Reckless Abandon?

The last day of term in the Senedd always seems to throw up curve balls, and just before AMs broke for Easter recess came the news – after a day of rumours and counter-rumours – that Mark Reckless had left UKIP to join the Conservative group.

Read More

FMQs: Teachers, Llangennech & Bridgend Ford

A refreshingly Brexit-light edition of First Minister's Questions this afternoon.

Read More

Carmarthenshire's Roll of Dishonour

This weekend, people will gather near monuments which, in some cases, will list the names of those who willingly and unwillingly sacrificed their lives in conflict.

Read More

FMQs : Veterans, USA & Article 50

It's a long one this week as I've decided to tack on the Assembly's response to the Article 50 judgement. There's also a sense of deja vu from recent FMQs as you'll probably see for yourselves.

Read More

Done up like a kipper?

He might have backed Brexit, but where will Nathan Gill Remain?
(Pic : BBC Wales)

Update 17/08/2016 : Nathan Gill has made his choice - he's keeping both jobs. Bizarrely, he's leaving the UKIP Assembly group to sit as an Independent, but will remain a UKIP member, UKIP MEP for Wales and leader of UKIP's Welsh branch. You couldn't make it up. Do-do-dodododo-do-do-do-do.

Another Update 18/08/2016 : Just when you thought the hole couldn't be dug any deeper, Channel 4 News reveal this little problem....I may have to return to that once more details come out.

It's taken them just over three months, but – as widely anticipated – the signs are that the UKIP Assembly group is beginning to dismantle itself.

Read More

Local Democracy petition given short shrift by AMs

LA! LA! LA! LA! WE ARE NOT LISTENING! LA! LA! LA! LA!
(Pic : Carmarthenshire Planning)

When it comes to rotten boroughs in Wales, there's one that stands head and shoulders above any other and that's Carmarthenshire, which is being run in a manner similar to Saudi Arabia; there's a token elected body but an unelected monarch calls the shots.

Read More

Bandits control the Wild West

Carmarthenshire folk don't take kindly to varmint auditors.
(Pic : via angelfire)

We've already seen Pembrokeshire Council's (PCC) Indians protect their chiefs - another round of that next week - but Carmarthenshire's cowboys and cowgirls (CCC) had an opportunity to restore natural order to their territory earlier this week.

The council instead hanged the sheriff by choosing to "note" – effectively reject - the Wales Audit Office (WAO) report into unlawful indemnity funding, whilst accepting they made mistakes on that and the pension payments – with nobody taking responsibility, naturally.

The broad message coming out of the meeting was identical to that of Pembrokeshire - "We haven't done anything wrong, but we won't do it again."

Y Byd ar Bedwar

Ahead of the meeting, S4C's Y Byd ar Bedwar provided a decent summing up of the issues in Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire (available here with English subtitles), with contributions from Carmarthen Planning's Jacqui Thompson and Y Cneifiwr. Both Mark James and Bryn Parry-Jones had an opportunity to put their side of the story across but turned it down.

Former Chair of CCC, Cllr. Sian Thomas (Plaid, Penygroes), said she "could see the erosion of democracy within the county council". Although it was her job to ensure councillors could have their say, she feared she would be corrected or overruled by the executive.

To put that in context, imagine if the head of the Welsh Government civil service attended meetings of the National Assembly, was looking over the shoulder of the Presiding Officer, telling her who should and shouldn't speak, for how long and on what basis.

Although it's standard practice for senior officers to attend council meetings, that's how bad things have been in Carmarthenshire for many years. But don't worry, because they're the best local authority in Wales.

"At the end-a the day...."

Outfits from Debenhams....
(Pic : lightmasterstudios.co.uk)

This was my first experience of Carmarthenshire Council live. You can watch it for yourself here.

After a failed attempt by Cllr. Emlyn Dole (Plaid, Llannon) to – under CCC's constitution – remove Tim Kerr QC from proceedings, it moved on to statements on behalf of the WAO and Tim Kerr himself.

The auditor, Anthony Barrett, said "the law is very clear" that no funding can be provided for a counterclaim, there were failures in governance and procedure, and he called on CCC to withdraw the indemnity.

Tim Kerr QC – not as cheery as he was in Pembrokeshire, this was Serious Tim – repeated the assertions in his November 2013 legal advice (covered here).

That being :

• the WAO doesn't have an authoritative voice in law.
• the Welsh Governments 2006 Order didn't remove powers to indemnify officers under Section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972.
• CCC wasn't "a litigious council" because they were sued.
• there were no procedural flaws.

Cllr. Darren Price (Plaid, Gorslas) said officers failed to be cautious, adding that the public would expect someone earning £200k to fund legal proceedings themselves. He said guidance clearly prevents individuals undertaking legal proceedings,and that by ignoring it, CCC were questioning the legitimacy of Welsh Government. He posed the question - "Was it really worth it?"

Cllr. Sian Caiach (People First, Hengoed) argued that officers had been used as a proxy to undertake a libel case on behalf of the council through a legal loophole. This action undermined both free speech and the authority of the Welsh Government.

