Wednesday, February 12, 2025
The hidden scandals
It used to be Twitter where politicians came unstuck from a late night retweet or a drunken tirade, but the focus has switched recently to a less public forum, one which is meant to be private because it is encrypted, but is proving as leaky as most government departments.
I suppose it is because WhatsApp provides a supposedly secure and private forum that MPs and other politicians use it for confidential chats. The danger is when they get careless and believe that they can let rip with what they really think, believing that their views will never see the light of day, only to discover their error when the conversation adorns the headlines of every major newspaper.
At least two Labour MPs and quite a few Labour councillors are no doubt regretting doing just that this morning. The Independent reports that eleven Labour councillors have now been suspended from the party over their membership of a WhatsApp group that has already seen two MPs lose the whip.
The paper records that former health minister Andrew Gwynne was sacked over the weekend for offensive messages sent in the group, named Trigger Me Timbers, while on Monday, Oliver Ryan, who was elected as MP for Burnley last summer, became the second MP to have the whip withdrawn over his involvement in the group:
Now, almost a dozen more Labour members – including Mr Gwynne’s wife – are understood to have been suspended.
Other councillors who were administratively suspended on Tuesday are understood to include former council leader Brenda Warrington, and Claire Reid, a member of Labour’s national policy forum.
The group’s members come from Tameside and Stockport councils.
A Labour Party spokesperson said: “As part of our WhatsApp group investigation, a group of councillors have been administratively suspended from the Labour Party.
“As soon as this group was brought to our attention, a thorough investigation was launched in line with the Labour Party’s rules and procedures and this process is ongoing. Swift action will always be taken where individuals are found to have breached the high standards expected of them as Labour Party members.”
Mr Gwynne left government and was suspended from Labour at the weekend after reports he had sent messages to the group including a joke about a constituent being “mown down” by a truck.
He also said hoped a 72-year-old woman would soon die after she asked a councillor about bin collections.
The MP for Gorton and Denton in Greater Manchester said he deeply regretted his “badly misjudged comments” and apologised for “any offence caused” in a statement.
Sir Keir Starmer dismissed him as a minister as soon as he became aware of the comments, it is understood.
Meanwhile, the Daily Mail reported that Mr Ryan appeared to mock a fellow Labour MP over his sexuality in exchanges in the group.
The newspaper does not name the MP being mocked in the group and notes he has never discussed his sexuality publicly and is not publicly known to be gay.
Mr Ryan is also said to have used an offensive nickname to refer to local Labour leader Colin Bailey.
It is not a good look for a party that professes to be socially liberal and tolerant of all beliefs.
I suppose it is because WhatsApp provides a supposedly secure and private forum that MPs and other politicians use it for confidential chats. The danger is when they get careless and believe that they can let rip with what they really think, believing that their views will never see the light of day, only to discover their error when the conversation adorns the headlines of every major newspaper.
At least two Labour MPs and quite a few Labour councillors are no doubt regretting doing just that this morning. The Independent reports that eleven Labour councillors have now been suspended from the party over their membership of a WhatsApp group that has already seen two MPs lose the whip.
The paper records that former health minister Andrew Gwynne was sacked over the weekend for offensive messages sent in the group, named Trigger Me Timbers, while on Monday, Oliver Ryan, who was elected as MP for Burnley last summer, became the second MP to have the whip withdrawn over his involvement in the group:
Now, almost a dozen more Labour members – including Mr Gwynne’s wife – are understood to have been suspended.
Other councillors who were administratively suspended on Tuesday are understood to include former council leader Brenda Warrington, and Claire Reid, a member of Labour’s national policy forum.
The group’s members come from Tameside and Stockport councils.
A Labour Party spokesperson said: “As part of our WhatsApp group investigation, a group of councillors have been administratively suspended from the Labour Party.
“As soon as this group was brought to our attention, a thorough investigation was launched in line with the Labour Party’s rules and procedures and this process is ongoing. Swift action will always be taken where individuals are found to have breached the high standards expected of them as Labour Party members.”
Mr Gwynne left government and was suspended from Labour at the weekend after reports he had sent messages to the group including a joke about a constituent being “mown down” by a truck.
He also said hoped a 72-year-old woman would soon die after she asked a councillor about bin collections.
The MP for Gorton and Denton in Greater Manchester said he deeply regretted his “badly misjudged comments” and apologised for “any offence caused” in a statement.
Sir Keir Starmer dismissed him as a minister as soon as he became aware of the comments, it is understood.
Meanwhile, the Daily Mail reported that Mr Ryan appeared to mock a fellow Labour MP over his sexuality in exchanges in the group.
The newspaper does not name the MP being mocked in the group and notes he has never discussed his sexuality publicly and is not publicly known to be gay.
Mr Ryan is also said to have used an offensive nickname to refer to local Labour leader Colin Bailey.
It is not a good look for a party that professes to be socially liberal and tolerant of all beliefs.
Tuesday, February 11, 2025
The Labour MPs under fire over the tractor tax
The Independent publishes an analysis of a petition calling for a U-turn on Rachel Reeves’ controversial proposal to apply inheritance tax to farms that seeks to identify the Labour MPs under the most pressure to revolts against the measure.
They say that on Monday, hundreds of protesting farmers blocked Whitehall before MPs entered Parliament to debate the petition:
Under the chancellor’s plan, a 20 per cent inheritance tax rate will be introduced on farms worth more than £1 million from April 2026. But it has sparked a furious backlash in farming communities and created a problem for many newly-elected Labour MPs in rural constituencies.
Analysis of the signatories of a petition, called ‘Don’t change inheritance tax relief for working farms’ and signed by 150,000 people, shows the Labour-held seats with the highest number of constituents signing it.
It comes as Save British Farming and the Countryside Alliance urge MPs to act on the issue or face losing their seat at the next election.
The Labour seat with the highest number of petition signatures (768) was Penrith and Solway, held by Markus Campbell-Savours.
Mr Campbell-Savours, who has more farms in his constituency than any other Labour MP, voiced reservations on the policy in a speech in the Commons last year.
More recently, the MP, who won his seat last year with a 5,300 majority, organised a survey of farmers over concerns he had heard on the viability of family farms and supply chains in Cumbria as a result of the plan.
He did not respond in time to The Independent for comment.
The Labour seat with the second highest number of signatures (686) was Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr, where MP Steve Witherden became the first Labour representative to express doubts about the proposal last year.
Third was the Derbyshire Dales, where MP John Whitby won the seat with a majority of just 350. A total of 666 people have signed the petition in his constituency. In Mr Whitby’s maiden speech in October, he pledged to stand up for the farming community in the Dales.
MP David Smith’s constituency of North Northumberland and MP Anna Gelderd’s of South East Cornwall had 599 and 576 people signing the petition respectively.
Of the Labour MPs to win on the tightest majorities, MP Sam Carling’s constituency of North West Cambridgeshire had 294 signatures. Mr Carling won with a majority of just 39. In the Forest of Dean, 400 people signed the petition where MP Matt Bishop won with a majority of 278.
Labour MP Jenny Riddell-Carpenter, whose constituency Suffolk Coastal had 325 people sign the petition, told The Independent she had passed on farmers’ concerns to the Treasury.
