Here are the highlights of this afternoon's First Minister's Questions which, as you might expect, was dominated by the Welsh Government's decision earlier today not to underwrite the Circuit of Wales project in Blaenau Gwent.
This site is no longer updated
Please use the links in the sidebar to visit the new sites!
Showing posts with label Military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Military. Show all posts
Tuesday, 27 June 2017
FMQs: Circuit of Wales, Stressed Teachers & Gambling
Here are the highlights of this afternoon's First Minister's Questions which, as you might expect, was dominated by the Welsh Government's decision earlier today not to underwrite the Circuit of Wales project in Blaenau Gwent.
Tuesday, 8 November 2016
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.
Saturday, 3 October 2015
Armed Forces School Visits Debated
 |
| (Pic : Education Business Partnership West Berkshire) |
In June, the Assembly's Petitions Committee published a report (pdf) into armed forces recruitment, following a petition from Cymdeithas y Cymod – which garnered more than 1,000 signatures – calling for the military to be banned from visiting schools for recruitment purposes.
Monday, 22 June 2015
Should the military recruit in Welsh schools?
 |
| (Pic : The Telegraph) |
Wednesday, 22 April 2015
Flying Doctors set to take to the sky
 |
| It's happened! It's actually happened! A common sense, practical idea on ambulance services from the Welsh Government. (Pic : EMRTS Cymru) |
After a longer than usual Easter recess, the National Assembly has returned for summer term. Although the election will be on everyone's minds, it's important to remember that AMs still exist, and I'm sure many of you are as bored of the election as I am by now.
Monday, 20 April 2015
Westminster 2015 : The Manifestos Part II
Following
yesterday's look at the party manifestos (linked
above), today it's the turn of the Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru and
UKIP.
Sunday, 19 April 2015
Westminster 2015 : The Manifestos Part I
The following two posts are the most important of the lot this election campaign : What are we voting for in May? Or, more accurately, what might be on the table during negotiations in the event of a hung parliament?
Friday, 17 April 2015
Westminster 2015 : The BBC Challengers Debate
 |
| (Pic : The Mirror) |
The second of the main TV debates of Election 2015 was held last night, this time consisting of the opposition party leaders – so no David Cameron bwark-bwark-bwark-bwaaaark or Nick Clegg, which damaged the legitimacy a little bit.
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Westminster 2015 : How have the Coalition performed?
 |
| As of Monday, every MP will be unemployed and scrounging for votes. So it's fitting to kick them when they're down, as the Cameron administration know all about that. (Pic : millenniumhotels.co.uk) |
With the formal dissolution of the UK parliament coming on Monday, the time's come to kick-start my coverage of the 2015 House of Commons election.
Thursday, 13 November 2014
National Assembly debates veterans support
 |
| People who leave the armed forces after active service are sometimes at greater risk of developing mental illnesses, falling foul of the criminal justice system and homelessness. (Pic : UK Government) |
On Tuesday, the
National Assembly debated Welsh Government support for armed forces
personnel, which coincided with Armistice Day.
Public Services Minister, Leighton Andrews (Lab, Rhondda), started by underlining the importance of 2014 due to the 100th anniversary of the start of World War One and the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings. He said it was also important to remember veterans of more recent conflicts : Falklands, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Each local authority has signed a community covenant and has appointed a designated armed forces champion. In terms of what the Welsh Government are doing, Leighton said Veterans NHS Wales was the only national veterans' service of its kind in the UK, and veterans were satisfied with the service they received.
New guidelines will ensure veterans have a right to housing advice, and this will be backed by £2million for those leaving the armed forces. In addition, council tax reductions were introduced in April 2013, and these don't include veterans' benefits when means-testing. Leighton also said veterans were a priority group for the all-Wales re-offending prevention scheme, and that future support for veterans will need to take reservists into account, as UK Government reforms will mean reservists will have a more front line role.
Mark Isherwood AM (Con, North Wales), said it was "good news" the the UK government accepted part of British Legion's manifesto where spouses will be able to keep military pensions for life even if they have a new partner. Mark welcomed the work of both governments in signing up all 22 local authorities to the military covenant.
However, he said there was a need to protect real-terms funding for health services for ex-service personnel, and few veterans were aware of the services. Mark also highlighted the importance of peer mentoring of ex-services personnel, as post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can be complex and might require residential treatment. Mark was concerned that the Welsh Government didn't support residential-based services.
Peter Black AM (Lib Dem, South Wales West) said debates like this were, "an opportunity to acknowledge the contribution of armed forces". The Welsh Lib Dems would prefer, what he describes as, a "seemless service" for veterans with mental health issues caused by active service.