Council Leader, Kevin Madge (Lab, Garnant), tried to make a statement, but proceedings were interrupted as CCC invited Sunn O))) to perform an impromptu concert.

                              

After some bowel-loosening drone metal, he continued, saying he wanted to set up cross-party group to overview governance, led by the WLGA (aka. "Form a committee" - Welsh solution to everything).

Kevin was "appalled and disgusted by some of the things said about Mark James", and it was right - as an employer - to support him as part of their duty of care. The court judgement backed that decision, and only the courts can determine the interpretation of law with regard the legality of the indemnity.

Then the leader of the "Independents" - Cllr. Meryl Gravell (Ind, Trimsaran) – admonished the "disgraceful content on blogs", saying five defamatory blogs constituted "exceptional circumstances" (when it was later confirmed that "exceptional circumstances" has no clear cut definition and evolved from case law). She wagged fingers at people around the chamber, saying that it was all those who committed the grievous crime of speaking to the media who brought the council into disrepute.

Later, Cllr. Giles Morgan (Ind, Swiss Valley) – Martin Bell minus ethics – described the Thompson case as a "crusade against council officers", saying people who talk about the council as if they're down the pub are "reprehensible" (unless they're actually down the pub, I presume - or is that where CCCs lawyers are heading next?).

Though Giles did accept that Mark James should've left the meeting. Which....would render the process unlawful on its own. Which means having to accept the WAO report.

An impassioned speech from Cllr. Glynog Davies (Plaid, Quarter Bach) said the "plain English" guidance cautioned against awarding the indemnity and bans using funds to undertake a claim. The Executive Board say they didn't get independent legal advice because of their "knowledge of the blogger", and he asked whether the decision was morally correct?  Cllr. Linda Evans (Plaid, Llanfihangel-ar-Arth) asked if advice from the barrister representing Mark James – Adam Speker – counted as "independent advice"?

The answer to both questions was, of course, "yes".

CCC moved to "note" the report, suspend part of constitution relating to indemnity funding, and called for Welsh Government to clarify the law. As a result, there's an outside chance the WAO could take the council to the High Court.

The pensions and no-confidence debates were staid. However, it was broadly accepted CCC got things wrong - even by Meryl Gravell.

Cllr. Anthony Jones (Lab, Llandybie) said senior executive pay was "out of kilter" and immoral, calling for the Welsh Government to intervene and issue clear guidance. It's worth pointing out that the National Assembly's Public Accounts Committee are undertaking an inquiry into senior management pay.

Kevin Madge's broad defence was, "I was doing it all in good faith."

The no-confidence debate had something to do with bungalows and Debenhams. Also, it included one of the most bizarre statements I've ever heard - that Carmarthenshire was "unscathed by the recession". This report from the Wales Rural Obervatory (pdf) – sorry, Jac – indicates otherwise, with Carmarthenshire suffering relatively badly compared to other rural authorities.

Although the mother hens of the Independents looked as though they were "Waiting until Great Birham Wood to high Dunsinane Hill shall come against him", Kevin Madge et. al - as expected - saw off the no-confidence vote comfortably.

Plaid left with their tail tucked between their legs having "stood up for taxpayers", Labour-"Independents" rallied behind themselves, but ultimately CCC remains led by someone who can't command gravitas however decent, if misguided, a bloke he comes across as.

"Where seldom is heard a discouraging word"....

Mark James wasn't there in person, but he was in spirit.
(Pic : via photobucket)

Considering the finer points of law and statute, it's clear neither CCC or PCC did anything that was explicitly prohibited. Neither did Caerphilly Council either.

When you weigh up the sums of money involved, the lack of any reimbursement, disregard for normal procedure, the bloody mindedness of both authorities in the face of public criticism and most importantly of all - basic morality - they're guilty as sin. That often counts for more.

The reason Carmarthenshire has gone so far down this road is because small mistakes haven't been acknowledged properly or corrected, officers and senior councillors come to think they're always in the right, then the mistakes get bigger and bigger and bigger - what Pat Dodd Racher described on West Wales News Review as "a bubble of self-congratulation".

CCC had a golden opportunity to start its healing process by taking full accountability for what they did, but they fluffed the test.

If those at the top had done the decent thing and resigned, still co-operating with any cross-party investigation into procedures at the council, that would've been praiseworthy and honourable.

Instead, far from drawing a line under the matter, I suspect they've just made things worse.

If Gloucestershire Police and CPS decide there's a criminal case to go forward, CCC have just done something monumentally stupid. I'd also be surprised if Carmarthenshire survives local government reorganisation now, because they've publicly undermined the Welsh Government's authority.

We're talking about one of the largest local authorities in Wales effectively slipping into administrative anarchy by forming their own interpretation of Welsh Government guidance and orders, even when it's been made crystal clear that what CCC has done was contrary to them.