She added: “But at the heart of the challenges facing our farming industry is that of profitability. Without profitability, farmers cannot sustain their businesses or plan for the future. This isn’t to take away the real concerns that farmers have about the Agricultural Property Relief, but it has exposed a real and fundamental problem facing the farming industry.”
Ms Riddell-Carpenter is one of 46 Labour MPs who has signed an open letter to six major supermarkets calling for a better deal for farmers.
This is one that will be worth watching.
They say that on Monday, hundreds of protesting farmers blocked Whitehall before MPs entered Parliament to debate the petition:
Under the chancellor’s plan, a 20 per cent inheritance tax rate will be introduced on farms worth more than £1 million from April 2026. But it has sparked a furious backlash in farming communities and created a problem for many newly-elected Labour MPs in rural constituencies.
Analysis of the signatories of a petition, called ‘Don’t change inheritance tax relief for working farms’ and signed by 150,000 people, shows the Labour-held seats with the highest number of constituents signing it.
It comes as Save British Farming and the Countryside Alliance urge MPs to act on the issue or face losing their seat at the next election.
The Labour seat with the highest number of petition signatures (768) was Penrith and Solway, held by Markus Campbell-Savours.
Mr Campbell-Savours, who has more farms in his constituency than any other Labour MP, voiced reservations on the policy in a speech in the Commons last year.
More recently, the MP, who won his seat last year with a 5,300 majority, organised a survey of farmers over concerns he had heard on the viability of family farms and supply chains in Cumbria as a result of the plan.
He did not respond in time to The Independent for comment.
The Labour seat with the second highest number of signatures (686) was Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr, where MP Steve Witherden became the first Labour representative to express doubts about the proposal last year.
Third was the Derbyshire Dales, where MP John Whitby won the seat with a majority of just 350. A total of 666 people have signed the petition in his constituency. In Mr Whitby’s maiden speech in October, he pledged to stand up for the farming community in the Dales.
MP David Smith’s constituency of North Northumberland and MP Anna Gelderd’s of South East Cornwall had 599 and 576 people signing the petition respectively.
Of the Labour MPs to win on the tightest majorities, MP Sam Carling’s constituency of North West Cambridgeshire had 294 signatures. Mr Carling won with a majority of just 39. In the Forest of Dean, 400 people signed the petition where MP Matt Bishop won with a majority of 278.
Labour MP Jenny Riddell-Carpenter, whose constituency Suffolk Coastal had 325 people sign the petition, told The Independent she had passed on farmers’ concerns to the Treasury.
She added: “But at the heart of the challenges facing our farming industry is that of profitability. Without profitability, farmers cannot sustain their businesses or plan for the future. This isn’t to take away the real concerns that farmers have about the Agricultural Property Relief, but it has exposed a real and fundamental problem facing the farming industry.”
Ms Riddell-Carpenter is one of 46 Labour MPs who has signed an open letter to six major supermarkets calling for a better deal for farmers.
This is one that will be worth watching.
Monday, February 10, 2025
Could there be a Trump-style coup in the UK?
Alan Rusbridger has a very disturbing article in Prospect magazine in which he speculates on whether a a Donald Trump tribute act could sweep into power in the UK, trash the existing order and overwhelm the system with a series of outlandish and extreme measures before anyone had a chance to catch their breath:
He says that there are two theories of British exceptionalism which we tell to reassure ourselves that this could never happen, one is the Good Chap Theory while the other is the Cable Street warm bath:
The Good Chap Theory was coined by Professor Peter Hennessy, himself the ultimate good chap, who has spent his life writing about how power is wielded in a country which has (unlike the US) no written constitution—nothing on paper—but which nonetheless muddles through. So taken with this notion is he that he called his collection of essays on the subject Muddling Through.
The Good Chap Theory is the idea that the letter of the rules is less important than the system being run by players who understand their spirit. It was a theory which sort of muddled through until tested to breaking point by Boris Johnson (aided by his sidekick Dominic Cummings) and then by Liz Truss, who got muddled and was rather quickly dispensed with.
The Cable Street warm bath is the one that basks in the fundamental moderation and decency of the British people. In the mid-30s, when fascism was on the rise throughout Europe, we Brits wanted nothing to do with it. Oswald Mosley’s Blackshirts may have marched through Stepney in 1936—but they were met with honest working-class folk who gave them a thrashing.
Put these two fables together and we can amuse ourselves with the wild melodrama currently playing out in Washington DC and comfort ourselves that, to borrow the title of Sinclair Lewis’s 1936 dystopian novel, “it can’t happen here”.
Rusbridger is not so sure that these models work anymore:
You can be reasonably sure that there are a bunch of bright twenty-somethings in Tufton Street—the HQ of shadowy well-funded right-wing thinktanks—watching every move in Maga-land and plotting exactly how they could transplant it.
We know Elon Musk has developed a keen interest in British politics and might gladly fund Nigel Farage/Richard Tice/Tommy Robinson (delete as appropriate) to have a go at wreaking the same kind of chaos in London as he has in Washington. Blow the whole thing up and start again.
Or you could read the lip-smacking X posts of the British Right’s philosopher-in-chief, Matthew Goodwin, in the hour of Trump’s inauguration. He asked his followers to imagine Day 1 of an equivalent regime in the UK: “A national border emergency is declared; the military is sent to stop the boats; all constraints on North Sea gas and oil are removed; shut down woke ideology; immediately end DEI; establish a new department of government efficiency”. Sound familiar?
How hard would it be?
Coups generally start with capturing the media. Quite a large chunk of ours wouldn’t need much capturing: they’re practically there already. The BBC wouldn’t be a hard nut to crack. Sack the chair (there’s precedent) and get them to sack the director general (ditto). Abolish the licence fee and say the organisation must in future stand on its own two feet. They’d soon fall into line.
You’d need your own version of Fox News: welcome GB News! Do we still need Ofcom to regulate fairness and impartiality? Thought not.
But don’t stop there. Ask every regulator to resign and replace them with loyalists. This would require dealing with the Commissioner for Public Appointments. Happily this office, set up by the Nolan Committee to straighten out public life in 1995, has never been on a statutory footing. So abolishing it would be the work of a moment—done by an Order in Council.
He says that if this supremo has a comfortable majority in House of Commons and that MPs were as loyal/intimidated as Maga representatives seem to be, there would be little problem with parliament nodding anything through. Acts would be paased as skeletons with all the detail subject to secondary legislation and orders in council, while the House of Lords, troublesome civil servants and even stubborn judges could be removed by one way or another.
Without a written constitition, a determined Prime Minister with unquestioning support in the House of Commons could effectively write his own. It is not a pleasant prospect.
He says that there are two theories of British exceptionalism which we tell to reassure ourselves that this could never happen, one is the Good Chap Theory while the other is the Cable Street warm bath:
The Good Chap Theory was coined by Professor Peter Hennessy, himself the ultimate good chap, who has spent his life writing about how power is wielded in a country which has (unlike the US) no written constitution—nothing on paper—but which nonetheless muddles through. So taken with this notion is he that he called his collection of essays on the subject Muddling Through.