He said helplines and websites were not always the best way to deal with such problems, and the Welsh Government weren't doing enough to address mental health issues, with serious treatment and diagnostic delays. Peter also made the important point that PTSD of this sort isn't just confined to the armed forces, but applies to the emergency services.
Lindsay Whittle AM (Plaid, South Wales East) described his 5 day stint in Afghanistan, saying that when he was waiting to leave Kabul, all service personnel had in terms of readjustment to demobilisation was a 10 minute video.
He said veterans are more likely to face homelessness, fall foul of the criminal justice system and suffer mental health problems. As many of the services often have to be sought out by the person themselves (self-referral), Lindsay believes this meant many "slip through the net". He argued that as so much money was spent on training recruits for combat, similar resources should be available for readjustment.
Lindsay criticised the Ministry of Defence, saying they had a "duty of care" to veterans, and they should stop expecting the "overstretched" Welsh NHS to pick up the tab.
Julie Morgan AM (Lab, Cardiff North), said a new British Legion drop-in centre had over 1,000 contacts in the short time it's been set up, and she was impressed by the range of help offered, and the fact it was easily accessible. She raised concerns about people leaving the armed forces before their minimum service requirements (usually 4 years), as they're not always able to access the same levels of support.
Jeff Cuthbert AM (Lab, Caerphilly) said that as the last British troops were being withdrawn from Afghanistan, there's a more critical need to look at veterans' support; even if defence policy isn't devolved, aftercare is. He believes the Welsh Government should continue to report on their package of support annually.
He raised the issue of finding veterans employment after they've left the services, as they're often young, have transferable skills, and can show teamwork and communication skills. He would, therefore, also like updates on re-employing veterans and the training they receive.
The motion noting the Welsh Government's support for armed forces personnel and calling for ongoing support was unanimously passed.
Policy Responses
There've been two policy announcements from Welsh parties to coincide with Remembrance events.
Firstly, outgoing Plaid Cymru MP, Elfyn Llwyd, launched the party's own set of commitments to helping the estimated 250,000 veterans living in Wales. Their proposals include special Veterans' Courts to deal with criminal justice cases involving veterans, ensuring people leaving the forces have access to information on housing, health and employment and an audit of the numbers of ex-forces people in prison.
Though after what's happening in Scotland, political parties should be very careful about calling something a "vow".
Secondly, the Welsh Conservatives debated their own proposal for an Armed Forces Commissioner yesterday. The Commissioner would be tasked with holding public bodies to account to ensure they live up to their commitments under the military covenant.
The Welsh Conservatives have also long supported an Armed Forces Card, which would provide concessionary or free services, or bump them up waiting lists.
Soldiers are for life, not just for Remembrance Day
I'm glad the Assembly discuss things like this, but
as someone with a strong military pedigree - on both sides of my
family - even I feel there's a sentimentality about veterans and
remembrance that's bordering on a complex.
Although it was inevitable it was going to go into overdrive this year (and will again next year and in 2018), it's become noticeably stronger over the last decade, and I think it's collective guilt.
Large numbers of us feel guilty about Iraq (perhaps other wars too) – some of us didn't do enough to stop it, others backed it when they shouldn't have, others – like the Labour Party – are forever stained by it. By questioning it we think we're "letting veterans down", so we overcompensate by excessive parades, commemoration and glorification of a modern toy soldier.
That's all very solemn and respectful, but it doesn't address the bigger issues.
First of all, let's dispel the myth that the modern UK military are "defending the country", because they're not. That's rarely their job anymore. The imminent dangers the UK face are severe weather, flooding and disruption to energy supplies, not a foreign military power.
What the military actually do is implement the forceful side of the UK's foreign policy, whilst also playing a role in international development, counter-terrorism abroad and policing. They're also a de facto further education college for many kids who are otherwise hard to reach, and are amongst the biggest purchasers of goods and services in the public sector.
It's never wrong to question defence or foreign policy, or question whether it's right to send troops into various situations. Doing so doesn't do anything to take away any sacrifices service personnel make, and it might prevent it happening in the first place, which is more respectful than seeing them as disposable heroes.
But we don't force tens of thousands of teenage boys to their deaths anymore and the modern military is highly-skilled, highly-trained and – most importantly of all – voluntary. That's despite it sometimes being an employer of last resort for those who can't find jobs elsewhere, or need the discipline and camaraderie a military career often provides.
In terms of dangerous jobs, you're more likely to be killed or seriously injured on a farm or fishing boat than in the military; while a significant proportion of service personnel will be killed on the roads compared to active service.
Lindsay Whittle hit the nail on the head. Defence isn't devolved. It's the Ministry of Defence and UK Government who should clear up the problems their little sojourns abroad leave the men and women they so actively ask to serve their interests. Or, at the very least, they should make sure the Welsh Government have everything they need to do the job they've largely abandoned.