They've made AMs and MPs from all parties look like chumps. They blatantly disrespected Anthony Barrett and the Wales Audit Office. They've spat in Lesley Griffiths' coffee, farted in Carl Sargeant's face and kicked Carwyn Jones in the balls. They've made the National Assembly look like muscleless wonders and left a flaming bag of dog poo on the steps of Cathays Park.

The Welsh Government can either restore good order themselves by sending in more sheriffs, or they can let it go, giving other local authorities in Wales a green light to try the same thing in future.

Read More

The Stench of the Cleddau

An otherwise productive meeting of Pembrokeshire Council on the damaging
Wales Audit Office reports descended into an unedifying farce.
(Pic : BBC Wales)

As much of the focus regarding the recent Wales Audit Office reports into unlawful payments has been on Carmarthenshire – due to culminate next week - it's only fair I turn my attentions to their equally-ripe neighbour, Pembrokeshire Council (PCC), which held an extraordinary council meeting to discuss unlawful pension payments to their chief executive and one other senior officer last Friday.

Extensive coverage of the goings on there has been provided by Cllr. Jacob Williams (Non-affiliated Ind, East Williamston) and Cllr. Mike Stoddart (Non-affiliated Ind, Milford Hakin).

Auditor Anthony Barrett's findings (pdf) were very similar to those in Carmarthenshire – which is unsurprising as it was effectively a joint-arrangement. The main difference is the numbers involved and some of the titles of the relevant committees. Pembrokeshire also didn't have any libel indemnity issues.

• The agreement to pay cash sums instead of pension payments to senior staff who opted-out of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) - to mitigate effects of changes to tax relief on pensions - was ultra vires (beyond their power).
• The Senior Staff Committee failed to take into account all relevant considerations. They also failed to provide evidence that supported their claims that not approving the cash payments would prevent the recruitment of high-calibre senior staff. The Committee made a decision based off a one page report, which was exempt from publication.
• They also failed to take equalities duties into account, and the decision "constituted indirect discrimination" on age and sex grounds because senior staff – mostly older men – would benefit disproportionately from the cash payments compared younger staff and women. As nobody complained within the legal timescale, it was "indirect" discrimination rather than outright (same as Carmarthenshire).
• The report itself was drafted and presented by two senior officers who had disqualifying personal interests as they could've benefited from the cash payments – rendering it an unlawful decision just by their mere presence.
• Despite claims to the contrary, the payments would have constituted an additional cost to the council based on future actuarial/risk assessments and changes to national insurance contributions. The auditor says the figures were also different to those the Senior Staff Committee decided upon.
• PCC's Chief Executive, Bryn Parry-Jones, had received £51,011 in payments across 2012-13 and 2013-14. I understand the report implies £28,742 was also paid to an unnamed senior member of staff.

I was home at the time so I caught most of the second half of the meeting. OK, it wasn't the most riveting thing to watch, but it was conducted impressively. Councillors were given the freedom to speak as long as they wanted – often making great contributions – and the chair didn't dominate proceedings.

Hopefully, Bridgend Council will be joining them later this year. It underlines the importance of broadcasting these meetings – as will become more apparent later on.

PCC accepted all four of the Wales Audit Office recommendations, meaning the council will :

• Stop the payments in lieu of pension contributions.
• Address procedural weaknesses to avoid a repeat.
• Ensure that any similar future payments (if possible) are in line with the decision taken by the Senior Staff Committee.
• Disclose the payments in their 2012-13 financial statement, and the committee responsible should re-approve the accounts.

Then things took a bizarre, sinister turn.

The leader of the opposition in the council, Cllr. Paul Miller (Lab, Neyland West), had tabled a motion calling for PCC to suspend Bryn Parry-Jones on full pay due to the Gloucestershire Police investigation. This is a very different tact to the Labour leader a few miles east.

As you probably know, since then, Carmarthenshire's chief executive Mark James has temporarily stood down while the police investigation continues. Although it's unclear what "stepping down" means as opposed to a formal suspension, he really should've done so days after the original reports were published – for his own sake, really.

Better late than never. The delay deserves criticism, but he's innocent until proven otherwise.

PCC's ruling "Independent" Group, however, were going to defend their man to the end, and boy does he know it.

In a display of pompous bluster, one of the "Independents" stood up, said he had a prejudicial interest as he had called for the chief executive to remain in post in the Western Telegraph, and withdrew from the meeting hoping to take a large chunk of the opposition with him as some sort of matter of honour.

He later snuck back in and withdrew again, each time accompanied by a dramatic closing of his file.

Tim Kerr QC – a name which should be familiar – revealed that a brown white envelope containing newspaper cuttings was left for him in the chauffeur-driven car that picked him up at Port Talbot station. Those local newspaper cuttings contained quotes from councillors who called for Bryn Parry-Jones's suspension.

After pressing from councillors to name names, he began "readink names from ze list". Lo and behold, almost all of them were councillors who had called for the chief executive to be suspended or resign, whether Labour, Plaid or non-affiliated Independents.

Councillors are supposed to vote with an open mind. So proceedings hinged on whether councillors were predispositioned (leaning towards a decision) or predetermined (100% made their mind up) in their voting intentions.