The Good Chap Theory is the idea that the letter of the rules is less important than the system being run by players who understand their spirit. It was a theory which sort of muddled through until tested to breaking point by Boris Johnson (aided by his sidekick Dominic Cummings) and then by Liz Truss, who got muddled and was rather quickly dispensed with.
The Cable Street warm bath is the one that basks in the fundamental moderation and decency of the British people. In the mid-30s, when fascism was on the rise throughout Europe, we Brits wanted nothing to do with it. Oswald Mosley’s Blackshirts may have marched through Stepney in 1936—but they were met with honest working-class folk who gave them a thrashing.
Put these two fables together and we can amuse ourselves with the wild melodrama currently playing out in Washington DC and comfort ourselves that, to borrow the title of Sinclair Lewis’s 1936 dystopian novel, “it can’t happen here”.
Rusbridger is not so sure that these models work anymore:
You can be reasonably sure that there are a bunch of bright twenty-somethings in Tufton Street—the HQ of shadowy well-funded right-wing thinktanks—watching every move in Maga-land and plotting exactly how they could transplant it.
We know Elon Musk has developed a keen interest in British politics and might gladly fund Nigel Farage/Richard Tice/Tommy Robinson (delete as appropriate) to have a go at wreaking the same kind of chaos in London as he has in Washington. Blow the whole thing up and start again.
Or you could read the lip-smacking X posts of the British Right’s philosopher-in-chief, Matthew Goodwin, in the hour of Trump’s inauguration. He asked his followers to imagine Day 1 of an equivalent regime in the UK: “A national border emergency is declared; the military is sent to stop the boats; all constraints on North Sea gas and oil are removed; shut down woke ideology; immediately end DEI; establish a new department of government efficiency”. Sound familiar?
How hard would it be?
Coups generally start with capturing the media. Quite a large chunk of ours wouldn’t need much capturing: they’re practically there already. The BBC wouldn’t be a hard nut to crack. Sack the chair (there’s precedent) and get them to sack the director general (ditto). Abolish the licence fee and say the organisation must in future stand on its own two feet. They’d soon fall into line.
You’d need your own version of Fox News: welcome GB News! Do we still need Ofcom to regulate fairness and impartiality? Thought not.
But don’t stop there. Ask every regulator to resign and replace them with loyalists. This would require dealing with the Commissioner for Public Appointments. Happily this office, set up by the Nolan Committee to straighten out public life in 1995, has never been on a statutory footing. So abolishing it would be the work of a moment—done by an Order in Council.
He says that if this supremo has a comfortable majority in House of Commons and that MPs were as loyal/intimidated as Maga representatives seem to be, there would be little problem with parliament nodding anything through. Acts would be paased as skeletons with all the detail subject to secondary legislation and orders in council, while the House of Lords, troublesome civil servants and even stubborn judges could be removed by one way or another.
Without a written constitition, a determined Prime Minister with unquestioning support in the House of Commons could effectively write his own. It is not a pleasant prospect.
Sunday, February 09, 2025
Labour giving Farage credibility by copycat adverts
The Mirror reports that Labour has launched adverts boasting about deporting migrants using the colour and branding of Nigel Farage's Reform UK party, failing to include any iconic Labour red nor the red Labour rose logo.
The paper says that instead the ads use the turquoise blue - and the straight-edged font - of Reform UK:
One Facebook page set up under Reform UK's colours is the UK Migration Updates, which is run for by the Yorkshire and Humber Labour party. It posts stories and updates celebrating Labour's deportation figures. The account appears to have become active at the start of January.
And a Reform UK-style attack ad has been posted on a Facebook page called Putting Runcorn First, which is run by Labour North West. It has a banner at the top reading "breaking news", with a caption saying: "Labour hits five-year high in migrant removals. Labour government removes a record 16,400 illegal migrants since taking power including 2,580 foreign criminals."
It is not a new tactic for Labour to tailor its campaigning material depending on the region, demographic or subject matter of the ad. Similarly it is not unknown for other parties to use Labour's signature red in attack ads against the party. But it is the first time the use of Reform UK's colour as a deliberate choice has been so explicitly noticed, illustrating Labour's shift in starting to take Mr Farage's party more seriously.
Such targeted advertising is being rolled out in areas where Reform UK could pose a threat, such as constituencies where the party came in second place to Labour at the general election. It comes after Reform UK topped the UK's polls for the first time earlier this week. Elsewhere in the country Labour has used targeted ads to challenge the Tories or the Green party.
Some social media users did not look favourably on the tactics. Commenting on a post the UK Migration Updates, Facebook user Nicholas Graham said: "This page is absolutely disgraceful in branding values and message. If the Labour Party really has no higher ambition than to be mistaken for the witless rabble of Reform, you have thrown away whatever moral compass you may once have had."
Another user Anna Hubbard: "Appalling. You can't out Reform Reform. Stop pandering."
This really is scraping the barrel by Labour.
The paper says that instead the ads use the turquoise blue - and the straight-edged font - of Reform UK:
One Facebook page set up under Reform UK's colours is the UK Migration Updates, which is run for by the Yorkshire and Humber Labour party. It posts stories and updates celebrating Labour's deportation figures. The account appears to have become active at the start of January.
And a Reform UK-style attack ad has been posted on a Facebook page called Putting Runcorn First, which is run by Labour North West. It has a banner at the top reading "breaking news", with a caption saying: "Labour hits five-year high in migrant removals. Labour government removes a record 16,400 illegal migrants since taking power including 2,580 foreign criminals."
It is not a new tactic for Labour to tailor its campaigning material depending on the region, demographic or subject matter of the ad. Similarly it is not unknown for other parties to use Labour's signature red in attack ads against the party. But it is the first time the use of Reform UK's colour as a deliberate choice has been so explicitly noticed, illustrating Labour's shift in starting to take Mr Farage's party more seriously.
Such targeted advertising is being rolled out in areas where Reform UK could pose a threat, such as constituencies where the party came in second place to Labour at the general election. It comes after Reform UK topped the UK's polls for the first time earlier this week. Elsewhere in the country Labour has used targeted ads to challenge the Tories or the Green party.
Some social media users did not look favourably on the tactics. Commenting on a post the UK Migration Updates, Facebook user Nicholas Graham said: "This page is absolutely disgraceful in branding values and message. If the Labour Party really has no higher ambition than to be mistaken for the witless rabble of Reform, you have thrown away whatever moral compass you may once have had."
Another user Anna Hubbard: "Appalling. You can't out Reform Reform. Stop pandering."
This really is scraping the barrel by Labour.
Saturday, February 08, 2025
New book that undermines Starmer
To be honest I'm getting a bit bored with massive tomes lifting the lid on behind the scenes controversy in government, but that isn't going to stop me blogging on some of the more newsworthy revelations of the latest.
The Independent reports that Get In, by Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund has left the prime minister facing a series of questions over a meeting with his voice coach while the UK was under strict Covid restrictions and details an attempted ‘coup’ by his deputy.
They add that The loss of the Hartlepool by-election in May 2021 came as a blow to the Labour leader, so much so that in its aftermath, he sacked the party chairman, Angela Rayner, triggering a stand-off:
She reportedly went to the pub and turned off her phone.