That's not to understate the mark serving in the armed forces leaves on individuals. The adjustment to civilian life can be incredibly difficult for some, especially if you're used to regimented routines and having everything you need provided for you.
Outside the military, the only other place you get that is prison.
Public Services Minister, Leighton Andrews (Lab, Rhondda), started by underlining the importance of 2014 due to the 100th anniversary of the start of World War One and the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings. He said it was also important to remember veterans of more recent conflicts : Falklands, the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Each local authority has signed a community covenant and has appointed a designated armed forces champion. In terms of what the Welsh Government are doing, Leighton said Veterans NHS Wales was the only national veterans' service of its kind in the UK, and veterans were satisfied with the service they received.
New guidelines will ensure veterans have a right to housing advice, and this will be backed by £2million for those leaving the armed forces. In addition, council tax reductions were introduced in April 2013, and these don't include veterans' benefits when means-testing. Leighton also said veterans were a priority group for the all-Wales re-offending prevention scheme, and that future support for veterans will need to take reservists into account, as UK Government reforms will mean reservists will have a more front line role.
Mark Isherwood AM (Con, North Wales), said it was "good news" the the UK government accepted part of British Legion's manifesto where spouses will be able to keep military pensions for life even if they have a new partner. Mark welcomed the work of both governments in signing up all 22 local authorities to the military covenant.
However, he said there was a need to protect real-terms funding for health services for ex-service personnel, and few veterans were aware of the services. Mark also highlighted the importance of peer mentoring of ex-services personnel, as post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can be complex and might require residential treatment. Mark was concerned that the Welsh Government didn't support residential-based services.
Peter Black AM (Lib Dem, South Wales West) said debates like this were, "an opportunity to acknowledge the contribution of armed forces". The Welsh Lib Dems would prefer, what he describes as, a "seemless service" for veterans with mental health issues caused by active service.
He said helplines and websites were not always the best way to deal with such problems, and the Welsh Government weren't doing enough to address mental health issues, with serious treatment and diagnostic delays. Peter also made the important point that PTSD of this sort isn't just confined to the armed forces, but applies to the emergency services.
Lindsay Whittle AM (Plaid, South Wales East) described his 5 day stint in Afghanistan, saying that when he was waiting to leave Kabul, all service personnel had in terms of readjustment to demobilisation was a 10 minute video.
He said veterans are more likely to face homelessness, fall foul of the criminal justice system and suffer mental health problems. As many of the services often have to be sought out by the person themselves (self-referral), Lindsay believes this meant many "slip through the net". He argued that as so much money was spent on training recruits for combat, similar resources should be available for readjustment.
Lindsay criticised the Ministry of Defence, saying they had a "duty of care" to veterans, and they should stop expecting the "overstretched" Welsh NHS to pick up the tab.
Julie Morgan AM (Lab, Cardiff North), said a new British Legion drop-in centre had over 1,000 contacts in the short time it's been set up, and she was impressed by the range of help offered, and the fact it was easily accessible. She raised concerns about people leaving the armed forces before their minimum service requirements (usually 4 years), as they're not always able to access the same levels of support.
Jeff Cuthbert AM (Lab, Caerphilly) said that as the last British troops were being withdrawn from Afghanistan, there's a more critical need to look at veterans' support; even if defence policy isn't devolved, aftercare is. He believes the Welsh Government should continue to report on their package of support annually.
He raised the issue of finding veterans employment after they've left the services, as they're often young, have transferable skills, and can show teamwork and communication skills. He would, therefore, also like updates on re-employing veterans and the training they receive.
The motion noting the Welsh Government's support for armed forces personnel and calling for ongoing support was unanimously passed.
Policy Responses
There've been two policy announcements from Welsh parties to coincide with Remembrance events.
Firstly, outgoing Plaid Cymru MP, Elfyn Llwyd, launched the party's own set of commitments to helping the estimated 250,000 veterans living in Wales. Their proposals include special Veterans' Courts to deal with criminal justice cases involving veterans, ensuring people leaving the forces have access to information on housing, health and employment and an audit of the numbers of ex-forces people in prison.
Though after what's happening in Scotland, political parties should be very careful about calling something a "vow".
Secondly, the Welsh Conservatives debated their own proposal for an Armed Forces Commissioner yesterday. The Commissioner would be tasked with holding public bodies to account to ensure they live up to their commitments under the military covenant.
The Welsh Conservatives have also long supported an Armed Forces Card, which would provide concessionary or free services, or bump them up waiting lists.
