Fourth Assembly Review : End of Term Awards

The stage is (not) set, the red carpet is (not) laid out....
(Pic : modified via Shutterstock)

After focusing on what they've collectively done or haven't done, it's worth turning attentions to AMs themselves and being "nice to them".

Read More

Fourth Assembly Review : Final Verdict

(Pic : The Guardian)

Here's a final round-up of how the Welsh Government and opposition party leaders have performed as the Fourth Assembly draws to a close.

• End of Year Report 2015
• End of Year Report 2014
• WAG End of Year Report Card 2013
• Welsh Government - End of year report (2012)

Office of First Minister; Constitutional & Legislative Affairs

• First Minister : Carwyn Jones (2011-2016)
• Counsel General : Theodore Huckle QC (2011-2016)

C+

Does Carwyn display leadership credentials? I say yes on the whole and it's hard to picture anyone else on the Labour front bench being able to replace him. Carwyn also thinks very carefully before acting – which should be considered a good trait in a political leader – but he seems to be a bit slow to move from talking about doing something to actually doing something.

I wouldn't say he's smug, but it's clear Carwyn thinks he's above the opposition leaders and finds FMQs a chore; in all honesty, you can't blame him. He finds it all too easy to bat off questions – presumably because of his background as a barrister – and he'll often find agreement with Plaid and Lib Dems on certain matters of policy. As a result he's rarely put under any pressure at all, but comes across as a bit too laid back.

The Counsel General had a more prominent role this term and racked up a 2-1 victory over the UK Attorney General after three Welsh laws were challenged in the Supreme Court. He did his job – nothing good or bad you can say about that. He could well play a key role in the argument for some sort of Welsh legal jurisdiction in the future, but AMs seem reluctant to ask him questions – Simon Thomas and Mick Antoniw aside.

Finance & Leader of the House

• Minister : Jane Hutt (2011-2016)

B-

Finance Minister is one of the duller postings in the Welsh Government, but it requires a strong hand and a cool head to deal with competing priorities. Jane might not have set the world alight in other roles down the years, but I'd say she's found her niche and that could stand her in good stead if she decides to make a leadership bid in the future. Maybe she's shown a bit too much favouritism to the NHS in her budgets, but I'd say her overall management of the nation's finances has been sound, with cautiously sensible proposals for the management of devolved taxes in the Fifth Assembly.

Considering the time and manpower constraints, the Assembly's calendar has been well-managed, with the introduction of topical individual members debates bringing more relevant discussions into the chamber. However, the weekly business statement announcements verged on pointless as Jane always has an excuse on hand not to hold a debate or support a ministerial statement - which clearly frustrated many AMs over the last five years.

Economy, Science & Transport

• Ministers : Edwina Hart (2011-2016),
• Deputy Ministers : Jeff Cuthbert (2011-2013), Ken Skates (2013-2014), Julie James (2014-2016)

B

It started very wobbly indeed, but in the end – and with evidence to back it up – it's hard to argue against Edwina Hart's stint here being anything other than a success and she's leaving the Assembly on a high.

Unemployment's down, there are some big schemes on the table on in the pipeline and the Welsh economy has been through a period of growth. The only real criticisms would be her department's failure to properly implement reforms to business rates while it's clear that some of Edwina's actions have been unnecessarily combative – the closure of Junction 41 in Port Talbot, for example.

Ken Skates' brief stint as Deputy Minister for Skills was a rare ministerial highlight as he oversaw the rapid expansion of Jobs Growth Wales, which made the decision to move him in 2014 all the stranger.

Health & Social Services

• Ministers : Lesley Griffiths (2011-2013), Mark Drakeford (2013-2016),
• Deputy Ministers : Gwenda Thomas (2011-2014), Vaughan Gething (2014-2016)

D

Health is the big area of policy failure for Labour, mainly due to service failures rather than their intent to make improvements. They've passed three significant laws on health and social services this term – Hygiene Ratings Act, Human Transplantation Act, Social Services & Wellbeing Act – but not without controversy or incident, such as the original proposals for vaping in the Public Health Bill (which ultimately failed) and the smacking ban.

I've said enough about their policy performance, so I'll focus on the ministers themselves. It was quite clear that Lesley Griffiths was out of her depth and lost control of matters at times. While Mark Drakeford brought a more considered intellectualism to the post he's hardly set the world alight either. There's a real danger that Health Minister is going to become the post nobody wants.

Although he was perhaps too slow to act on the McClelland review's recommendations on ambulance services, Vaughan Gething has, at times, shown why he's so highly thought of and it's a racing certainty he'll become a full minister in the Fifth Assembly.

Education & Skills

• Ministers : Leighton Andrews (2011-2013), Huw Lewis (2013-2016)
• Deputy Ministers : Jeff Cuthbert (2011-2013), Ken Skates (2013-2014), Julie James (2014-2016)

C+

A mixed bag though, broadly-speaking, Huw Lewis is leaving the Assembly on a political high. This area of policy hasn't perhaps got the critical attention it deserves in the Welsh media – aside from the PISA results and big changes like the Donaldson Review. It's fair to say there've been a number of big policy announcements through the Fourth Assembly, and exam results have gradually improved.

The Lib Dems can take some credit here for their Pupil Deprivation Grant – though it's probably going to be some time until the effectiveness of it is properly analysed. Money in education has been a major theme, with Labour committing to keeping schools budgets at 1% above any changes to the block grant (and it's believed they didn't keep that promise over the whole term). Meanwhile, the increasingly controversial tuition fee policy, while being well-meant, seems financially damaging in the medium to long term.

So although the raw numbers point towards improvement of sorts, there's been a bit too much knee-jerk tinkering – though the difference in attitudes between Leighton Andrews (more proactive and directly-influential) and Huw Lewis (more collaborative) was marked.

Environment, Natural Resources & Rural Affairs

• Ministers : John Griffiths (2011-2014), Alun Davies (2013-2014), Carl Sargeant (2014-2016)
• Deputy Ministers : Alun Davies (2011-2013), Rebecca Evans (2014-2016)

C+

The intentions are good but, as always with Welsh Labour, the actions weren't there in abundance. Wales' excellent record on recycling has held up, but there were a number of issues – particularly open-cast mining and fracking – where Carl Sargeant was very good at talking the talk but lacking any real bite.

The Welsh Government passed landmark legislation on planning and the environment – the latter committing Wales to meeting greenhouse gas reduction targets. Also, the intent of another "landmark" law on future generations/sustainable development was welcomed, but the implementation was a damp squib.

On rural affairs, there were several major developments with the first Deputy Minister, Alun Davies, picking a fight with the Supreme Court over agricultural wages, forcing a law through the Assembly using emergency legislation powers; a fight he ultimately won. Then he finally oversaw action on stray horses – which has been a particular problem in south west Wales – though again he used emergency powers to see the law though. His stint in the job – which polarised the farming community – came to a rather ignominious end.