According to the book, a confident says she was ready to launch a coup against her leader: “We could have taken him out there and then, without a shadow of a doubt. All of the unions were on board. We had Unite. We had the money. Momentum were lined up. We were done. We had a rally of 5,000 people ready to go.”
In the end, Ms Rayner was eventually given not just one new job but three -including shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. The book claims Rayner’s doubts over Sir Keir continued, however, and that she also complained she did not know who ran the Labour Party — adding that it could not be its leader, because he could not run a bath.
The paper says that the one story from the book that has caused the most problems for Starmer is when it emerged that former actress Leonie Mellinger, who was his voice coach, was made a ‘key worker’ during the Covid pandemic:
The two met on Christmas Eve to discuss his response to Mr Johnson’s Brexit deal, even though London was under ‘Tier 4’ Covid restrictions at the time. Ms Mellinger later travelled to Brighton, which was under ‘Tier 3’ restrictions, at a time when people were told not to travel between areas. Sir Keir has insisted no rules were broken and since hit back at the Tories saying: “I was working, they were partying.”
The Tories have called for the police to investigate, but on Wednesday they said they would not because too much time had passed.
For me the most damaging revelation is that Morgan McSweeney once questioned his boss’s lack of political nous by saying: “Keir acts like an HR manager, not a leader. What’s the point of circling the wagons if you can’t last?”
They add that another of Sir Keir’s senior advisers in opposition, jokingly referenced London’s driverless Docklands Light Railway (DLR) to say: “Keir’s not driving the train. He thinks he’s driving the train, but we’ve sat him at the front of the DLR.”
How these stories play out in the coming months will need to be seen, but in terms of the idea that Starmer is not up to the job could well haunt him to the next general electiuon.
The Independent reports that Get In, by Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund has left the prime minister facing a series of questions over a meeting with his voice coach while the UK was under strict Covid restrictions and details an attempted ‘coup’ by his deputy.
They add that The loss of the Hartlepool by-election in May 2021 came as a blow to the Labour leader, so much so that in its aftermath, he sacked the party chairman, Angela Rayner, triggering a stand-off:
She reportedly went to the pub and turned off her phone.
According to the book, a confident says she was ready to launch a coup against her leader: “We could have taken him out there and then, without a shadow of a doubt. All of the unions were on board. We had Unite. We had the money. Momentum were lined up. We were done. We had a rally of 5,000 people ready to go.”
In the end, Ms Rayner was eventually given not just one new job but three -including shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. The book claims Rayner’s doubts over Sir Keir continued, however, and that she also complained she did not know who ran the Labour Party — adding that it could not be its leader, because he could not run a bath.
The paper says that the one story from the book that has caused the most problems for Starmer is when it emerged that former actress Leonie Mellinger, who was his voice coach, was made a ‘key worker’ during the Covid pandemic:
The two met on Christmas Eve to discuss his response to Mr Johnson’s Brexit deal, even though London was under ‘Tier 4’ Covid restrictions at the time. Ms Mellinger later travelled to Brighton, which was under ‘Tier 3’ restrictions, at a time when people were told not to travel between areas. Sir Keir has insisted no rules were broken and since hit back at the Tories saying: “I was working, they were partying.”
The Tories have called for the police to investigate, but on Wednesday they said they would not because too much time had passed.
For me the most damaging revelation is that Morgan McSweeney once questioned his boss’s lack of political nous by saying: “Keir acts like an HR manager, not a leader. What’s the point of circling the wagons if you can’t last?”
They add that another of Sir Keir’s senior advisers in opposition, jokingly referenced London’s driverless Docklands Light Railway (DLR) to say: “Keir’s not driving the train. He thinks he’s driving the train, but we’ve sat him at the front of the DLR.”
How these stories play out in the coming months will need to be seen, but in terms of the idea that Starmer is not up to the job could well haunt him to the next general electiuon.
Friday, February 07, 2025
The loss of a Welsh political giant
Very sad and shocked at the death of Dafydd Elis Thomas today.
I first met him when I was a student in, I think, 1980, at an NUS Wales conference, where he confessed to a table of us that he couldnt understand the logic of nationalists burning holiday homes when so many people were homeless.
We worked closely together on the Assembly Commission for a number of years, where Dafydd carved out an independent role for the parliamentary side of the Assembly, creating a separate identity for the organisation with its own chief executive and branding.
His role in developing bilingualism in the Assembly was not without controversy, but the settlement he helped to create persists to this day.
I would argue that he was one of the major architects of devolution. His influence is evident in all the subsequent Government of Wales Acts after 1998, while the organisational and political structure and processes used by MSs today, have his stamp all over them.
But he was also independent, stubborn, wilful, and determined, all characteristics of a first class politician with an exceptional political brain. He was also kind, attentive, and caring with a strong interest in the Welsh language and culture, a passion he was able to put into practise as a deputy minister in his final years as an AM.
He took a peerage in defiance of the wishes of his party, and told me often that when in the House of Lords he followed the Liberal Democrat whip.
He was a Welsh giant politically, and will be greatly missed. My thoughts and commiserations are with Mair and all his friends and family.
I first met him when I was a student in, I think, 1980, at an NUS Wales conference, where he confessed to a table of us that he couldnt understand the logic of nationalists burning holiday homes when so many people were homeless.
We worked closely together on the Assembly Commission for a number of years, where Dafydd carved out an independent role for the parliamentary side of the Assembly, creating a separate identity for the organisation with its own chief executive and branding.
His role in developing bilingualism in the Assembly was not without controversy, but the settlement he helped to create persists to this day.
I would argue that he was one of the major architects of devolution. His influence is evident in all the subsequent Government of Wales Acts after 1998, while the organisational and political structure and processes used by MSs today, have his stamp all over them.
But he was also independent, stubborn, wilful, and determined, all characteristics of a first class politician with an exceptional political brain. He was also kind, attentive, and caring with a strong interest in the Welsh language and culture, a passion he was able to put into practise as a deputy minister in his final years as an AM.
He took a peerage in defiance of the wishes of his party, and told me often that when in the House of Lords he followed the Liberal Democrat whip.
He was a Welsh giant politically, and will be greatly missed. My thoughts and commiserations are with Mair and all his friends and family.
Palmerston is back
You can't keep a good cat down. Just when we though that foreign office mouser, Palmerston had gone into retieement, he resurfaces in Bermuda of all places.
The Independent reports that the former chief mouser has come out of retirement for a new, “purr-fect” job.
The paper says that the news, posted on Wednesday on Palmerston’s official DiploMog account on social network X, comes more than four years after it was announced that he was retiring from public life to a “quieter and easier” life in the countryside:
Palmerston had been adopted by Foreign Office diplomat Andrew Murdoch when he retired as chief mouser. Murdoch has now been appointed governor of Bermuda, a tiny British territory in the mid-Atlantic.
“Diplomacy and a purr-fect role have lured me out of retirement,” the post said.
“I’ve just started work as feline relations consultant (semi-retired) to the new Governor of Bermuda. I’ve been busy meeting very welcoming Bermudians.”
The Foreign Office said Palmerston “will attend only the meetings he deems important, offering advice when necessary and indulging in well-earned naps.”
Palmerston, who is named after the longest-serving British Foreign Secretary, Lord Palmerston, arrived in government in April 2016 as a rescue cat. He was regarded with affection and showered with treats by Foreign Office staff, occasionally bringing them dead mice in return.