If they were predetermined, and voted that way on the motion, it was implied they would breach the Code of Conduct and be subject to an Ombudsman investigation.

Cllr. Miller said he received legal advice from Welsh Labour's retained lawyers that his group's statements were predispositions and so his group would remain.

However, Tim Kerr believed many of the newspaper quotes constituted predetermination. It's also worth pointing out that the envelope was left by Pembrokeshire's Monitoring Officer (a senior legal officer and paid member of staff).

Not willing to be subject to their own misconduct investigations, most – but not all – of the opposition councillors withdrew part in protest, part because they had no choice. As a result, the motion calling for the suspension of the chief executive was withdrawn.

However, as Caebrwyn pointed out yesterday, the official guidance within the Localism Act 2011 on predetermination (which applies to Wales as well as England) doesn't prohibit councillors from voting even if they've made public statements supporting a particular position.

So it looks like what happened in Pembrokeshire was a dirty trick and attempt to intimidate.

And, most importantly of all, it happened all on camera.

What should cause bums to squeak across the south west of Wales however, is the news that's broken in the last few hours that Caerphilly Council's former chief executive, Anthony O'Sullivan, and his deputy, Nigel Barnett, have been formally charged with misconduct in public office....having been brought to that point by similar, but not identical, circumstances to those in Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire.

Read More

Carmarthenshire Goes Rogue

I don't make a habit of returning to things that haven't concluded, but I'll make an exception in Carmarthenshire Council's (CCC) case, as the local authority continues its downward spiral into chaos.

The fallout from two critically damaging Wales Audit Office (WAO) reports continues – I don't need to tell you to follow the Carmarthenshire blogs and South Wales Guardian there – with an extraordinary general meeting of CCC due to be held on 27^th February to discuss them.

The opposition Plaid Cymru group seek to table motions of no confidence in senior officers and members of the Executive Board - which decided to award the pension payments and indemnity in the first place.

The recent intervention of Keith Davies AM (Lab, Llanelli), who's joined calls for Mark James to be suspended, is significant because – as Carmarthenshire Planning has said – he's the first senior Labour figure to voice that opinion and could – as Y Cneifiwr has said – give some Labour councillors a "green light" to back a motion of no confidence or abstain.

I don't know much about internal Carmarthenshire politics, but judging by the numbers it's likely any motions of no-confidence will need at least 10 votes from Lab-Ind, or abstentions, to succeed. Easier said than done.

I'm sure many councillors would've wanted an immediate extraordinary meeting, but it was perhaps the right decision to give the debate some breathing room, even if it extends the headlines for several weeks.

You would've expected suspensions of the senior officers involved too because of the seriousness of the judgements. It's the sensible thing to do – to protect the officers as much as the reputation of the council - but CCC are delicate little flowers and are never, ever, ever wrong!

The formal responses from CCC have been quite astonishing and have read like North Korean news bulletins.I expected a rebuff, but not to these levels.

Caerphilly took it on the chin, but unfortunately it's since descended into an unedifying "tu quoque" bun fight between Labour and Plaid Cymru. It looks like Pembrokeshire are dilly-dallying – though the former Council Leader, John Davies, has been big enough to admit they were wrong. Neither have reached anywhere near the same levels of petulant delusion as Carmarthenshire.

It's an old trick Fungus used at Manchester United – make "your side" (Labour & Independents) think the whole world's against you and it'll create a siege mentality where everyone will pitch together and dig in to win whatever the cost. Fungus was also often described as a Stalinist. And, as history has taught us, sometime an autocrat can get you to do what they want just by being in the same room and looking at you.

The Legal Advice

Aside from the publication of the WAO reports themselves, preliminary police involvement and the intervention of Keith Davies, the biggest development since has been the publication of two pieces of legal advice CCC received in relation to the indemnity funding. As far as I can tell there's been nothing relating to the pension payments, though Pembrokeshire Council are due to debate that later this week.

The first set of legal advice from 2008, by James Goudie QC (pdf), suggests the 2006 Order didn't override clauses in the Local Government Act 1972 (Section 111) which grants local authorities any and all powers to discharge their functions – what West Wales News Review described as a "Get Out of Jail Free Card".

Basically, if CCC want to ignore the 2006 Order, they believe a certain interpretation of the 1972 Act and how the 2006 Order relates to it gives them the power to do so.

As far as I can tell though, that would only be the case had Wales voted no to devolution in 1997.

The auditor said the 2006 Order provided a statutory code to Welsh local authorities outlining precisely when a Welsh local authority can indemnify officers in libel defences, explicitly prohibiting their use to undertake a claim.

Last time I checked, Carmarthenshire was in Wales and the National Assembly has responsibility for most aspects of local government within Wales. What the Welsh Government says in that regard, goes.

Although James Goudie QC disagrees with this, he says in no uncertain terms that "the restrictions in the 2006 Order and the Welsh Assembly Guidance on the bringing of defamation are a weighty factor against granting an indemnity" and that "it will be extremely rare for such a decision by the Council to be reasonable."