Soldiers are for life, not just for Remembrance Day
 |
| The biggest mark of respect we can pay members of the services is ensuring they're only put in harm's way for the right reasons. (Pic : Getty Images via Financial Times) |
Although it was inevitable it was going to go into overdrive this year (and will again next year and in 2018), it's become noticeably stronger over the last decade, and I think it's collective guilt.
Large numbers of us feel guilty about Iraq (perhaps other wars too) – some of us didn't do enough to stop it, others backed it when they shouldn't have, others – like the Labour Party – are forever stained by it. By questioning it we think we're "letting veterans down", so we overcompensate by excessive parades, commemoration and glorification of a modern toy soldier.
That's all very solemn and respectful, but it doesn't address the bigger issues.
First of all, let's dispel the myth that the modern UK military are "defending the country", because they're not. That's rarely their job anymore. The imminent dangers the UK face are severe weather, flooding and disruption to energy supplies, not a foreign military power.
What the military actually do is implement the forceful side of the UK's foreign policy, whilst also playing a role in international development, counter-terrorism abroad and policing. They're also a de facto further education college for many kids who are otherwise hard to reach, and are amongst the biggest purchasers of goods and services in the public sector.
It's never wrong to question defence or foreign policy, or question whether it's right to send troops into various situations. Doing so doesn't do anything to take away any sacrifices service personnel make, and it might prevent it happening in the first place, which is more respectful than seeing them as disposable heroes.
But we don't force tens of thousands of teenage boys to their deaths anymore and the modern military is highly-skilled, highly-trained and – most importantly of all – voluntary. That's despite it sometimes being an employer of last resort for those who can't find jobs elsewhere, or need the discipline and camaraderie a military career often provides.
In terms of dangerous jobs, you're more likely to be killed or seriously injured on a farm or fishing boat than in the military; while a significant proportion of service personnel will be killed on the roads compared to active service.
Lindsay Whittle hit the nail on the head. Defence isn't devolved. It's the Ministry of Defence and UK Government who should clear up the problems their little sojourns abroad leave the men and women they so actively ask to serve their interests. Or, at the very least, they should make sure the Welsh Government have everything they need to do the job they've largely abandoned.
That's not to understate the mark serving in the armed forces leaves on individuals. The adjustment to civilian life can be incredibly difficult for some, especially if you're used to regimented routines and having everything you need provided for you.
Outside the military, the only other place you get that is prison.
Tuesday, 19 August 2014
"Thank you for flying Ieuan Air...."
 | |
| Poor value for money? Or vital transport link? The Anglesey-Cardiff "Ieuan Air" service has its critics. (Pic : Wales Online) |
The direct air service between Cardiff and Anglesey has been a political football since it was first introduced. Some consider it a vital public service air link; others consider it a complete waste of money.
The National Assembly's Public Accounts Committee undertook a short inquiry into its future role, as well as evaluating its current commercial performance due to the high levels of public subsidy it receives and falls in passenger numbers (pdf).
The Committee's summarised recommendations were that :
- Data collection should be improved - preferably using an independent source - to avoid discrepancies between what the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and airline operators report.
- The Welsh Government should undertake research on who uses the air-link and why, as well as research into the long-term passenger number trends.
- Any future tender for the air-link should include comprehensive marketing plans, and the Welsh Government should try to attract as many bidders as possible in order to maximise the benefits and opportunities of the air-link.
Background & Current Performance
 |
| £9million has been spent on the air link since 2007, including £1.5million on terminal facilities at RAF Valley. (Pic : anglesey-today.com) |
The Welsh Government subsidises the service under the EU's Public Service Obligation (PSO) rules, which allows governments to subsidise services that are key to economic development but are otherwise commercial unviable. The subsidy currently amounts to £1.2million per year.
The Ministry of Defence are also involved as they run the RAF Valley terminus of the flight. Anglesey Council and a company called Europa also fund/run the terminal services at the airbase.
The total cost of the air service from May 2007 to March 2013 was just over £9million. This sum includes the £1.5million to build the passenger terminal at RAF Valley and various grants to Anglesey Council.
65,703 passengers used the service over the same time period, and the subsidy per passenger is £86. Although passenger numbers exceeded expectations in the first two years, they've since declined by 12.5% between 2011-2013.
There were differences between the passenger numbers reported by the CAA and those provided by the Welsh Government (via the service operator) – the latter's numbers being higher than the CAA's. However, since 2012 these discrepancies have become smaller and didn't cause the Committee any great concern.
As for the reasons why passenger numbers are falling, the University of South Wales' Martin Evans said that passengers were "price sensitive" and even the slightest increase in fares put them off. The Welsh Government, however, pointed towards figures that showed an increase in the number of advanced bookings and overall passenger numbers.