He had less-than-smooth diplomatic relations with Larry, cat-in-residence at nearby 10 Downing Street. The two were sometimes seen fighting in the street outside the British prime minister’s home.
Larry really has come out second-best this time.
The Independent reports that the former chief mouser has come out of retirement for a new, “purr-fect” job.
The paper says that the news, posted on Wednesday on Palmerston’s official DiploMog account on social network X, comes more than four years after it was announced that he was retiring from public life to a “quieter and easier” life in the countryside:
Palmerston had been adopted by Foreign Office diplomat Andrew Murdoch when he retired as chief mouser. Murdoch has now been appointed governor of Bermuda, a tiny British territory in the mid-Atlantic.
“Diplomacy and a purr-fect role have lured me out of retirement,” the post said.
“I’ve just started work as feline relations consultant (semi-retired) to the new Governor of Bermuda. I’ve been busy meeting very welcoming Bermudians.”
The Foreign Office said Palmerston “will attend only the meetings he deems important, offering advice when necessary and indulging in well-earned naps.”
Palmerston, who is named after the longest-serving British Foreign Secretary, Lord Palmerston, arrived in government in April 2016 as a rescue cat. He was regarded with affection and showered with treats by Foreign Office staff, occasionally bringing them dead mice in return.
He had less-than-smooth diplomatic relations with Larry, cat-in-residence at nearby 10 Downing Street. The two were sometimes seen fighting in the street outside the British prime minister’s home.
Larry really has come out second-best this time.
Thursday, February 06, 2025
Rushed, misjudged and profligate
The Guardian reports on the conclusion of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee that Home Office’s plans to house asylum seekers revealed a “dysfunctional culture of repeated mistakes and weak internal challenge” that wasted nearly £100m.
The paper says the Committee's report found that the department had a “troubling culture that repeatedly wastes public money” after examining the acquisition of the £15.4m HMP Northeye site to house new arrivals:
The cross-party committee said senior civil servants ignored expert advice available at the time during its bid to buy the site, in Bexhill-on-Sea, East Sussex, and bypassed processes designed to protect public money.
The report also said that a small ministerial group, which included leading Tories Robert Jenrick and Oliver Dowden, backed plans for the “rushed and misjudged” £15m purchase of the asbestos-ridden former airbase.
In a report released on Wednesday, the committee said the Home Office had also spent £34m on the Bibby Stockholm barge, which was towed away from Portland in Dorset last week having housed far fewer asylum seekers than expected. Another £60m was spent on a possible migrant housing site at RAF Scampton, the former home of the Dambusters, which was abandoned before it could open, and another £2.9m of taxpayer’s cash was spent on a cancelled site in Linton-on-Ouse, North Yorkshire.
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Conservative chair of the committee, said: “Northeye was one of a series of failed Home Office acquisitions for large asylum accommodation sites, totalling a cost to the public purse of almost £100m of taxpayers’ money.
“Treasury rules for safeguarding public money are there for a reason and should only be overridden in extreme circumstances. This case clearly demonstrates why those safeguards should normally be followed.”
Rishi Sunak’s government ultimately paid £15.4m for the abandoned prison site a year after the previous owners bought it from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) for £6m.
The government “chose to dispense with some established processes” to acquire the Northeye site for asylum accommodation at pace, leading to increased costs.
The National Audit Office (NAO) found in November that the main risks on the site were ground contamination, asbestos in buildings, flooding risks and issues with mains connection to utilities. It was estimated that sorting out these problems could cost more than £20m.
In December 2022, the then prime minister, Sunak, told parliament he would end the use of hotels to house people seeking asylum.
A month earlier, the government established the small ministerial group, which aimed to set up the former MoD sites at Wethersfield and Scampton, the Bibby Stockholm barge docked at Portland port, and the Northeye site to house asylum seekers.
Jenrick visited Northeye in November 2022 “and subsequently led on the acquisition through to the Home Office’s purchase of the site in March 2023”, the auditors’ report said.
The Home Office then dispensed with the usual processes to buy the site. The Home Office ruled that a “full business case” would not be needed to argue that the purchase was value for money, even though this was a condition for receiving Treasury approval. There was no formal “red book” evaluation of the site’s value.
The PAC report said while the Home Office identified “over 1,000” lessons from its acquisitions of large asylum accommodation sites, committee members remain to be convinced it can put that learning into practice.
The report added: “Given that some of these ‘lessons’ should have been evident at the time, we are concerned about the Home Office’s ability to put that learning into practice and prevent such an unacceptable waste of public money from happening again.”
Among the report’s recommendations it urged the Home Office to set out to the committee how it intends to reduce spending for asylum support, how it will fairly integrate asylum seekers across local councils, and by when the Border Security Command will reduce the number of migrants arriving by boat across the English Channel.
The obsession of Tory Ministers with the asylum agenda, their unrealistic targets on immigration and their profligacy in pursuit of these objectives has cost the taxpayer dear, and in the process failed to make any difference to resolving the issues they highlighted.
The paper says the Committee's report found that the department had a “troubling culture that repeatedly wastes public money” after examining the acquisition of the £15.4m HMP Northeye site to house new arrivals:
The cross-party committee said senior civil servants ignored expert advice available at the time during its bid to buy the site, in Bexhill-on-Sea, East Sussex, and bypassed processes designed to protect public money.
The report also said that a small ministerial group, which included leading Tories Robert Jenrick and Oliver Dowden, backed plans for the “rushed and misjudged” £15m purchase of the asbestos-ridden former airbase.
In a report released on Wednesday, the committee said the Home Office had also spent £34m on the Bibby Stockholm barge, which was towed away from Portland in Dorset last week having housed far fewer asylum seekers than expected. Another £60m was spent on a possible migrant housing site at RAF Scampton, the former home of the Dambusters, which was abandoned before it could open, and another £2.9m of taxpayer’s cash was spent on a cancelled site in Linton-on-Ouse, North Yorkshire.
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Conservative chair of the committee, said: “Northeye was one of a series of failed Home Office acquisitions for large asylum accommodation sites, totalling a cost to the public purse of almost £100m of taxpayers’ money.
“Treasury rules for safeguarding public money are there for a reason and should only be overridden in extreme circumstances. This case clearly demonstrates why those safeguards should normally be followed.”
Rishi Sunak’s government ultimately paid £15.4m for the abandoned prison site a year after the previous owners bought it from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) for £6m.
The government “chose to dispense with some established processes” to acquire the Northeye site for asylum accommodation at pace, leading to increased costs.
The National Audit Office (NAO) found in November that the main risks on the site were ground contamination, asbestos in buildings, flooding risks and issues with mains connection to utilities. It was estimated that sorting out these problems could cost more than £20m.
In December 2022, the then prime minister, Sunak, told parliament he would end the use of hotels to house people seeking asylum.
A month earlier, the government established the small ministerial group, which aimed to set up the former MoD sites at Wethersfield and Scampton, the Bibby Stockholm barge docked at Portland port, and the Northeye site to house asylum seekers.
Jenrick visited Northeye in November 2022 “and subsequently led on the acquisition through to the Home Office’s purchase of the site in March 2023”, the auditors’ report said.