His replacement, Rebecca Evans – one of the quietly impressive performers this term - faced with her own immediate problems, particularly a crisis in milk prices which prompted a very quick and efficient review of the dairy sector. It come up with a number of ideas such as a new leadership board and possible milk processing facility in south west Wales.

Local Government, Communities, Housing & Regeneration

• Ministers : Carl Sargeant (2011-2014), Huw Lewis (2013), Lesley Griffiths (2013-2016), Jeff Cuthbert (2013-2014), Leighton Andrews (2014-2016)
• Deputy Ministers : Vaughan Gething (2013-2014)

C+

The overarching issue here has been local government reorganisation as facilitated by the Williams Commission. As mentioned earlier this week, what the whole process has failed to do is properly determine what local government is and what is should be responsible for. The map should've been an after thought.

This group of ministers also oversaw one of the worst scandals of the term in the form of RIFW, though they made up for that somewhat with the less ambitious replacement scheme, Vibrant & Viable Places.

For the first time in post-devolution Wales a minister was given specific responsibility to address high levels of relative poverty, and to date – in the absence of any meaningful level to make an impact, like the benefits system – little progress has been made.

However, several major laws relating to housing have been passed, one of which makes major changes to homelessness provision, while the other outlines significant reforms to the private rental market. Whether there are enough houses being built in the first place is another matter. Also, Labour kept one of their key 2011 manifesto pledges by recruiting at least 500 extra PCSOs.

Culture, Heritage, Welsh Language & Sport

• Ministers & Deputy Ministers : Huw Lewis (2011-2013), John Griffiths (2013-2014), Carwyn Jones (2013-2016), Ken Skates (2014-2016)

C

Another area where, while not really doing anything wrong, the Welsh Government probably could've done more. There's provisional evidence that 2012 London Olympics have had a positive knock-on impact on sports participation, but whether that lasts without proper funding is up for debate. It's a similar situation with the arts in Wales; as it's seen as "low hanging fruit" by local authorities many arts schemes, particularly music, have been victims of cuts.

Elsewhere, concerns have been raised about Wales' place in the new BBC Charter and future of public service broadcasting – particularly the long-term future of S4C – as the decline in the Welsh print media continues. A lot's been said but, as it typical, very little has happened with the Welsh Government appearing toothless as broadcasting  powers are non-devolved.

One area where they've bared their teeth this term is heritage, with the passing of the Historic Environment Act being an attempt to afford more protection to monuments and historic buildings – though perhaps not going as far as it should've, with ministers wimping out of a merger between Cadw and the Royal Commission on Ancient Monuments.

The position of the Welsh language has been awkward – particularly since the 2011 census findings, as well as the decision by the First Minister to take direct responsibility for Welsh language policy in 2013. Nevertheless, Welsh was made an official language in the National Assembly (with equal status to English) for the first time, while a (large and perhaps pedantic) number of standards for Welsh in public services were introduced.

Opposition Leaders

Andrew Davies (Con, South Wales Central)

B- personally; B- party

It's been a clear period of personal and professional growth, and despite some suspect moments of his leadership, Andrew took to the role of Leader of the Opposition pretty well and can be relatively pleased with his performance this term. He isn't perfect, but he does occasionally rile the First Minister – though it's sometimes hard to tell whether he's a mouthpiece for the UK Government or not.

The Tories have gone big on health and have, in some parts of Wales, managed to sew some doubts in people's minds on certain aspects – though it all seems a little repetitive. Following the Wales Bill(s) and future devolution of income tax they can, to a certain degree, say they are a pro-devolution party, though the EU referendum perhaps threatens to cause divisions. After a good result at the 2015 Westminster election, both Andrew himself and his party have reason to be upbeat going into the Assembly election....that still doesn't mean Andrew's coming out of it as First Minister.

Leanne Wood (Plaid, South Wales Central)

B+ personally; C+ party

This term has seen Leanne Wood rise from being part of the fringe of Plaid's backbenches to one of the more well-known politicians in Wales. At a personal level that's an incredible achievement. Leanne has always come across as down to earth, if a little self-righteous, so I don't believe there's any overconfidence there and she has every reason to believe in herself considering her political journey. The real danger is if the rest of her party believe their own hype. That's only going to end in tears.

Plaid haven't set the world alight over the last five years. Despite worthy attempts to professionalise their front bench, the positive reforms have occurred behind the scenes with the development of a strong "Brand Plaid". I'll come back to this in more detail later on in the campaign, but the good news is that Plaid haven't gone backwards and have stopped the rot from 2011. Their problem is a lack of demonstrable forward momentum.

Kirsty Williams (Lib Dem, Brecon & Radnor)

A personally; B party

Kirsty Williams is, without doubt, an excellent AM and excellent party leader. She managed to draw some significant concessions from the Welsh Government and the Lib Dems have passed two laws, including the Nurse Staffing Levels Act. That should count as a real triumph considering Labour's reluctance to take on board any suggestion on health and it's something Lib Dem activists can take to voters.

The party do genuinely punch above their weight – I'm tired of saying that, but it's the truth – and they can be proud of their record in the Fourth Assembly. Hand on heart I say that none of the Lib Dems AMs deserve to be on the end of a kicking in a few weeks time, but it's coming and I doubt I'll be the only one wincing when steel-toe boot makes contact with Lib Dem backside.

Overall Verdict

If the big theme of next term will be the devolution of taxes, the big theme this term was the Assembly's new law-making powers following the 2011 referendum. By and large, AMs and Assembly staff have proven they're more than capable of handling those powers.

The laws themselves, however, have been a mixed bag, with some genuinely groundbreaking legislation introduced alongside some very vague or downright useless laws which will probably be repealed sooner rather than later – the Future Generations Act somes to mind. I would prefer a focus on quality over quantity of legislation next term; it's better to have 10-12 good laws than the 30 or so glib laws we've seen over the past five years.

Although the opposition have certainly caused problems for Labour this term, their fractured and disunited nature - mainly due to big ideological differences - has given Labour an easy ride. That looks set to continue in the Fifth Assembly. Until Labour's "right to rule" is properly challenged (as it was, but for the wrong reasons on Wednesday), the Assembly's stuck in a rut. Maybe, for the good of the country and the future of democracy in Wales, the main opposition parties will have to put some of their differences aside and work together on some aspects.

Lack of ambition, micromanagement, laziness, cronyism – Welsh Labour have them all in spades and displayed them all this term.

Their rule of Wales over the last five years - while not being a complete catastrophe, more a cosy marriage that neither partner has the guts to call off – can be summed up as, "not good enough". The problem for the rest of us - unless you actually support Labour - is that we seem depressingly comfortable with "not good enough."


Tomorrow, I'm going to "do something nice" (or perhaps not so nice) and conclude my look back at the Fourth Assembly by handing out my end of term "awards".