The Welsh Government have commissioned ARUP to review the marketing of the air service, fares strategy and support to maximise passenger numbers. The contract currently grants the operators £20-25,000 per year to market the service. The Committee believe more needs to be done - such as advertising connecting bus services - and all of that should be part of the tendering process.
In terms of the type of passenger, it was said between half and two-thirds of passengers were business passengers, but there was no data on how many of these were public sector workers. The Committee were concerned because public sector journeys would ultimately be paid for entirely by taxpayers, weakening the subsidy's value for money case.
With regard value for money, there hasn't been an evaluation of the benefits of the air service since 2008, and without this information it might be more difficult for the Welsh Government to justify further subsidy. Some of this will be explored further in the ARUP review, which will give a better idea of who uses the service and why, but it was argued it might be difficult to tie economic data to the service.
The Contract
 |
| Following the 2011 Cork air crash, there've been concerns raised at EU level about "virtual airline" arrangements for air services. (Pic : RTE) |
There's a slightly complicated back story as to how the current operators got the franchise.
When the contract was up for re-tender in 2010, the only bidder was Highland Airways. But because the Welsh Government had concerns over the financial stability of the company, they rejected Highland Airways offer and put out an "emergency tender" which was awarded to Manx2.
However, because Manx2 were a "virtual airline" (they outsource all operational roles), this fell foul of EU PSO rules, meaning another company had to be on board at the same time – hence why there are two companies involved in running the air link.
As for the relevance of this, an accident at Cork Airport in February 2011 – which killed 6 people – involved an aircraft operated by the same company Manx2 used to provide the Anglesey-Cardiff link (FLM). The company has since had its aviation accreditation withdrawn, and this dual-company arrangement has been flagged up to the European Commission as a concern which should be taken into consideration when awarding any new Anglesey-Cardiff contract in December.
The Committee also had concerns about the timing of the tender and contract award, which is supposed to go out (quite literally) now if it's going to be awarded in December. The Committee were worried that the timescales are too tight and there's little room for contingencies.
The Future of the Air-Link
 |
| Due to MOD restrictions, the air link can only operate 5 days a week. (Pic : Royal Air Force) |
- Increasing the size of the aircraft – The current aircraft has 18 seats, but previous tenders included 29-50 seater aircraft. The size of the aircraft was reduced by the Welsh Government due to concerns over air passenger duty and because RAF Valley doesn't meet UK guidelines for passenger aircraft bigger than 18 seats. Increasing the size of the aircraft would mean fewer passengers would be turned away and, if marketed correctly, could boost incomes and make it more commercially viable.
- More stops? – This might mean adding an extra stop or two (Harwarden in Flintshire and Caernarfon airport were mooted). Harwarden was ruled out due to competition from rail, while Caernarfon would need lots of work to bring it up to spec. A third stop could also put off passengers as it would increase journey times.
- 7 day a week service – At the moment only a 5 day service is possible due to military restrictions, and any moves to change this will need to be discussed with the RAF.
- Changes to state aid rules – PSO rules were recently changed which mean there are fewer constraints on what the Welsh Government can or can't do. An example was given where the Cardiff-Anglesey aircraft could be used to make commercial flights from Cardiff-Paris in the downtime between Anglesey flights.
A bit of afters
 |
| The inquiry has been criticised for being "too simplistic", and it failed to draw comparisons with other PSO services in the UK and rest of Europe. (Pic : via Wikipedia) |
I've read my fair share of committee reports over the last three years or so. The lack of any comparison with other PSO services in the UK (like those in the Scottish Highlands & Islands) was a glaring omission. Mike Hedges was right. I don't think it would've really changed the overall conclusions, but without those comparisons it's hard to say whether the air link is truly under-performing or not.
The Lib Dems have long called for the service to be scrapped, and chimed in again this time, describing the air link as "wasteful and polluting".
The air link currently reduces the NW Wales-Cardiff journey time from 4-5 hours (by car or train) to around 90 minutes. If the service were well-used it could be considered an absolute bargain. The £1.2million per year saved by scrapping the service would do diddly squat to improve north-south transport links, and the Lib Dems have consistently failed to say what they would do with such an enormous bounty. The cost of doubling the Wrexham-Chester railway line is £44million alone.
If money were no object, ideally we would build a floating runway in the Menai Straits off Bangor. That would be the optimum place for a NW Wales-Cardiff air link, and being right next to Snowdonia should provide a steady stream of tourist traffic too. However, like it or not, RAF Valley – despite being poorly located – is the only suitable facility.
It looks as though the air link has an uncertain future, and criticisms about its performance stand up. There's just a danger that through this inquiry we only know the price of it whilst ignoring its value.