The Home Office then dispensed with the usual processes to buy the site. The Home Office ruled that a “full business case” would not be needed to argue that the purchase was value for money, even though this was a condition for receiving Treasury approval. There was no formal “red book” evaluation of the site’s value.
The PAC report said while the Home Office identified “over 1,000” lessons from its acquisitions of large asylum accommodation sites, committee members remain to be convinced it can put that learning into practice.
The report added: “Given that some of these ‘lessons’ should have been evident at the time, we are concerned about the Home Office’s ability to put that learning into practice and prevent such an unacceptable waste of public money from happening again.”
Among the report’s recommendations it urged the Home Office to set out to the committee how it intends to reduce spending for asylum support, how it will fairly integrate asylum seekers across local councils, and by when the Border Security Command will reduce the number of migrants arriving by boat across the English Channel.
The obsession of Tory Ministers with the asylum agenda, their unrealistic targets on immigration and their profligacy in pursuit of these objectives has cost the taxpayer dear, and in the process failed to make any difference to resolving the issues they highlighted.
Wednesday, February 05, 2025
Are Labour's donors dictating policy?
The Guardian reports that Labour reportedly dropped a plan to ban foreign political donations after an intervention from Waheed Alli, the Labour peer who paid for Keir Starmer’s clothes and glasses.
The paper says that the plan, if implemented, would have scuppered any potential donations from the billionaire Elon Musk to Reform UK by making it illegal to donate unless donors were registered to vote in the UK or via companies owned by people based in Britain:
Labour has received £4m from a hedge fund based in the Cayman Islands, Quadrature Capital, though it pays corporation tax in the UK on profits.
But Lord Alli, the party’s fundraising chief in opposition, is said to have stopped the planned speech by Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, and Gordon Brown to announce the changes, according to a new book about Labour’s path to power.
The former Labour prime minister had already booked accommodation in London for the speech announcing the changes when it was canned, according to Get In, by Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund.
Labour and Alli declined to comment.
The book contains a leaked policy paper for the speech intended to take place in December 2023 at Chatham House – and suggests it had been signed off by Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s now chief of staff.
Though McSweeney was reportedly concerned about seeming anti-donor, he is said to have agreed the plan on the basis it would prevent donations from those without “skin in the game”.
A Labour source told the authors that Alli had intervened to pull the announcement with a week to go, with no explanation.
Labour is said to be examining proposals to limit how much individuals and companies can donate to political parties as part of an effort to tighten the rules around money in UK politics. The Institute for Public Policy Research has recommended that ministers limit individual and corporate donations to political parties to £100,000 a year.
In its manifesto, Labour committed to “protect democracy by strengthening the rules around donations to political parties”. At the core of this promise was an aim to tighten protections around foreign interference in UK democracy.
Donation caps are among a number of measures the government is looking at as part of plans for an election and democracy bill in the next parliamentary session. The bill did not form part of the king’s speech in July.
According to the policy paper quoted in the book, Rayner’s proposal was to “close loopholes in UK donation law which currently allow dodgy money to enter our politics – primarily through the Tory party – via shell companies or companies with no connection to the UK.
“This policy will provide us with a robust defence to the Tories’ attack on our donations by laying out with full transparency the robustness of our donation due diligence, and inviting the Tories to close loopholes which allow foreign money into UK democracy.”
Whatever the truth, the impression that the government us being led by its donors is terribly damaging and of course plays into the hands of both Nigel Farage and the Tory Party.
The paper says that the plan, if implemented, would have scuppered any potential donations from the billionaire Elon Musk to Reform UK by making it illegal to donate unless donors were registered to vote in the UK or via companies owned by people based in Britain:
Labour has received £4m from a hedge fund based in the Cayman Islands, Quadrature Capital, though it pays corporation tax in the UK on profits.
But Lord Alli, the party’s fundraising chief in opposition, is said to have stopped the planned speech by Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, and Gordon Brown to announce the changes, according to a new book about Labour’s path to power.
The former Labour prime minister had already booked accommodation in London for the speech announcing the changes when it was canned, according to Get In, by Patrick Maguire and Gabriel Pogrund.
Labour and Alli declined to comment.
The book contains a leaked policy paper for the speech intended to take place in December 2023 at Chatham House – and suggests it had been signed off by Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s now chief of staff.
Though McSweeney was reportedly concerned about seeming anti-donor, he is said to have agreed the plan on the basis it would prevent donations from those without “skin in the game”.
A Labour source told the authors that Alli had intervened to pull the announcement with a week to go, with no explanation.
Labour is said to be examining proposals to limit how much individuals and companies can donate to political parties as part of an effort to tighten the rules around money in UK politics. The Institute for Public Policy Research has recommended that ministers limit individual and corporate donations to political parties to £100,000 a year.
In its manifesto, Labour committed to “protect democracy by strengthening the rules around donations to political parties”. At the core of this promise was an aim to tighten protections around foreign interference in UK democracy.
Donation caps are among a number of measures the government is looking at as part of plans for an election and democracy bill in the next parliamentary session. The bill did not form part of the king’s speech in July.
According to the policy paper quoted in the book, Rayner’s proposal was to “close loopholes in UK donation law which currently allow dodgy money to enter our politics – primarily through the Tory party – via shell companies or companies with no connection to the UK.
“This policy will provide us with a robust defence to the Tories’ attack on our donations by laying out with full transparency the robustness of our donation due diligence, and inviting the Tories to close loopholes which allow foreign money into UK democracy.”
Whatever the truth, the impression that the government us being led by its donors is terribly damaging and of course plays into the hands of both Nigel Farage and the Tory Party.
Tuesday, February 04, 2025
Starmer's EU reset evidence that Brexit has failed
The Independent reports that Emmanuel Macron is reportedly set to tell Sir Keir Starmer his appearance at a summit of EU leaders on Monday is proof Brexit has failed.
The paper adds that senior diplomats have reportedly said that the French president views the prime minister as the “demandeur”, a leader humbled into returning to the EU fold because Britain has been weakened by Brexit:
“The Brexit project, breaking away from the EU to create a global Britain, didn’t work. We thought it wouldn’t work because the UK is European, geographically and economically. Brexit was a project for a stable and prosperous world, but in a complicated world, obviously the UK will be closer to Europe,” one source told The Times.
Ahead of the visit, Sir Keir said that Brexit is “settled”, but added that “I do want to see a closer relationship on defence and security, on energy, on trade and our economy”.
“And that is what we’re working on,” the PM said.
But Brussels diplomats have said Donald Trump’s return to the White House, and the looming threat of a global trade war, have heightened the need for Britain to return to the EU’s orbit.
At a meeting of the 27 EU leaders on Monday, Sir Keir will place defence at the heart of his post-Brexit reset with Brussels, calling on European allies to double down on their support for Ukraine.
He will challenge EU countries to ramp up their defence spending to keep the continent safe from Vladimir Putin’s “campaign of sabotage and destruction”.
But while the PM wants to focus on defence and security, he is also facing questions about other parts of the UK’s relationship with Europe, notably over fishing and a youth mobility agreement.
A senior UK government source has indicated Britain is closer to agreeing to a deal on youth mobility, which would allow under-30s to study, work and travel across the European Union for a number of years.