The broad conclusion of the 2008 legal advice was, therefore, "even if you can do it – don't". A common sense cautious approach could've interpreted it as advising against awarding the indemnity quite easily.

The Executive Board were apparently told there was unequivocal support in favour of granting the indemnity – which was bullshit, as there in black and white in the legal advice itself.

The second set of advice, from Timothy Kerr QC (pdf), is retrospective and doesn't add anything new. It's basing the lawfulness of the indemnity, largely, on the (for now) successful outcome at the High Court and on similar grounds to the Goudie advice (Section 111 powers).

The outcome isn't important. The lawfulness of the indemnity when it was originally granted is. Therefore, the 2008 advice trumps anything after it.

The WAO reports were written with full knowledge of both sets of legal advice and other unpublished correspondence, so I doubt the publication of the advice damages the credibility of Anthony Barrett's reports at all. It's now CCC's word against the WAO and will almost certainly head for the courts unless "something else" happens.

When it comes to matters of public finance, I know whose unqualified opinion I believe carries more weight.

Carmarthenshire : Rogue State?

We deal with upstart rebel territories a bit differently nowadays.
(Pic : themiscollection.com)

CCC are not only thumbing their nose at the WAO, Anthony Barrett, the opposition, the media, Carmarthenshire's council taxpayers and pretty much everyone who disagrees with them, they're also challenging the Welsh Government's authority.

By resorting to a justification based on the 1972 Act, they're effectively saying the 2006 Order isn't worth the paper it was written on. I hope Lesley Griffiths, the First Minister, AMs and civil servants in Cathays Park can see that. Their rather timid response to date shows they perhaps don't.

If CCC are given an opportunity to overturn WAO reports in relation to remuneration and indemnities, it could lead to challenges under the 1972 Act provisions to all sorts of Orders issued by the Welsh Government. It undermines both the devolution of local government, and the mandate Welsh Ministers have from the Welsh electorate to make regulations in that area.

That's before considering the serious damage it would do to the Wales Audit Office's reputation.

Carmarthenshire are, in effect, trying to seize control of some aspects of local government finance from the Welsh Government via a loophole that shouldn't even be there.

In less-enlightened times, if a local fiefdom were undermining the authority of the central government and its public servants in such an insolent manner, legions of knights would now be crossing the Loughor and heads would be put on spikes.

We're no stranger to this. Senior officers in Carmarthenshire are in danger of joining the long list of shit heel petty princes who paid the price for getting ideas above their station, having little care for the damage it could do Wales as a whole.

Councillors have been left in a tough position. Many will be swayed by the legal advice, but if they focus on the first set alone, and fully comprehend it, they'll realise the case for awarding the indemnity was likely to have been exaggerated beyond recognition.

I even feel sorry for Executive Board members. They still have to go for their own incompetence, but they've been done up like kippers by people they surely trusted. The sillier ones will still trust them, and will be standing there alongside the officers when the inevitable happens one day.

This is in danger of becoming a national embarrassment, and because of CCC digging their heels in, is more serious than it otherwise would have been.

A failure to, at the very least, suspend those involved temporarily means Carmarthenshire may as well be considered a rogue local authority that's become a law unto itself, needing to be brought to heel in the same way Anglesey was.

This isn't just about the credibility of CCC now, but about the credibility of Welsh local government and some of our most important public institutions.

When it rains....

I doubt anyone will have noticed this, but another sign of both the implosion within CCC's bunkers and contempt they hold the National Assembly and Welsh Government has come from an unexpected source.

The National Assembly's Petitions Committee recently discussed a petition to list the former ground of Llanelli RFC and Scarlets - Stradey Park - which has been eyed up for a controversial housing development (since under construction, apparantly).

The petition itself was closed after Culture Minister, John Griffiths (Lab, Newport East), said no more could be done (pdf).

Here's edited version of what was said at the Committee meeting last week on this petition :

(Chair) William Powell AM (Lib Dem, Mid & West Wales) : We....received a response from the Minister for Culture....and from Carmarthenshire County Council....I think it would be fair to say that we found a degree of churlishness from the local authority. I have had sight of e-mails from the local authority officers that fall some way short of courtesy to the team that supports this committee and to us. I think we should put on record that that is regrettable. Possibly, we might wish to bring these matters regarding the curt and somewhat inappropriate tone of the correspondence to the attention of the leader or chief executive of Carmarthenshire council.

Joyce Watson AM (Lab, Mid & West Wales) : I think courtesy is the least that anyone can expect. Are you telling me that what is printed here—I read this a few times—is what you received? Was this it?

(Clerk) Mr George : No, this was the second response that we received. The first response was shorter than this.

William Powell AM : I believe that it was, ‘No, no and no’

Joyce Watson AM : That sounded -

Mr George : I went back to say that the response was likely to be put before the committee and, maybe, they wanted to reconsider. We then got this response instead.

Joyce Watson AM : ....I move that we write to the leader of the authority, Councillor Kevin Madge, and to the chief executive.

William Powell AM : Mr Mark James.