Saturday, 8 February 2014
A oes heddwch?
 |
| The Temple of Peace is more likely to be used for exams or to film Doctor Who nowadays, but will its original vision find new life one day in a Wales Peace Institute? (Pic : BBC Wales) |
On Wednesday, the National Assembly debated a Petitions Committee report into a proposed Welsh Peace Institute. The report itself (pdf) was published in October 2013.
The original petition calling for a Wales Peace Institute received over 1,500 signatures, though it took four years from receipt of the petition to get this far. In the process, the Committee received more than 50 representations to their consultation, which they claim is the most responses they've ever had.
The Committee made only one recommendation - that the Welsh Government work to bring interested parties together to flesh out what such an institute would do and how it would work.
The Report's Findings
 |
| The report cites three other examples of "Peace Institutes" across Europe, the Flemish one being all the more poignant considering the anniversary this year. (Pic : centenarynews.com) |
They envisage :
- A "relationship" with the National Assembly in order to judge how their actions impact human rights, in addition to Welsh and UK defence and foreign policy. They want the institute to become a "non- partisan authority on peace issues".
- A single reference point for information and education about peace, conflict resolution, disarmament etc. and developing links with other peace institutes and international agencies (like the UN) which deal with human rights.
- Freedom to seek independent funding by commissioning research, as well as becoming a consultee with respect to the National Curriculum.
The petitioners explicitly say they're not expecting state funding, they simply want a look into how practical it would be to set the institute up. The Committee say that without that extra detail they found it hard to come to a conclusion, and could've contributed to the length of time it took to get through the Assembly.
The Welsh Government's initial response focused on the academic side of things, like university research and collaboration. The petitioners saw the proposed institute's role being much broader, taking research into "peace studies" out into the public sphere.
The report cites three examples of other "Peace Institutes".
- Flemish Peace Institute – Established in 2004 after powers relating to licensing the arms trade were devolved to the Flemish Parliament (could you imagine Westminster doing that!?). The remit was broad and covered international relations, polemology ("war studies") and peace in society. The Institute is fully financed by the Flemish Government and can also seek external funding.
- International Catalan Institute for Peace – Established via a Catalan law in 2007 following a public campaign. Its remit broadly covers conflict resolution and research relating to it. It's fully funded by the Catalan Government and has to publish an annual report to the Catalan Parliament. It's governing body includes Catalan MPs.
- Peace Research Institute Frankfurt – Established by the Landesrat (State Parliament) of Hesse in 1970, its funding comes partly from both the Hesse State Government and the German Federal Government. It undertakes research and practical work, and is the "leading adviser in Germany" to the German Government on some aspects of policy.
The Committee say there are three main things they can take from the other Peace Institutes.
- Political Independence – Many of the institutes stressed the importance of being arms length of their respective governments, but despite this there have been suspicions that such organisations are "leftist" (in my opinion, those suspicions are sometimes valid). This was overcome by trying to include more conservative politicians in discussions and undertaking academically rigorous research.
- Funding – All three stress that structural funding is more important receiving funding on a project-by-project basis. The Frankfurt institute even suggests funding could be based on an endowment (donations by individuals to a trust, with or without restrictions on how it could be used) in order to ensure independence. The Committee say it would be "difficult to assess how much a Welsh Peace Institute would cost", and that the Welsh Government would be reluctant to foot the bill.
- Regional Parliaments – All three were established by regional parliaments, which aren't responsible for defence or foreign affairs. So there shouldn't be any reason Wales couldn't establish such an institute either, in principle, as the same applies here.
Many of the consultation responses came from individuals
and religious groups - Welsh non-conformist churches have a history
of pacifism, for example. Many organisations believe a peace
institute would be "desirable" – including the Welsh
Refugee Council, their reason being that it would provide an independent voice for
refugees and asylum seekers.
However, Higher Education Wales rejected the idea, saying many universities already have research programmes into peace that were "held in high regard".
The Committee concluded that although they can't map out what such an institute would look like, they "support it in principle", believing it could help "add value to the Assembly's work and wider civic society".
The Assembly Debate
A large chunk of the Assembly debate itself (available here) went over many of the points raised in the report, so there's no need to go into much detail.
Christine Chapman AM (Lab, Cynon Valley) said that while peace, human rights and things like foreign policy aren't devolved, there's room for the Assembly and Welsh Government to get involved in this. She said that there's no need to "replicate exactly what they (other peace institutes) do", though there's no reason peace couldn't become a "cross-cutting theme" in Welsh public policy.
There was lots of support, including from (as you might expect) Bethan Jenkins AM (Plaid, South Wales West), Julie Morgan AM (Lab, Cardiff North) and Simon Thomas AM (Plaid, Mid & West Wales) – the latter needing some help in the cause of peace at the moment.