The scheme, a key demand of Brussels in Sir Keir’s bid for closer ties with the EU, would run for up to three years under concessions being considered by the bloc. In a sign Labour could ease its opposition so far to a scheme, a government source told The Telegraph “we will look at anything that the European Union does put forward”.
Ahead of the meeting on Monday, Sir Keir was warned Brussels will play tough in negotiations about closer ties, with Sir Keir facing the same fate as Boris Johnson in talks with the bloc – with tough concessions demanded in return for any new relationship.
Sir Keir will be warned that progress on issues such as defence and security is not an option unless he is willing to give ground on issues such as EU access to Britain’s fishing waters and a youth mobility scheme.
In a boost for Sir Keir ahead of the meeting, Poland’s foreign minister said that while Brexit is not reversible, the EU would like to have Britain as “a major partner” on security and defence.
In my view Macron has judged the UK's weakness perfectly, as well as identifying a huge opportunity for Starmer to start to put things right. As Ed Davey has now started to say much more openly, we need to be part of the single market if we are to stand up to Trump and his tariffs, and if we are to kickstart growth.
The paper adds that senior diplomats have reportedly said that the French president views the prime minister as the “demandeur”, a leader humbled into returning to the EU fold because Britain has been weakened by Brexit:
“The Brexit project, breaking away from the EU to create a global Britain, didn’t work. We thought it wouldn’t work because the UK is European, geographically and economically. Brexit was a project for a stable and prosperous world, but in a complicated world, obviously the UK will be closer to Europe,” one source told The Times.
Ahead of the visit, Sir Keir said that Brexit is “settled”, but added that “I do want to see a closer relationship on defence and security, on energy, on trade and our economy”.
“And that is what we’re working on,” the PM said.
But Brussels diplomats have said Donald Trump’s return to the White House, and the looming threat of a global trade war, have heightened the need for Britain to return to the EU’s orbit.
At a meeting of the 27 EU leaders on Monday, Sir Keir will place defence at the heart of his post-Brexit reset with Brussels, calling on European allies to double down on their support for Ukraine.
He will challenge EU countries to ramp up their defence spending to keep the continent safe from Vladimir Putin’s “campaign of sabotage and destruction”.
But while the PM wants to focus on defence and security, he is also facing questions about other parts of the UK’s relationship with Europe, notably over fishing and a youth mobility agreement.
A senior UK government source has indicated Britain is closer to agreeing to a deal on youth mobility, which would allow under-30s to study, work and travel across the European Union for a number of years.
The scheme, a key demand of Brussels in Sir Keir’s bid for closer ties with the EU, would run for up to three years under concessions being considered by the bloc. In a sign Labour could ease its opposition so far to a scheme, a government source told The Telegraph “we will look at anything that the European Union does put forward”.
Ahead of the meeting on Monday, Sir Keir was warned Brussels will play tough in negotiations about closer ties, with Sir Keir facing the same fate as Boris Johnson in talks with the bloc – with tough concessions demanded in return for any new relationship.
Sir Keir will be warned that progress on issues such as defence and security is not an option unless he is willing to give ground on issues such as EU access to Britain’s fishing waters and a youth mobility scheme.
In a boost for Sir Keir ahead of the meeting, Poland’s foreign minister said that while Brexit is not reversible, the EU would like to have Britain as “a major partner” on security and defence.
In my view Macron has judged the UK's weakness perfectly, as well as identifying a huge opportunity for Starmer to start to put things right. As Ed Davey has now started to say much more openly, we need to be part of the single market if we are to stand up to Trump and his tariffs, and if we are to kickstart growth.
Monday, February 03, 2025
It is time for the Welsh Government to intervene on university cuts
The Guardian features the existential crisis facing UK universities from huge funding pressures made worse by government policies.
The paper says that nearly one in four leading UK universities are slashing staff numbers and cutting budgets, with up to 10,000 redundancies or job losses, bringing calls for action to avoid damaging the sector’s international standing.
They add that in the past week four universities, including two members of the research-intensive Russell Group of universities, have announced a combined 1,000 job losses in response to budget shortfalls, while about 90 universities are currently restructuring alongside compulsory and voluntary redundancy schemes to lower their wage bills.
The paper features the decision by Cardiff University to axe its highly rated nursing courses as well as job losses in humanities subjects:
The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) has sounded the alarm that the financial crisis is “engulfing” nursing courses. A majority of nurse-lecturers and other higher education nursing staff across the UK reported redundancies and recruitment freezes, when there are more than 40,000 vacancies in the sector.
Helen Whyley, the executive director of RCN Wales, said she was “very concerned” by Cardiff’s proposals.
She said: “Its school of nursing has a longstanding reputation for excellence, producing highly skilled, compassionate nurses who have gone on to serve communities locally and across Wales.
“This decision has the potential to threaten the pipeline of registered nurses into the largest health board in Wales and undermines efforts to address the critical staffing crisis in the NHS and social care.”
While universities such as Durham and Cardiff are only now announcing job losses, others have undergone constant cost-cutting and restructuring for the past three years as rising costs and declining tuition fee income from domestic students have eroded budgets.
One vice-chancellor said the “drip-drip” nature of the cuts meant they had largely passed under the public’s radar.
“If the BBC or John Lewis was cutting 5,000 or 6,000 jobs, we’d hear all about it but what we’re seeing in universities isn’t being noticed,” they said.
Highlighting the lack of fuss being made about the loss of these courses is absolutely right. It is something that Welsh journalist Will Hayward is particularly scathing about in his latest newsletter.
He says that the proposed 400 job cuts at Cardiff Uni have been covered extensively but what hasn’t got the attention it deserves is the Welsh Government’s attempt to abdicate responsibility over this:
Let’s just focus on the proposed removal of the nursing course (though loss in the other areas is also clearly devastating for Wales).
Here are some numbers:
There are 800 to 1,000 students in the Cardiff Uni nursing school.
There are 2,000 nursing vacancies in Wales.
The Cardiff course is the #1 ranked nursing course in Wales and #5 in the whole of the UK.
One of the challenges Welsh health boards face is attracting staff to come and work in Wales. This is a particular issue in rural Wales and at Betsi Cadwaladr in the North. When people study in a place, there is a pretty decent chance they will stick around after university.
I know six people who studied nursing at Cardiff. Four of them were from England. 10 years on from graduating, five of the six are still working in the Welsh NHS.
You can make a strong argument that a shortage in a profession as vital as nursing is a national security threat. Especially given our aging population, long waiting lists and the ever present threat of pandemics.
Given that it is devolved, it begs the question what has been the Welsh Government's response to this crisis in higher education? Well it has been two fold:
To start with they were seemingly utterly blindsided by it despite other Welsh unis making redundancies and repeated warnings about the perilous state of HE institutions by economists like Professor Dylan Jones-Evans.
Once the proposed cuts were announced they did everything they could to distance themselves from the problem and deflect responsibility for solving it.
Barely anyone has come forward for an interview on the issue and when the minister for further and higher education, Vikki Howells, appeared in the Senedd it was an exhibition of the finest buck passing.
Over and over again she responded to questions saying that “universities are autonomous of the Government”.