Read More

A Comprehensive Review of Welsh Law-Making

We voted to give AMs law-making powers in 2011, so how has the process been handled since?
(Pic : National Assembly of Wales)

Making new laws is the National Assembly's most important function, though it's a role that – apart from a few high-profile cases like the Human Transplantation Act 2013 – draws little in the way of media coverage or scrutiny.

Read More

Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap IV : Endgame?

After a wait of years, the Wales Audit Office has finally
delivered its verdict on the RIFW land sale scandal.
(Pic : BBC Wales)

It's been three years in the making, but at long last the Wales Audit Office have delivered their verdict on the Regeneration Investment Fund for Wales (RIFW) and the sale of land parcels to an offshore company, South Wales Land Developments (pdf).

It doesn't make good reading for the Welsh Government. At all.

It's so serious it warranted a special episode of Week In, Week Out : The Big Welsh Land Scandal? which will be broadcast tonight at 10:35 (iPlayer link).

A Brief Recap

The core issue is how or why RIFW sold widely-known lucrative development
land (like Lisvane, above) for significantly less than its proper value.
(Pic : Wales Online)

• Dirty deeds done dirt cheap (18.9.12)
• Digging deep into dirty deals done dirt cheap (11.2.13)
• Dirty deeds done dirt cheap – Round III (17.7.13)

RIFW was established as an arms-length public body by former Deputy First Minister, Ieuan Wyn Jones. Its primary goal was to sell Welsh Government-owned land to raise match funds for regeneration projects in the EU Objective One area (West Wales & The Valleys).

In 2012, RIFW sold a parcel of 15 pieces of land to South Wales Land Developments (SWLD), which was based in the tax haven of Guernsey. This includes land in Bridgend (Pyle and Brackla Industrial Estate), Lisvane in Cardiff (now being developed as Churchlands), Wrexham and Llandudno Junction.

Former police officer and Conservative AM for South Wales West - now MP for Gower - Byron Davies, referred the sale to the Wales Audit Office (WAO). It was understood the land was sold for a total of just £20.6million.

There's nothing controversial about that in itself; however, because the land was certain to be developed for housing – particularly the Cardiff plot – the actual value of the land would've risen considerably, meaning RIFW (effectively the Welsh Government) sold lucrative land for significantly less than it was worth. From the Cardiff land alone, at the time it was estimated the Welsh Government will have missed out on a potential ~£120million.

There were "claw back clauses" inserted into the deal to ensure that if the value of the land rose, the Welsh Government would get some extra money back, but the exact details were unclear. The implication was that the land was deliberately or accidentally undervalued, the sale was rushed unnecessarily or that someone passed insider information to SWLD.

The Welsh Government suspended RIFW projects in February 2013 (except one in Neath town centre) and ordered two internal investigations. The Wales Audit Office also referred the deal to the Serious Fraud Office (SFO).

The WAO Report Key Findings

1. The RIFW Concept

• The RIFW concept was "innovative", but the requirement to sell property distracted RIFW from its core purpose. There's no criticism of the concept, and WAO actually praise it – particularly providing regeneration funding in a period when accessing finance was difficult. Because there were (supposed) deadlines on the EU component of funding, the need to generate funding from land sales should've been acknowledged as a risk and perhaps distracted officials from the task of working on regeneration projects themselves.
• Progress was slower than expected. The Welsh Government underestimated how long it would take to establish the fund, many projects were not deemed "investment ready", and there were delays as officials worked with interested developers to develop more robust plans – compounded by the economic conditions at the time.

2. Welsh Government Oversight

• The Welsh Government failed to set out the oversight mechanisms for RIFW as an "arms-length body". RIFW was established as a limited liability partnership (LLP), wholly owned by the Welsh Government, with Welsh Ministers and officials as board members – having obtained legal advice to ensure it complied with EU law.
• Amber Infrastructure Limited and Lambert Smith Hampton acted as independent fund and investment managers respectively. But because RIFW didn't have a chief executive, it was unclear who was accountable as all executive functions were carried out by Amber. This is described as a "complicated contractual arrangement" which hampered oversight.
• RIFW would've appeared in the Welsh Government accounts and should've subsequently been subject to scrutiny from the Welsh Government's Corporate Governance Committees – but it never featured at committee meetings.
• It was unclear where legal responsibility stopped because RIFW crossed a boundary between the Welsh Government and an entirely private company – this should've been cleared up in unambiguous guidance which was never issued.
• The Welsh Government were represented at board meetings by an "observer", who expressed no concerns over the land sales. This involvement in itself would've compromised the "arms-length" nature of RIFW and could be interpreted as tacit Welsh Government approval of the sales.
• Further oversight was hindered by departmental reorganisations between 2011-2012 following the 2011 Assembly elections, where responsibility for regeneration shifted and officials who were familiar with RIFW's work were moved. Vital information wasn't transferred with them.
• RIFW's board was too small, meaning absences impacted performance and the large amount of work the board needed to get through placed burdens on all board members, many of whom were unpaid. An independent board member rarely participated due to a conflict of interest.
• These weaknesses aren't contained to RIFW, as the Welsh Government internal investigation findings (Lloyd report) are relevant to other "arms-length" bodies.
• Actions undertaken by the Welsh Government since the issue was raised (i.e. internal investigations and taking direct control of the fund) are described as "appropriate".

3. Value for Money

• 23 plots were drawn up to be transferred to RIFW in 2009, it was estimated their total value was between £29.8-£35.6million (the higher figure being optimistic/"hope value").
• The plots were transferred in 2010, however many of them were said to be unready for marketing and sale, plus information was inaccurate with "unresolved issues" at some sites.
• It's acknowledged that many of the sites had "long-term development potential" if included in Local Development Plans, so a quick sale would minimise returns. RIFW weren't advised to keep hold of high-value land (like Lisvane) and were pressured to sell quickly because of various deadlines (explained later).
• The Welsh Government published information that became known within the Welsh property industry (i.e. land values, cash requirements) and subsequently weakened their negotiating hand. This information was circulated to six unnamed property companies with interests in Wales, or clients with interests in Wales.
• There was no December 2015 deadline to sell the land to meet EU match-funding requirements. Some high-value assets could've been held back for the second phase of RIFW beyond 2015. RIFW only had to raise ~£6million to meet the requirement because it was established with £9.4million in cash and had to meet a match-funding target of £15.4million. They were also wrong to assume they needed to invest £55million in the first phase by 2015.
• The plan for a phased sales was abandoned when they received a written £23million offer from Guernsey-based GST Investments for all of the land. GST were operated by Barclays on behalf of Peter's Foods Sir Stanley Thomas, and were represented in negotiations by Langley Davies. Rightacres also submitted a bid of £17.7million.
• After torturous negotiations, the sale was agreed for £20.65million, which didn't reflect the market value. Only two voting board members were present at the meeting which accepted the deal. In 2012, the purchaser changed from GST Investments to newly-registered South Wales Land Developments, also in Guernsey - the sale value increasing to £21.75million. These changes weren't properly reported to the RIFW board.
• There was no independent valuation or open marketing as well as weak professional advice. Phased disposals (instead of selling the sites in one swoop) could've yielded at least an extra £9.2million (£30.9million in total based on District Valuer estimates).
• The sales agreement didn't allow RIFW to benefit from increases in value. Only sites in Lisvane and Monmouth had "claw back" clauses which entitled the Welsh Government to a share of future profits – potentially worth £20.7million at 2013 prices. It's unclear how much they could've clawed back from other sites which are now being developed, like Pyle and Brackla.
• The sale of public assets at significantly below market value could be interpreted as unlawful "state aid". The Welsh Government should discuss whether the EU Commission should be informed by the UK Government.