Support also came from unexpected quarters – Janet Finch-Saunders AM (Con, Aberconwy) for instance, who recalled hopes that the horrors of the First World War would create a culture of peace that, as we now know with the benefit of hindsight, didn't materialise.
There were dissenting voices. Nick Ramsey AM (Con, Monmouth) said he didn't support a Welsh Peace Institute, though – slightly strangely – the rest of his speech set out a backhanded case for one, and that "any discussion about peace is a good one to have in the long term".
Minister for Communities & Tackling Poverty, Jeff Cuthbert (Lab, Caerphilly), responded on behalf of the Welsh Government by saying any further work should be "undertaken by an independent body", effectively rejecting the Committee's recommendation, albeit not rejecting the idea of peace playing a role within public policy completely.
This echoes the Welsh Government's official response (pdf). The First Minister said despite the fact he "wholeheartedly supports the promotion of peace on our society", there was too little detail as to how such an institute would work, noting that the petitioners hadn't agreed on what an institute would do, so the case for it was "inconclusive".
He also believes any further work needs to be done by the petitioners themselves – not on behalf of the Welsh Government - as any formal Welsh Government involvement could give the petitioners false hope that an institute could be established.
Peace in our time?
It's not over, but it
could be a while before anything gets done. I don't want to stick the
boot in, but this account from Caerau Greens perhaps indicates the size of
task ahead, as there appears to have been some sort of disagreement between the alliance of peace groups which backed the
petition in the first place.
Any further work will probably have to be undertaken by the Assembly's Cross-Party Group on Human Rights in order for a serious proposal to be put forward.
Arguments that resort to violence as the first option are almost always on shaky ground, and far from being a sign of weakness, seeking peaceful resolutions to difficult problems is often the harder option and possibly, in some cases, a sign of strength.
However, the very concept of a world free of violence is depressingly out of reach.Violence is something that happens, is a natural behaviour and is sometimes necessary.
I'd support an independent Wales being a "neutral state" (more here) – which is very different from a pacifist state - oppose NATO membership (for practical rather than ideological reasons), and believe Wales should only get involved in various adventures abroad either in self-defence, as part of a mutual defence agreement, or under an internationally-agreed mandate - after all attempts at negotiation have failed.
Any future Welsh troops should be taught "soft" military skills - like dealing with natural disasters, disarmament, negotiation skills and humanitarian issues - as much as "hard" military skills.
If Wales is going to make a serious go at this, it should be linked to a university/universities and produce credible academic research – not just on international relations, but things closer to home like domestic abuse, alcohol-related violence, extremism, cults, football hooliganism, Carmarthenshire Council, organised crime and bullying.
That could be very useful for the Welsh Government, AMs, social services, schools and the police. Some Welsh universities are already doing that – Aberystwyth for the international side of things, Cardiff for things like alcohol-related violence, and Prifysgol Cneifiwr for Carmarthenshire.
A Peace Institute could bring all that together under one umbrella and link it to wider civil society instead of it being stuck in an academic bubble. I think that's what the petitioners were aiming for.
I have to agree with the First Minister though that this needs a clear "vision" to be credible, instead of becoming a "club" for committed activist groups who are perhaps just as motivated by politics and individual causes as promoting peace generally.
An interesting and novel idea, but the case perhaps just wasn't strong enough.
However, Higher Education Wales rejected the idea, saying many universities already have research programmes into peace that were "held in high regard".
The Committee concluded that although they can't map out what such an institute would look like, they "support it in principle", believing it could help "add value to the Assembly's work and wider civic society".
The Assembly Debate
 |
| The Welsh Government rejected the idea of a Welsh Peace Institute, but broadly supports the concept of peace within public policy. (Pic : Flakt Woods) |
A large chunk of the Assembly debate itself (available here) went over many of the points raised in the report, so there's no need to go into much detail.
Christine Chapman AM (Lab, Cynon Valley) said that while peace, human rights and things like foreign policy aren't devolved, there's room for the Assembly and Welsh Government to get involved in this. She said that there's no need to "replicate exactly what they (other peace institutes) do", though there's no reason peace couldn't become a "cross-cutting theme" in Welsh public policy.
There was lots of support, including from (as you might expect) Bethan Jenkins AM (Plaid, South Wales West), Julie Morgan AM (Lab, Cardiff North) and Simon Thomas AM (Plaid, Mid & West Wales) – the latter needing some help in the cause of peace at the moment.
Support also came from unexpected quarters – Janet Finch-Saunders AM (Con, Aberconwy) for instance, who recalled hopes that the horrors of the First World War would create a culture of peace that, as we now know with the benefit of hindsight, didn't materialise.
There were dissenting voices. Nick Ramsey AM (Con, Monmouth) said he didn't support a Welsh Peace Institute, though – slightly strangely – the rest of his speech set out a backhanded case for one, and that "any discussion about peace is a good one to have in the long term".