Joyce Watson AM : We should simply say that, in our opinion, it is not normally the way we receive correspondence from those that we ask questions of. For as long as I have been on this committee....I have not seen anything so brief, so blunt and which lacks complete engagement, quite frankly.

William Powell AM : It may, at the least, flag-up some sort of training need and the need for people to be called to account.....it would be useful for us to write to the chief officer and the leader of Carmarthenshire....just to flag up that matter, because it shows a discourtesy to the committee, to our team and, indeed, to the petitioners to have adopted such a tone.

It's unclear precisely who sent the "No, no and no" response, though the Head of Planning at Carmarthenshire Council is Eifion Bowen. You can read a tidied-up of CCC's curt and disrespectful response to both a National Assembly Committee and more than 4,000 petitioners here (pdf).

Read More

Police & Crime Commissioners - A Guide

Three posts in a row. I'm spoiling you.  After the excitement of last week's US Presidential elections, I bet you can't wait to have your say on Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) for Wales' four police forces tomorrow.

PCCs : What are they?

The UK Government passed the Police Reform and Responsibility Act in 2011, which created the role of Police and Crime Commissioner. PCCs will be directly-elected – by supplementary vote or first past the post (when there are only 2 candidates).

PCCs will only be elected in the 41 police forces in EnglandandWales outside London (not including the likes of British Transport Police). Policing in Wales is a non-devolved matter, and therefore the responsibility of Westminster. The Welsh Assembly does control over some minor devolved functions relating to community safety, as do local authorities.

Policing is devolved in both Scotland and Northern Ireland. Scotland is (for now at least) retaining the police authority model, while Northern Ireland has a National Policing Board which includes Northern Irish Assembly Members.

What will they do?

PCCs replace the existing police authorities, which were made up of local councillors and appointed members. Local authorities will retain some say in policing via new Police & Crime Panels, which will scrutinise the PCCs themselves.

PCCs themselves will:

• Have the power to fire, hire or suspend the Chief Constable of their respective police force
• Manage police finances, including the Council Tax precept for policing
• Produce a "Police & Crime Plan" for the police force area, setting out strategic objectives
• Ensure Chief Constables deliver the objectives of the plan
• NOT be able to impact operational policing decisions.

It's a full-time role, with a salary of between £65,000 and £100,000 per year.

Are they worth it?

In principle, I believe directly-electing these "executive positions" is the right thing to do. I've made my reasons clear before. I'm a fan of directly-elected mayors, and I'll have more to say on that next year.

However, the police is a different matter.

Politics and justice rarely mix. Politics needs to take in the popular will of the electorate. If it did, I'm convinced we'd still have the death penalty and corporal punishment in schools (or for petty criminals). That's not justice, it's a step up from barbarism. Although PCCs won't have any control over the operational side, you can certainly see a way for a "strongman/woman" to get into a position to give criminals a "bally good thrashing, wot." I'd prefer just upholding the law.

In my opinion, the Police Commissioner should have operational decision making, not just the administrative stuff. To do that effectively, the only credibly candidates for PCC would be the senior police officer in charge of a particular territory, and answerable to local authorities directly.

Basically, I'm saying if we're going to have PCCs, we should elect Chief Constables into the position, or they should be part of a "ticket" including commissioners for fire services, health boards, social services etc.

I'm not impressed with the prospective PCCs to be frank, and although they've been criticised, I think Plaid Cymru (and the Lib Dems) made the correct decision to sit these out. It isn't worth the time, money or effort. If these roles were combined police, fire, health and social service "commissioners" – in effect regional mayors – then maybe it would've been worth getting excited about.

I'll probably give these elections a miss, and doubt I'll be the only one.

I'd only vote for a candidate who explicitly supports the devolution of policing and criminal justice, and the closest to that in South Wales appears to be the Independent candidate, Mike Baker. Consider that an endorsement if you want, and if I were going to vote it would be for the two Independents.

Though as far as I can tell, he hasn't mentioned it officially in his programme. Reassuring tweets and posts from Plaid members aren't enough, personally. Even if a candidate did support it, they wouldn't have the political power or clout to do anything about it.

I doubt spoiling my ballot would make any difference either. It's not as if they make a note of why a ballot was defaced (AFAIK). The fact that voting would annoy Ian Blair is tempting though. I think a really, really low turnout (sub 20%) is the only way to "send a message", as it undermines the credibility and mandate of the position – hopefully leading to a positive rethink in Westminster, or hopefully, Cardiff one day.

As for my predictions, I think Labour will win all four quite comfortably. The most "interesting" contest appears to be between Tal Michael (Lab) and Winston Roddick (Ind) in North Wales. There's also extensive analysis of the related (in South Wales) Cardiff South & Penarth by-election at Penarth a'r Byd.

I think it's worth running down the candidates – who bear no resemblance to the real ones, honest - and what they stand for.

RoboCop

As the property of G4S, he's been criticised for being a vehicle for the privatisation of South Wales Police. Unlikely to be satisfied with a desk job, memories from his organic remnants cause him to go on rampages of revenge against those who tore his body apart with shotguns. That's what he vows to do to Welsh criminal scum – to applause from those who like the sound of baton on skull on a Sunday afternoon.