4. Conflicts of Interest

• Lambert Smith Hampton (Investment Manager) – After the sale in March 2012, LSH were appointed as managing agents for SWLD at some sites, including Brackla Industrial Estate (though that sale was conducted after they were appointed). There's no evidence of improper conduct, but there was a clear conflict of interest which breached their investment manager agreement.
• Jonathan Geen (Independent Board Member) – As a solicitor he had undertaken work for one of the potential purchasers. He immediately notified the board and left the meeting, though later got permission from the board to act for the purchaser. Again, there was no improper conduct and he took no part in any sales decisions. However, the WAO say it would've been more appropriate to turn down Mr Geen's request to act for a purchaser due to the board's small size.

What does this mean?

If any crime's been committed here it's criminal incompetence.
(Pic : Wales Online)

There were two main scenarios as to what this constitutes : fraud, or incompetence. According to the report, the SFO have decided it's not something which "falls within their remit for investigation" unless further information is brought to South Wales Police or the SFO themselves.

That leaves one other scenario, doesn't it?

I suspect it boils down to the misinterpretation of the December 2015 EU match-funding deadline – the deadline that never really existed in the WAO's verdict. That's presumably why quick sales were pushed so hard and why a sale of all of the sites in one package looked tempting.

RIFW was clearly a good idea which was rendered dysfunctional by its own governance arrangements. SWLD saw an open goal to make money and took it – you can't blame them either. From their end, apart from moral questions that surround being based in a tax haven, everything they've done sounds above board.

The WAO say the value of the Lisvane land, originally estimated by King Sturge, may not be as high as the often-quoted £120million figure because not all of the land can be developed – only about 58-63% can (a proportional £69.6-£75.6million).

The only hard figure of how much the Welsh Government "lost" is in the region of £9-15million (the difference between the sale price and the most optimistic actual values); but when you factor in all the parcels of land without "claw back" agreements, plus the potential value of the workable land in Lisvane alone, you're looking at something approaching £90-100million.

The National Assembly's Public Accounts Committee have also announced today they'll hold an inquiry into RIFW, so it's not quite over yet. The current Natural Resources Minister, Carl Sargeant (Lab, Alyn & Deeside), will be in the firing line as the last minister in charge of RIFW, but due to reshuffles he can argue this is something he inherited from others.

Politicians and civil servants are human and will err from time to time - sometimes at great cost. The price we pay for democracy is that the right person for the job won't necessarily be the one elected or appointed.

Is this the worst blunder involving public funds in the devolution era? It's got to be up there.

Read More

A St David's Day Deposit

Legend says the ground beneath St David rose so all of his audience could see and hear him.
Like his namesake, the ground beneath David Cameron rose too, but it was a steaming mound of dung.

Most people don't care about the constitution, what powers the Assembly has or the intricacies of how devolution works. They're more concerned about public services, and what the decisions made by politicians mean for themselves and their families.

Some of us realise the constitution determines what decisions politicians are able to make in the first place – all of which has a direct impact on the public.

As you probably all know, the Silk Commission published two reports between 2012-2014 as part of "the next step in Wales' devolution journey" etc.

The first report (Silk I) covered taxation powers for the National Assembly. Those powers are now on the statute book in the Wales Act 2014, meaning from 2018 the Assembly will have the power to set landfill tax, stamp duty and the aggregates levy. It also means the Assembly can call a referendum on whether they should have the power to vary income tax - which the First Minister is already attempting to scotch. This is despite the inclusion of a new funding review, which Carwyn Jones said would be required for his government to back a referendum.

Holding a referendum on such a technical subject is, as Borthlas said today, "one of the silliest ideas ever to be proposed by a government" and very easy to lose.

As I've said before (Marching out of lockstep) a referendum on a general principle of fiscal powers - i.e. "Should the National Assembly have the power to fund devolved services by borrowing money and collecting taxes devolved to Wales?" - would be a juicer topic for the public to have a debate on and would definitely necessitate going to the polls to get a mandate from the electorate.

The second report (Silk II) covered extra powers, which was taken forward by the Welsh Secretary, Stephen Crabb MP (Con, Preseli Pembs.), who set a deadline of 1^st March – St David's Day – for a cross-party, cross-government consensus on Silk II's recommendations. You can read the full report, which was published last Friday to great fanfare, here (pdf).

Whisper it quietly, but I've been impressed with how Stephen Crabb has gone about his job. He's done more for Wales in 8/9 months than his predecessors have in the best part of a decade. I don't blame him personally for this brown whale, rising from the depths of the bowl to mock Ahab.

This may well be another "step forward on Wales' devolution journey", but it's also one last blast of Westminster's brand of constitutional Poodigree Chum out of the tradesman's entrance before the election.

What's been agreed?

• A reserved powers model, which should clear up what the Assembly's powers are by listing what the Assembly can't do. Except it won't clear anything up because of the piecemeal nature of Welsh devolution. Reserved powers would be like putting the current Schedule 7 in a mirror (if you see what I mean).
• Inter-governmental relations – Puts relations between the two governments on a more equal footing, with better co-ordination of policies in areas like training, economic development, cross-border rail routes and franchises as well as cross-border health services.
• Ports policy and development.
• Speed limits.
• Bus and taxi regulation, along with Traffic Commissioner functions.
• Places a duty on the UK Government to consult with the Welsh Government, and take into account Welsh energy policy, when approving energy projects of up to 350MW. This effectively means the Welsh Government will have a veto on "fracking".
• Sewerage and some aspects of water (with further negotiation).
• Marine licensing.
• At least one appointee to the Supreme Court should have an understanding of Wales.
• Local government elections.
• The Assembly itself – The Welsh Secretary will no longer have to appear before the Assembly, or have a right to participate in Assembly proceedings. The Assembly will also gain control over the age to vote in Assembly elections, the size of the Assembly and its name/branding. The National Assembly will also be recognised as "permanent".
• The First Minister should have the power to recommend appointments to Lord Lieutenancies (more on this from me later this month).

What's been taken off the table?