That’s true but as BBC journo James Williams pointed out on his podcast, “so is Tata Steel in Port Talbot”, and yet the Welsh Government never missed a second telling the UK Government that they needed to intervene there (until of course Labour were in charge of the UK Government and then the plan made by the Tories was apparently good enough).
He quotes the response by Vikki Howells to questions in which she says:
“I'd like to place on record in this Chamber this afternoon that we need to see a review of how the HE sector is funded across the UK as a whole.
“I understand that some work is ongoing in the UK Government, and I expect the Welsh Government to have the opportunity to contribute to this review so that any findings are relevant to the needs of Wales, which will of course always be my primary concern.”
Oh for crying out loud. These jobs and vital training places are at risk of going right now. The UK Government clearly has no appetite for tackling the problems for unis in England let alone Wales. To call for that review by someone else and think that it is enough is a dereliction of duty. They are the custodians of Wales, they must do more.
Now don’t get me wrong, in an ideal world, any review of HE would indeed cover England and Wales because HE institutions on both sides of the border are facing similar issues like changes to visa rules, the impact of Brexit and the student finances rules set in London. Not to mention the fact they are very interconnected.
But this isn’t an ideal world and Welsh Labour clearly have next to no influence with their Westminster colleagues to drive the changes
Therefore it is the duty of the Welsh Labour Government to step up and do all they can to help the sector in Wales. Barely a day goes by when Welsh Labour doesn’t call for more powers to be devolved, but when there is an issue in an area which is already devolved they call on the UK Government to do more. It is infuriating.
Finally, it is important to note that though Cardiff grabs the headlines, almost every uni in Wales is facing the same challenges. This is a Wales issue, not a Cardiff issue.
One of the big failures of devolution in my view is the inability of ministers to carry out effective workforce planning around the health service. The shortage of nurses is a symptom of that. Their failure to secure this vital course is just more of the same. an abrogation of responsibility by the Welsh government.
The paper says that nearly one in four leading UK universities are slashing staff numbers and cutting budgets, with up to 10,000 redundancies or job losses, bringing calls for action to avoid damaging the sector’s international standing.
They add that in the past week four universities, including two members of the research-intensive Russell Group of universities, have announced a combined 1,000 job losses in response to budget shortfalls, while about 90 universities are currently restructuring alongside compulsory and voluntary redundancy schemes to lower their wage bills.
The paper features the decision by Cardiff University to axe its highly rated nursing courses as well as job losses in humanities subjects:
The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) has sounded the alarm that the financial crisis is “engulfing” nursing courses. A majority of nurse-lecturers and other higher education nursing staff across the UK reported redundancies and recruitment freezes, when there are more than 40,000 vacancies in the sector.
Helen Whyley, the executive director of RCN Wales, said she was “very concerned” by Cardiff’s proposals.
She said: “Its school of nursing has a longstanding reputation for excellence, producing highly skilled, compassionate nurses who have gone on to serve communities locally and across Wales.
“This decision has the potential to threaten the pipeline of registered nurses into the largest health board in Wales and undermines efforts to address the critical staffing crisis in the NHS and social care.”
While universities such as Durham and Cardiff are only now announcing job losses, others have undergone constant cost-cutting and restructuring for the past three years as rising costs and declining tuition fee income from domestic students have eroded budgets.
One vice-chancellor said the “drip-drip” nature of the cuts meant they had largely passed under the public’s radar.
“If the BBC or John Lewis was cutting 5,000 or 6,000 jobs, we’d hear all about it but what we’re seeing in universities isn’t being noticed,” they said.
Highlighting the lack of fuss being made about the loss of these courses is absolutely right. It is something that Welsh journalist Will Hayward is particularly scathing about in his latest newsletter.
He says that the proposed 400 job cuts at Cardiff Uni have been covered extensively but what hasn’t got the attention it deserves is the Welsh Government’s attempt to abdicate responsibility over this:
Let’s just focus on the proposed removal of the nursing course (though loss in the other areas is also clearly devastating for Wales).
Here are some numbers:
There are 800 to 1,000 students in the Cardiff Uni nursing school.
There are 2,000 nursing vacancies in Wales.
The Cardiff course is the #1 ranked nursing course in Wales and #5 in the whole of the UK.
One of the challenges Welsh health boards face is attracting staff to come and work in Wales. This is a particular issue in rural Wales and at Betsi Cadwaladr in the North. When people study in a place, there is a pretty decent chance they will stick around after university.
I know six people who studied nursing at Cardiff. Four of them were from England. 10 years on from graduating, five of the six are still working in the Welsh NHS.
You can make a strong argument that a shortage in a profession as vital as nursing is a national security threat. Especially given our aging population, long waiting lists and the ever present threat of pandemics.
Given that it is devolved, it begs the question what has been the Welsh Government's response to this crisis in higher education? Well it has been two fold:
To start with they were seemingly utterly blindsided by it despite other Welsh unis making redundancies and repeated warnings about the perilous state of HE institutions by economists like Professor Dylan Jones-Evans.
Once the proposed cuts were announced they did everything they could to distance themselves from the problem and deflect responsibility for solving it.
Barely anyone has come forward for an interview on the issue and when the minister for further and higher education, Vikki Howells, appeared in the Senedd it was an exhibition of the finest buck passing.
Over and over again she responded to questions saying that “universities are autonomous of the Government”.
That’s true but as BBC journo James Williams pointed out on his podcast, “so is Tata Steel in Port Talbot”, and yet the Welsh Government never missed a second telling the UK Government that they needed to intervene there (until of course Labour were in charge of the UK Government and then the plan made by the Tories was apparently good enough).
He quotes the response by Vikki Howells to questions in which she says:
“I'd like to place on record in this Chamber this afternoon that we need to see a review of how the HE sector is funded across the UK as a whole.
“I understand that some work is ongoing in the UK Government, and I expect the Welsh Government to have the opportunity to contribute to this review so that any findings are relevant to the needs of Wales, which will of course always be my primary concern.”
Oh for crying out loud. These jobs and vital training places are at risk of going right now. The UK Government clearly has no appetite for tackling the problems for unis in England let alone Wales. To call for that review by someone else and think that it is enough is a dereliction of duty. They are the custodians of Wales, they must do more.
Now don’t get me wrong, in an ideal world, any review of HE would indeed cover England and Wales because HE institutions on both sides of the border are facing similar issues like changes to visa rules, the impact of Brexit and the student finances rules set in London. Not to mention the fact they are very interconnected.
But this isn’t an ideal world and Welsh Labour clearly have next to no influence with their Westminster colleagues to drive the changes
Therefore it is the duty of the Welsh Labour Government to step up and do all they can to help the sector in Wales. Barely a day goes by when Welsh Labour doesn’t call for more powers to be devolved, but when there is an issue in an area which is already devolved they call on the UK Government to do more. It is infuriating.
Finally, it is important to note that though Cardiff grabs the headlines, almost every uni in Wales is facing the same challenges. This is a Wales issue, not a Cardiff issue.
One of the big failures of devolution in my view is the inability of ministers to carry out effective workforce planning around the health service. The shortage of nurses is a symptom of that. Their failure to secure this vital course is just more of the same. an abrogation of responsibility by the Welsh government.