Unfortunately, his state-of-the-art programming can't cope with the complexities of the Welsh language. Protesters from Cymdeithas yr Iaith were dealt with swiftly and with extreme prejudice. After being hacked by Anonymous, he could only ask women to show their tits, and developed an obsession with cats.

He has no concept of rehabilitation or proportionate response. He runs on nothing but air and baby food. He doesn't require rest, or money. He can't decide is he's a man or a machine. He doesn't understand fun, commits everything to memory and lives to do what he's told – the model Tory citizen.

Gene Hunt

It's time to fire up the Quattro and turn your clocks back to Thatcher. With a healthy amount of misogyny and a regard for police brutality that would make General Pinochet blush, the Gene Genie is on the case.

As officer in charge of the children's TV presenter CID unit, his nonce-beating policies have proven popular on the doorstep in the wake of the Jimmy Savile scandal. He played a key part in the downfall of beloved entertainer – Mr Blobby – and his now infamous BDSM dungeon. He also uncovered a shocking bestiality fisting scandal, affecting a yellow bear, a dog, a panda called Soo....they even got Little Cousin Scampi too.

He pledges to bring back "the good old days", where someone who had their bike stolen could go into any police station, describe the assailant as a 5ft4 pale-skinned, freckled redhead, and be assured that the police will "catch the black bastard."

Inspector Gadget

"Go! Go! Gadget bureaucrat!" A perfect example of the Peter Principle. Somehow managing to become a senior detective by sheer luck than skill, Inspector Gadget couldn't detect his way out of a phone box. It's not a good sign when most of the detective work is done by his niece and a dog.

As the Nostalgia Party candidate, he's another ex-copper pledging to bring back "the good old days" of the 1940s and 50s, when crime didn't exist, gangsters were "good boys who loved their Mums" and public figures could rape vulnerable children and keep it hushed up.

Those extending arms aren't a superpower – they're a crippling bone condition that medical science hasn't found a cure for yet. He might have to accept his policing days are over.

Clay Davis

A valued pillar of the community, he sacrificed a safe seat on the promise of serving the people with dignity, honesty and transparency. He bats away criticism that politicising the police is wrong, and despite bitterly opposing the establishment of Police & Crime Commissioners, he was quick to throw his hat into the ring.

He promises to do all he can in the few hours a week he'll set aside for the job, alongside his £100,000 per year chairmanship of The Charitable Charity Trust, his £5,000 per month stipend from the Chartered Lesbian Society of Greater Swansea and his non-executive directorship of G4S.

Some controversy remains over his proposed £30million deal with Trabant to provide new police cars. Only £30 is actually going to be spent, with the rest of the money unaccounted for. Clay insists the money was never there in the first place, and hopes the public will be impressed with his magic trick, and treat him with the respect he's due. The Wales Audit Office said in a detailed statement, "Duuuurrrrrr, this seems Okie-Doke, duuuuurrrrrr."

Read More

What did we learn from the local elections?

Nobody cared – Turnout across the board seems to be atrocious, and quite similar to last year's referendum turnout. In hindsight, that probably makes the referendum turnout look a lot better than it was. This might've given Labour a boost, but I don't think it all comes down to turnout. It's a real shame, but I'm not really surprised anymore. Politics is becoming a massive turn-off for many people - for whatever reason - and it's going to be an uphill struggle to try and get them back.

People are fed up with austerity – That's not to say Labour wouldn't be doing similar if they were in the same position as the Coalition. The media turned this into a referendum on the Coalition - and it certainly helped Labour - though I'm sure local factors came into play as well in some cases. In the midst of a double-dip, you would hope that the UK Government will rethink their deficit reduction plans, perhaps focusing on developing infrastructure to boost competitiveness in all parts outside London. Easier said than done.

Decapitation! - One thing that really stood out was how many council leaders lost their seat, or came close to losing their seats - for all parties. Some really significant players are gone. Russell Roberts in RCT will make the headlines, but the one that stood out is the Lib Dem's Rodney Berman in Cardiff. He might have come across as slightly haughty and smug, but I don't really see what he did wrong. He always appeared to be a pretty decent figurehead for the city.

Is that "sending a message"? Or is it something more personal? Do the Welsh dislike "Big Time Charlies"? It would make elected mayor scenarios very interesting indeed.

Bridgend at a glance

Detailed results are available here.

Labour                 39 (+12)
Independents       10 (-4)
Lib Dems               3 (-3)
Conservatives        1 (-5)
Plaid Cymru           1 (n/c)

Congratulations to those who've been re-elected or newly elected. Commiserations to those who missed out this time around or who lost their seats.

My predictions weren't that far off all in all. Labour did slightly better than expected, taking seats in many of the wards I dubbed "too close to call" quite comfortably, along with others. They had a particularly excellent result in Brackla, taking all four seats.