Some significant stuff – arguably the only significant powers outlined in Silk II.

• Youth justice and probation services.
• Policing (all aspects).
• There'll no longer be a review of devolution of the criminal justice system (courts, prisons, criminal law) in the 2020s.
• Drink-driving limits – this has already been devolved to Scotland.
• Network Rail funding – Scotland currently receives a population-based proportion of Network Rail's UK-wide funding (around 9%). In 2013, just 1% of Network Rail's budget was spent in Wales compared to a population share of ~5%. This means Wales will continue to, in nominal terms, "subsidise" English rail projects, resulting in significantly less than our "fair share" to invest here.
• The Crown Estate – It currently generates a £9.4million surplus in Wales, and is devolved to Scotland and Northern Ireland.
• State funding for S4C and appointment of S4C board members.
• Any and all aspects of social security - aspects of which will be devolved to Scotland.
• Responsibilities in relation to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission.
• Teachers' pay and conditions.
• The civil service.

What does this mean?

Thanks to the efforts of Nick Clegg and the "true party of Wales", the
National Assembly is set to have power over shit. Literally.

Not only are the UK Government hamstringing devolution, but there are people in and around the Assembly doing so as well.

The reason criminal justice powers have been taken off the table – the devolution of which would've finally put Wales on a near equal footing with Scotland – is because the Welsh Conservatives oppose it and must've vetoed it.

Welsh Labour probably did too, but they support devolution of policing at least (What's all this then?) – though Ed Miliband doesn't even want to go that far, promising some bizarre role in report-writing. It doesn't help that Owen Smith is arguably the most devo-sceptic Welsh Secretary-elect since 1999. He has to justify his position somehow.

The UK Government have also, quite literally, devolved shit to Wales. So we need to be grateful for the existence of Nick Clegg. Without Nick, Wales wouldn't have powers over faecal poltergeists and used tampons – but, at the same time, we're not good enough to run policing. Lib Dems should put that on their election leaflets.

I'm sure quite a few AMs from all parties will be underwhelmed by the St David's Day agreement, but this is a mess partly of their own making, as they put far too much faith in the "proper process" to the point of being gullible. In short, the UK never has been, and never will be, a union of equals; while constitutional reforms are pushed through in reaction to immediate threats to the status quo, not political consensus and grand commissions.

The UK is a very dysfunctional "family" indeed.The Scots have proven that if you want something you need to rattle your sabres. In political terms that means electing nationalists but, unfortunately, even then Wales would have very few sabres to rattle.

I'm not going to use the same old tired clichés about Wales "being slapped in the face" or "insulted" or "offered third-rate devolution" because this is exactly the outcome I was expecting :

The question there is if Scotland votes no in September, and as a result acquires further devolved powers or devo-max, Wales will be left behind yet again when - based on this report - Wales is tantalisingly close to achieving parity with Scotland (if criminal justice powers were devolved in future).
- See more at: http://www.oggybloggyogwr.com/2014/03/silk-ii-wrath-of-paul.html#sthash.TZafNehB.dpuf

The question there is if Scotland votes no in September, and as a result acquires further devolved powers or devo-max, Wales will be left behind yet again when - based on this report - Wales is tantalisingly close to achieving parity with Scotland (if criminal justice powers were devolved in future).
- See more at: http://www.oggybloggyogwr.com/2014/03/silk-ii-wrath-of-paul.html#sthash.TZafNehB.dpuf

The question there is if Scotland votes no in September, and as a result acquires further devolved powers or devo-max, Wales will be left behind yet again when - based on this report - Wales is tantalisingly close to achieving parity with Scotland (if criminal justice powers were devolved in future).
- See more at: http://www.oggybloggyogwr.com/2014/03/silk-ii-wrath-of-paul.html#sthash.TZafNehB.dpuf

04/03/2014 : "....if Scotland votes no in September, and as a result acquires further devolved powers or devo-max, Wales will be left behind yet again when - based on this report - Wales is tantalisingly close to achieving parity with Scotland (if criminal justice powers were devolved in future)."

The question there is if Scotland votes no in September, and as a result acquires further devolved powers or devo-max, Wales will be left behind yet again when - based on this report - Wales is tantalisingly close to achieving parity with Scotland (if criminal justice powers were devolved in future).
- See more at: http://www.oggybloggyogwr.com/2014/03/silk-ii-wrath-of-paul.html#sthash.TZafNehB.dpuf

he question there is if Scotland votes no in September, and as a result acquires further devolved powers or devo-max, Wales will be left behind yet again when - based on this report - Wales is tantalisingly close to achieving parity with Scotland (if criminal justice powers were devolved in future).
- See more at: http://www.oggybloggyogwr.com/2014/03/silk-ii-wrath-of-paul.html#sthash.TZafNehB.dpuf

There have been several opportunities down the years to put the devolved powers issue to bed once and for all and ensure Wales has a settlement that would last more than a decade. People like me can then shut up about independence and further powers, and AMs can concentrate on running the country, safe in the knowledge that they would be on a clearer footing within the UK's constitution.

Nope, not going to happen. Again.

A cross-party commission's reasonable and proportionate recommendations have been watered down. Again.

Scotland is moving leaps and bounds ahead of Wales. Again.

Powers which, by rights, should be devolved (like abortion limits, medicine licensing, drink-drive limits, and Network Rail funding....because subjects like health and transport are devolved) have been taken off the table. Again.

The only person who has a right to be chuffed with this is the Llywydd, Rosemary Butler (Lab, Newport West). Her recommendations (Assembly Commission steps up to the oche) are included almost word for word.

So don't worry. The National Assembly might, in future be called Welsh Parliament because "National Assembly" isn't a good enough name for Wales....but it is for France, Greece, South Korea, Hungary, Pakistan and South Africa.

Oh, and all those 16 year olds chomping at the bit to vote may be able to (The X-Factor). Great stuff. Meanwhile, the "Assemblement" will be able to block "fracking" but won't be able to control any energy project that produces more power than a BMX dynamo. The UK Government will retain ultimate control.

I look forward to the recommendations of the Baroness Kirsty Williams Commission on Devolution for Wales in 2024, which will outline a lasting settlement and put the issue of constitutional reform to bed for....

Read More

Turning Wales a (Radioactive) Shade of Green

When the fuel for your nuclear reactor is spent, where does it go?
The Welsh Government are consulting on changes to their policy.
(Pic : American Nuclear Society)

"Radioactive waste" - two words that conjure images of deformities, lead boxes several feet thick and fluorescent green sludge.

The truth is a bit different. Most radioactive waste is a result of medicine – leftovers from radiography and radiotherapy - and is so low-grade it can sometimes be (carefully) disposed of at landfill sites. Then of course there's the higher-grade waste associated with nuclear energy and nuclear weapons.

Disposal of radioactive waste is – believe it or not – a devolved matter, though there's high-level cooperation between the respective governments of the UK.

