to expand, but they can only “naturally” expand into the adjacent mainland, which itself is strongly Welsh-speaking. The opposite is true for the Tories and Liberals, whose support is scattered across Wales. Expanding any of their seats brings in supporters
Finally, how to recognize a gerrymander once the new map has been drawn in a year or two? I have indicated in this article the pairings of seats which I consider “natural”. Any departure from the natural arrangements for the named seats should be suspect (for example) promontory seats not being combined with the adjacent mainland)
- a “taffymander”, so to speak.

gan MICHAEL HARRIS

Republished from the latest issue of Cambria magazine

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.

Older Entries Newer Entries

The new Welsh Tories

Plaid’s Future

Is the UK a Federal State? Should It Be?

Quick Look at the Proposed Electoral Changes in Scotland

State of the Welsh Assembly

Is Wales Economically Viable?

The Taffymander

A drama from S4/C’s crisis

What of it’s future?

Stuff from other blogs

Politics Twitter Stream

Cambria Magazine Subscription

Save Money!

Business4Wales

BBC Welsh Politics

Cambria Books

Cambria Books