Despite Labour's successes, there were still a few shocks. Alana Davies - a cabinet member - bucked the county trend and lost her Porthcawl seat to an Independent. Several long-serving councillors also lost their seats, such as : the Hacking's in Brackla, Bob Burns in Oldcastle and David Unwin in Newcastle. Peter Foley also came within 7 votes of losing his seat in Morfa.

The Lib Dems got off lightly it seems – in fact I think they'll be secretly "happy" with their performance, keeping 3 seats. The Independent vote held up remarkably well across the county. In many wards, Plaid were standing for the first time and gave a reasonable account of themselves, without really excelling.

It seemed to be the Conservatives who really suffered in Bridgend, losing 5 of their 6 seats. That's a pretty miserable performance for a party that has a decent base in the southern half of the county. What went wrong there?

Party by party national analysis

Conservatives

Was 2011 a high tide mark?

Losing overall control of Monmouthshire borders on incompetence. As mentioned before, they took a real hammering in Bridgend and even worse hammerings in Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan. However, it looks as though they held up reasonably well in north Wales and they still have a respectable number of councillors across Wales as a whole.

Pressure will be starting to pile on Andrew Davies. He hasn't seemed to capture the imagination of the public, the Conservatives are in serious danger of undoing all of the good work Nick Bourne did in "detoxifying" the brand, there seem to be serious organisation issues within the party and they are guilty by association with regard the UK Coalition. If they can create a clear narrative within the Assembly, they'll be able to turn things around, but it's increasingly looking like an uphill struggle. For those reasons, this is a worse result than they are making out.

Labour

It was always on the cards – a tremendous night for Labour in Wales. They pretty much recovered most - if not all - of their 2008 losses, retaking the major urban areas of Wales and the Valley authorities. Labour picked up seats from every single opposition party, and the independents, without breaking too much of a sweat. Depending on the result of the by-election in Gwynedd, Labour are now the only party in overall control of any Welsh local authority.

Cardiff will be the feather in their cap, but I think they'll be delighted to have a massive stranglehold on Caerphilly, RCT, Bridgend and NPT as well as thumping swings from the Tories in the Vale of Glamorgan. It was a great performance across the board.

Did Wales "send the Westminster Coalition a message"? Not really. Not even Ed Milliband will really care that the Valleys have turned red again. The Midlands and the south of England will be the main battleground in 2015, but it helps the cause to know that there'll be a fair few Labour MP's returned from Wales as usual.

The focus on Westminster issues, at least at the top level, played its part in victory once again. They won't be able to do that forever, though. Two words – hospital reorganisations.

Liberal Democrats

An embarrassing result in Cardiff, and real leatherings in Wrexham, Newport and Swansea. But less so elsewhere. At a local level, they are an effective party and to be fair, always have been. They are clearly paying the price for their perceived mistakes at UK level. Did they deserve that? Probably not, but it's easier to kick the junior partner in a coalition. They seemed resigned to fate in these elections, losing candidates through simple withdrawal or defections.

Maybe it's time for some of the more prominent Lib Dems to stop highlighting every minor "success" or "concession" they get in Westminster and focus more on what they can do in Wales.

Plaid Cymru

A bad night, but nowhere near as bad as it could've been. When austerity bites, people run back to Daddy Labour. Parties like Plaid - that compete largely on the same ground - will be squeezed out. The results in Caerphilly, Cardiff and Neath Port Talbot do require addressing and a significant rebuilding on the ground. The results in Rhondda Cynon Taf will likely be embarrassing to Leanne Wood on a personal level.

However, aside from the disappointment, there's a bit of hope there. Their core vote turned out - especially in the "heartland". Also, on the surface of it, it looks as though Plaid's overall share of the vote won't have dipped anywhere near as much as the Tories or Lib Dems. There's no need to be too downbeat really, but Plaid are going to have to become more than a party that thrives when Labour are unpopular. How they do that is a hard question to answer.

Independents & Minor Parties

Is the "age of the independent" over in Welsh local politics? Not quite, but they took a hit in most parts of the country. They do, however, remain in firm control of Pembrokeshire, and still hold sway in many other authorities. I think the question many people are starting to ask themselves is – what do independents actually stand for? Is it right that they can form a group and get away with not having a manifesto or a set of aims?

Should they be forced to form a registered party if they have over X number of seats? Perhaps, should registered independents be banned from forming political groups?

None of the "other" parties appear to have made much headway in Wales. The Green campaign has been an abject failure. I'm genuinely surprised they didn't pick up seats in Cardiff, as they've been quite vocal on local planning and transport issues in the city for many years now.

There were no far-right or far-left successes. I don't think the likes of the BNP or the National Front will ever make even a minor impact on Welsh politics the way things are going. That pleases me.

UKIP appear to have kept the seat that they had, and added one. The UKIP situation will be one to watch on a UK-wide level. Could they be emerging as a major player on the populist right, but without the "racist" baggage? That would be an interesting development, and would cause a headache for the Tories, and perhaps even Labour in some parts of England, if they can convince enough white, working-class voters to jump ship.

Read More