Back in April, the Welsh Government launched a consultation on their radioactive waste policies, asking people if said policies needed a review. After carrying out that review, the Welsh Government have launched another consultation (pdf) which includes its preferred options for future disposal of radioactive waste, though no final decisions have been made.

The Current Standpoint

Most of the UK's high-grade nuclear waste is reprocessed or stored at Sellafield,
but with so much fuel reaching the end of its life, a new option is required.
(Pic : BBC)

In 2006, the independent Committee for Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) recommended that their preferred method of dealing with the high-grade waste resulting from the current generation of nuclear power plants was geological disposal (aka. storing it permanently in an excavated hole circa 500-1000ft deep). In 2013, CoRWM reaffirmed this as their favoured option.

In 2010, the UK Government's approach was for communities to volunteer to store high-grade waste for the whole of the UK in exchange for "goodies/investment". Communities in Cumbria (where most of the UK's radioactive waste is stored) and Kent considered it but ultimately it was rejected.

The Scottish Government took a different view and would prefer surface-level storage near the place where the waste was produced. The Welsh Government sat on the fence and neither supported or opposed geological disposal, though if a Welsh community were to "volunteer", the Welsh Government would reconsider their position.

What concerns did the consultation raise?

Some respondents believed it was irresponsible to support Wylfa B whilst opposing
the storage of nuclear waste in Wales - and the Welsh Government now agree.
(Pic : Cyndeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg)

It's irresponsible to reject storage of nuclear waste whilst supporting Wylfa B – The support for Wylfa B is one of the main reasons, in the Welsh Government's own words, that they decided to review their policies. The Welsh Government believe, in principle, that storing/disposing nuclear waste in Wales would be consistent with supporting nuclear energy.

It would be irresponsible to store nuclear waste above ground due to threats from terrorism and natural disasters, but burying it won't solve these issues either – The Welsh Government "note" the CoRWM recommendation that geological disposal is the best long-term solution to the problem, and they say that there's "no evidence" that surface storage would "provide a safer long-term answer".

Concerns over the cost to the Welsh Government – UK policy means the costs of nuclear waste disposal falls on the operator. State funding is provided via the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and Radioactive Waste Management (RWM) and the Welsh Government are confident there would be no additional cost to themselves.

Liabilities following an accident – It's the UK Parliament's responsibility to approve/pay compensation as a result of nuclear accidents above and beyond compensation paid out by operators.

The Welsh Government should reconsider its support for new nuclear power stations – The Welsh Government rather glibly say that the issue of whether new nuclear power stations should be supported or not falls outside the consultation. They believe nuclear energy is a "reliable low-carbon source that complements renewables....bringing significant long-term economic benefits".

The best option is not to produce more radioactive waste – The Welsh Government believe that high-grade waste can be stored safely, and there's a backlog of "legacy waste" from 60 years of nuclear power that still needs to be disposed of. The presence of legacy waste also means that a decision has to be made now to comply with EU radioactive waste directives.

Incidents at Yucca Mountain and WIPP in the US prove geological disposal is unsafe – The Welsh Government raised concerns with CoRWM about these incidents, but they don't believe that this  proves geological disposal is harmful.

"Bribing" communities to host radioactive waste is wrong – The fact some of the communities that came forward to host a facility withdrew from the process without penalty demonstrates "the robustness of the right to withdraw". However, the Welsh Government evaded the issue of whether or not it was "bribing" or not.

The Welsh Government should be responsible for "Welsh" waste – Responsibility for disposal of radioactive waste doesn't mean waste will be disposed in Wales. At the moment, the only radioactive waste stored in Wales is low-grade and often in low volumes.

The Welsh Government's Choice

The Welsh Government now support "geological disposal" and
don't rule out Wales hosting such a facility.
(Pic : enformable.com)

Justification for a policy change

• "Storage" requires an ongoing supervision and is only a short to medium-term option, so "disposal" is preferred to remove the need for supervision.
• There are no proposals to reprocess nuclear waste from Wylfa B, so management of that waste is required. The current Welsh Government policy of opposing management of nuclear waste in Wales contradicts this and will need to be changed.
• There's already a considerable amount of nuclear waste requiring disposal even before taking Wylfa B into account. Therefore, there's a duty on this generation to ensure the process of disposing the waste is started now.

The Welsh Government's Preferred Option

• A nuclear waste policy that's consistent with supporting new nuclear power stations/Wylfa B.
• A policy that meets EU directives, and the Welsh Government believes that will not be met by surface or near-surface storage.
• A policy that takes the needs and safeguarding of future generations into account.
• Subsequently, the Welsh Government's preferred option is "geological disposal". Though they say they've taken no firm decisions on this and it doesn't mean it'll be stored in Wales.

A Radioactive Issue

This is the reason you shouldn't make up nuclear
energy policy on the back of a fag packet.

The legal difference (as defined in the EU directive) between "disposal" and "storage" is that if nuclear waste is "stored" there's an expectation that it will be recovered in the future. "Disposal" means it's left there and presumably sealed in somehow, never to be returned to again.

"Stored" is a better word to describe both because wherever it's put, it's going to be there probably a lot longer than humans will be around. The half-life of plutonium waste, for example, is around 24,000 years. For some uranium isotopes produced/used in nuclear energy it's around 245,000 years.

To put that in perspective, 24,000 years ago modern humans had just started colonising North America and the last ice age was at its peak.

That's one hell of a legacy for "Future Generations" we're going to leave.

Wanting nuclear power without dealing with the waste is a lot like wanting to eat haute cuisine without eventually having to take a dump.

Wales is going to be very high up the list of potential nuclear waste disposal sites because, objectively speaking, sites have to be : geographically isolated, economically depressed (to be easily won over by the promise of investment), close to a producers of high-grade waste (to minimise transport), home to communities that are used to living with nuclear energy and both geologically and hydrologically stable.

Anglesey ticks all the boxes.

The Welsh Government now openly admit their support for Wylfa B is implicit support for the disposal of high-grade nuclear waste in Wales (completely contradicting statements by the First Minister in the Senedd chamber). For once they're being honest.

That doesn't mean it'll happen, but certain politicians and parties will have to admit that on the record too because eggs are heading for faces, and there's little room for backtracking without looking like utter pillocks.

Read More

End of Year Report 2014

As the legislative year comes to a close, it's time to take yet another
look at the performance of the Welsh Government and opposition.
(Pic : cityofcardiff.com)

• Report 2011-12
• Report 2012-13

Carwyn Jones (Lab, Bridgend)
First Minister & Minister for the Welsh Language

C+ overall; D Welsh language (C for effort)

Until the torrid last fortnight, the First Minister had rarely been seriously challenged in the Senedd - except on specific issues in Bridgend which could have been embarrassing, as well as stalled work on the Williams Commission. You can argue there should've been a full cabinet reshuffle this month as the splitting of Alun Davies' old portfolio is clunky - though it's been said a full reshuffle before 2016 is likely.

I believe the heart's there when it comes to the Welsh language. It's just Y Gynhadledd Fawr didn't tell us anything we didn't already know. Despite all that's been said there's been very little evidence of action, leading to the (rather ineffectual) protests from Cymdeithas yr Iaith. Welsh language campaigners have always been an awkward squad, but Carwyn's lucky it's not the 1960s anymore. I'm sure his recent Twitter "spat" underlines to him how much of an uphill battle he's got here.

You can argue that May's results were disappointing for Labour, who seemed confident they would take two seats without putting any work in. UKIP's surge caught them off guard and it's also reflected in recent polling which suggests Labour could lose seats in 2016. They neglect the fact that a lot of people aren't happy with what they're doing in Wales and, yes, they're just as likely to lose votes to UKIP too.The opposition are were being held at bay, the economy is showing signs of recovery, the Welsh NHS is still the Welsh NHS we all know and are concerned about, while his calls for a UK constitutional convention continue to fall on deaf ears - presumably dependent on September's outcome. Steady as he goes.

Huw Lewis (Lab, Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney)
Minister for Education

C+

There've been three big problems Huw Lewis has had to deal with with year, two of which he inherited. The first being the poor PISA results, which resulted in the extensive OECD investigation. The second was a significant increase in the amount spent to fund Welsh tuition fee policies. Somehow, Huw managed to kick a review of higher education funding into touch and we won't see the results of the Diamond Review until September 2016.

His response to January's GCSE marking row showed a willingness to act quickly under pressure and to accept criticism gracefully. His decision to create a separate law on special education needs also showed he was prepared to listen to committees and AMs. He has a lot on his plate, obviously, but I'd argue that he's coping with it relatively well. Education's still a results game, though.

Edwina Hart (Lab, Gower)
Minister for the Economy, Science & Transport

B

It's hard for Edwina Hart to take all the credit, but she's certainly playing a role in the fleeting semblance of an economic recovery taking place in Wales, with unemployment now below the UK average. The main developments in her portfolio this year have been the early groundwork laid for the South Wales Metro scheme – which is about 10 years overdue – and the creation of city regions. Another major coup was managing to get Pinewood Studios to set up a base in Wales.

She's a worker, not a shirker, but it remains to be seen if other flagship policies like her version of enterprise zones are going to bear fruit. Also – even speaking as a rather private person myself, and especially after Wednesday's announcement – I believe she needs to do more to keep the rest of the Assembly informed of what she's up to outside the chamber. She's a poor communicator, but good at her job.

Jane Hutt (Lab, Vale of Glamorgan)
Minister for Finance

C+

Quite a bit of work's been done to increase procurement from Welsh-based companies. Though it's disappointing that, in an election year, more hasn't been done/said regarding the future of EU funds in Wales, which even senior Labour figures are beginning to feel haven't been used wisely. I don't think Jane has been forceful enough on the "lockstep provisions" in the Wales Bill either, which has now simply become something to bash the opposition with.

These remain straightened times for the Welsh budget, and Jane Hutt is continuing to do a reasonable enough job without pulling any rabbits out of hats. She did, however, dish out a tough deal to Welsh local government and further education colleges in the 2014-15 budget which seemed harsh in some respects.

Mark Drakeford (Lab, Cardiff West)
Minister for Health & Social Services

D (C for effort)

Another year where the Welsh NHS stumbles from problem to problem.

It's clear Mark's made an impact, but not to such an extent that the issues plaguing health services have been turned around. We're still waiting for progress in ambulance response times, mortality rates and the future of certain specialist services. Considering his background, I would've expected him to have understood the need for evidence-based laws too, which is a shame.

He's so far resisted Welsh Conservative calls for a "Keogh-style inquiry". I'd agree that a full blown public inquiry is unnecessary because action is more important than another bloody panel or committee - but we're one big tragedy or scandal away from it.

Even if Mark remains the best-suited person for the job, his response (or lack of) to concerns from families affected by problems in Abertawe Bro Morgannwg health board, and campaigners from Pembrokeshire, verged on a high-handed arrogance which is – unfortunately – becoming typical behaviour from Welsh ministers.

Lesley Griffiths (Lab, Wrexham)
Minister for Local Government & Leader of the House

C+

In terms of local government, this year's been dominated by the budget cuts and the Williams Commission, both of which Lesley seemed to play second fiddle to the First Minister and Jane Hutt in terms of being the public face. Ultimately, it'll be her responsibility to implement those recommendations and manage angry council chiefs – which will be a challenge in itself.

I welcome the ongoing commitments made to increase transparency in local government - things like webcasts and social media use in council chambers. There was also a major report into improving the diversity of local government, though it remains to be seen if anything will actually happen as a result. The Welsh Government's reasonable track record in dealing with community safety continues with the pledge for 500 extra PCSOs met and sustained, albeit being an underwhelming pledge in itself.

Carl Sargeant (Lab, Alyn & Deeside)
Minister for Housing & Regeneration

B-

Carl's dished out quite a bit of regeneration funding, including (the slightly controversial) Vibrant and Viable Places. The Welsh Government clearly want results this time round and don't want to hand out grants and funds for the sake of it.

He's also overseen the passage of the comprehensive Housing Act. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but he's shown a clear commitment to reducing homelessness and an unyielding commitment to addressing domestic abuse – the new Bill being very much his baby, I suppose.

His management of the planning system is likely to become a thorn in his side, as controversy continues over Local Development Plans and opencast mining. The forthcoming Planning Bill looks set to centralise decision-making in light of planning still being – in many respects – only part-devolved. It's right to question whether Welsh priorities are relevant here or are being thrown aside as part of EnglandandWales?

Jeff Cuthbert (Lab, Caerphilly)
Minister for Communities & Tackling Poverty

C

A minister struggling to find a purpose, though that's not entirely his fault. He's done some good work on credit unions, which seem to become bigger year by year. However, cuts to Funky Dragon risk undermining the National Assembly's engagement with youth at large.

The Well-being of Future Generations Bill – which really should've been up there as one of the most important pieces of legislation in the Assembly's history – turned out to be a woolly disappointment. I was also surprised at his negative attitude to the "FinEdBill" which would, in part, complement his brief and what he's trying to do.

Presumably, policing will eventually fall under this portfolio (if it's devolved on time) and that will increase the visibility and importance of this cabinet position. Until then, although he means well he can't really do much and a lot of his ministerial functions seem to cross over with local government. It's a confused portfolio that needs a firmer sense of purpose more in chime with devolved powers as all the big levers are reserved to Westminster.

John Griffiths (Lab, Newport East)
Minister for Culture

C

This portfolio has certainly been the Welsh Government's blind spot due to the challenging environment caused by harsh cuts to local authority budgets and wider austerity – where the arts, sport and culture are almost always the first up on the chopping board; a situation that's continued unabated.

He's clearly getting out and about and seems to be balancing many plates with skill. John also seems keen to listen to the rest of the Assembly. But you get the impression he's under pressure to try and deliver things he knows he won't be able to deliver, so he sits on the fence too often. He was perhaps always more comfortable with the environment brief and that's probably why it was given back to him.

Alun Davies (Lab, Blaenau Gwent)
(Former) Minister for Food & Natural Resources

F

A mixed record - that displayed both his strengths and weaknesses - has been tarnished by a few moments of rank stupidity.

Theodore Huckle QC
Counsel General

B

He's been a busy guy it's fair to say, and now has two Supreme Court "victories" under his belt with the third case on the way. AMs are starting to make better use of their opportunity to question him in plenary, though Simon Thomas AM (Plaid, Mid & West Wales) remains the most likely person to put him on the spot.

After the big UK reshuffle, he's outlasted his Whitehall "adversary" Dominic Grieve QC, though that could be because the Prime Minister was getting fed up with losing court cases to the Welsh Government. It remains to be seen whether new Attorney General, Jeremy Wright, will be more forceful in future encounters. Until we have a reserved powers model, further call-ins of Welsh laws are inevitable.

Junior Ministers

Gwenda Thomas (Lab, Neath)
Deputy Minister for Children & Social Services

B-

The Social Services and Wellbeing Act 2014 is the most challenging and complex law since devolution, and the proposed bill on Social Service Regulation promised to be another one. It's led to the creation of a new National Adoption Service and guarantees minimum rights for carers – Wales' unsung heroes. Gwenda's also overseen the transfer of care for the elderly from hospital to the community – but this hasn't been done urgently enough, leading to negative story lines and serious failures in hospital care. Another solid, but very testing year.

Vaughan Gething (Lab, Cardiff S. & Penarth)
Deputy Minister for Tackling Poverty

C+

He suffers from the same problem as his reporting minister Jeff Cuthbert. It's a small department with a small budget but an important remit. It's hard to tell what Vaughan actually does, but it appears to boil down to the micromanagement of schemes like Flying Start – though he appears to be making very good progress there.

He's shown inside and outside the Senedd chamber that he's a very capable and confident public speaker – something of a rarity in Welsh politics - but he needs a bit more time in the ministerial incubator. He'll almost certainly be bumped up to a more senior cabinet position prior to 2016 in order to properly challenge him, as you get the impression he isn't being so at the moment.

Ken Skates (Lab, Clwyd South)
Deputy Minister for Skills

B+

A quiet success story, overseeing a significant increase in the number of apprenticeships and successful job applicants through Jobs Growth Wales, playing a big part in reducing overall unemployment levels – albeit with youth unemployment still remaining relatively high.There was recent criticism that Jobs Growth Wales isn't reaching those most in need of a job or training – but all in all he's performing well, added to by the recent announcement of a new 10 year plan to address skills shortages in the private sector.

It's good to focus on vocational skills and apprenticeships but the Welsh Government should start thinking about graduates and postgraduates. Cuts to Young Enterprise could be a backwards step and he seems too fond on using Assemblese. He definitely looks the more likely of the "newbies" to make the step up to a full ministerial post at the moment.

Opposition Leaders

Andrew Davies (Con, South Wales Central)

C+

I'm sure many people will disagree, but compared to previous years this has been a good one for the Leader of the Opposition. He had a very strong end to the Assembly year, and came into his own during the recent debate on safe standing.

I don't question for a moment his sincerity on the NHS. It's just after seeing what's happening in England, it's not as if the Conservatives can be trusted to run the NHS properly either. The failings are almost identical just with different numbers involved. The Welsh Tory housing proposals seemed, in some respects, odd and based off poor maths. While a campaign against junk mail seemed whimsical. He's also perhaps way too easy to wind up compared to the more calm disposition of the First Minister.

Back in February it looked like he was a goner after the sudden sacking of four shadow cabinet members (subsequently reinstated) over the "lockstep" row. He was criticised for both the sackings and the manner by which he did it, but as I said at the time he was left with no other choice.

He's been half-vindicated by recent developments with regard Scotland (they won't have a "lockstep"), further added to by David Jones' exit from UK cabinet. If that had rumbled on another year I would've been surprised to see him lead the Welsh Tories into the 2016 elections, but his position is arguably stronger than ever now.

Leanne Wood (Plaid, South Wales Central)

B- personally; C party

July 2013 : "My gut instinct tells me the coming year will be tough, but manageable".

I was probably right. Plaid had made little progress in the polls until recently but, to be fair, they haven't gone backwards either. They also managed to get another set of budget concessions though (alongside the Lib Dems), a convincing by-election win on Anglesey and are producing a steady stream of good policy ideas and proposed laws. Leanne also made the right decision to streamline her "cabinet".

You don't last in frontline politics for 40 years unless you've got something between your ears, so Dafydd Elis-Thomas AM (Plaid, Dwyfor Meirionnydd) was correct, just his usual self. The attack on UKIP at the party's spring conference was miscalculated, and in hindsight there's irony in that UKIP's strong performance saved Jill Evans' seat – to a great deal of relief, I'd imagine.

Plaid are now part of the same "establishment elite" anti-politics voters turning to UKIP are railing against, exemplified to a certain extent by the classic groupthink in relation to Michael Haggett. They can't keep counting on their increasingly demographically-squeezed heartland vote to sweep them home either, while they're always outnumbered in the south and north east.

Next year looks promising in terms of target seats, but if Plaid want to seriously challenge in 2016, they need to stop looking in the mirror - basking in their inflated self-esteem as a party - and see May's result as a much needed kick up the arse before the electorate kicks it for them. Pride comes before a fall and all that.

Kirsty Williams (Lib Dem, Brecon & Radnor)

B personally; D party

Kirsty Williams has consistently proven to be a capable stateswoman, arguably being the most effective opposition leader in terms of picking apart the Welsh Government. She also won a ballot and will introduce a law on minimum nursing levels in hospitals – and I'll come back to that when the Bill's introduced.

Unfortunately, her party's prospects aren't looking good due to the metastasis of the very deadly cleggoma and secondary infection of dannyalexanderitis. I suppose the most galling aspect of that is that Lib Dem AMs haven't really put a foot wrong and have usually been pretty good at holding ministers to account.

You can't really read much from the European elections as the Lib Dems have always performed poorly, but it's not looking good for them in 2015 or 2016. It would be a shame if Kirsty is left a party of one – losing very capable AMs in the process - as the Welsh electorate sends the clowns in to Cardiff Bay.

Special Mention : The latest Standards Commissioner report (pdf) showed that there were no admissible complaints about AMs in the year April 2013- March 2014. I don't know if they deserve a gold sticker or a trip to Folly Farm or something....

Read More