Minister for Communities & Tackling Poverty, Jeff Cuthbert (Lab, Caerphilly), responded on behalf of the Welsh Government by saying any further work should be "undertaken by an independent body", effectively rejecting the Committee's recommendation, albeit not rejecting the idea of peace playing a role within public policy completely.
This echoes the Welsh Government's official response (pdf). The First Minister said despite the fact he "wholeheartedly supports the promotion of peace on our society", there was too little detail as to how such an institute would work, noting that the petitioners hadn't agreed on what an institute would do, so the case for it was "inconclusive".
He also believes any further work needs to be done by the petitioners themselves – not on behalf of the Welsh Government - as any formal Welsh Government involvement could give the petitioners false hope that an institute could be established.
Peace in our time?
 |
| There's a long tradition of pacifism amongst radical and religious groups in Wales. But this idea looks as though it's - barring more detailed proposals - going to rest for now. (Pic : indymedia.org) |
Any further work will probably have to be undertaken by the Assembly's Cross-Party Group on Human Rights in order for a serious proposal to be put forward.
Arguments that resort to violence as the first option are almost always on shaky ground, and far from being a sign of weakness, seeking peaceful resolutions to difficult problems is often the harder option and possibly, in some cases, a sign of strength.
However, the very concept of a world free of violence is depressingly out of reach.Violence is something that happens, is a natural behaviour and is sometimes necessary.
- See also : Defending Wales Parts 1-10
I'd support an independent Wales being a "neutral state" (more here) – which is very different from a pacifist state - oppose NATO membership (for practical rather than ideological reasons), and believe Wales should only get involved in various adventures abroad either in self-defence, as part of a mutual defence agreement, or under an internationally-agreed mandate - after all attempts at negotiation have failed.
Any future Welsh troops should be taught "soft" military skills - like dealing with natural disasters, disarmament, negotiation skills and humanitarian issues - as much as "hard" military skills.
If Wales is going to make a serious go at this, it should be linked to a university/universities and produce credible academic research – not just on international relations, but things closer to home like domestic abuse, alcohol-related violence, extremism, cults, football hooliganism, Carmarthenshire Council, organised crime and bullying.
That could be very useful for the Welsh Government, AMs, social services, schools and the police. Some Welsh universities are already doing that – Aberystwyth for the international side of things, Cardiff for things like alcohol-related violence, and Prifysgol Cneifiwr for Carmarthenshire.
A Peace Institute could bring all that together under one umbrella and link it to wider civil society instead of it being stuck in an academic bubble. I think that's what the petitioners were aiming for.
I have to agree with the First Minister though that this needs a clear "vision" to be credible, instead of becoming a "club" for committed activist groups who are perhaps just as motivated by politics and individual causes as promoting peace generally.
An interesting and novel idea, but the case perhaps just wasn't strong enough.
Thursday, 3 January 2013
Time to take flooding seriously?
 |
| Remember when there was talk of droughts last April? (Pic : BBC Wales) |
Wales has been battered
by heavy rain and flooding over the last six months. I don't think
there are any parts of the country that have escaped disruption over
that period - Bridgend town itself looked perilously close to flooding just before Christmas. It's badly affected rail services,
caused landslips and has damaged hundreds of homes and businesses.
The three stand-out flooding events have been Ceredigion and Powys in June 2012, Denbighshire in November 2012 and the aforementioned flooding last month, which affected south Wales particularly severely and still ongoing in some areas.
There's no such thing as "bad weather" really, just bad responses to it.
We're used to rain and some flooding as a residential hazard of living in Wales, but what were "once every 50 year events" are becoming "twice/thrice a decade" events. Climate change will inevitably be blamed - and I'm not going to debate the causes here. However, shifts in the North Atlantic jet stream – which has contributed to the rainfall - are (relatively) predictable, although those shifts are likely to happen more often with climate change.
I think (perhaps many others too) the one reason flooding is becoming perceiveably more common is past and present building on flood plains.
As most flat, developable land in Wales is alongside rivers, you can't blame developers for eyeing it up. But building too many houses right next to rivers without providing extensive flood protection is negligent. It's also negligent to plan for/allow too many houses in these areas. It's probably negligent to move next to a river or stream never expecting it to flood, as is a failure to keep streams and brooks clear of debris.
Llyr Huws Gruffydd AM (Plaid, North Wales), recently called for the establishment of a Flood Action Forum for Wales. England has a National Flood Forum, while Scotland has Community Flood Action Groups. The organisation would be an advocate for flood victims, help promote flood prevention and help plan flood defences. I'm actually surprised Wales doesn't currently have one.
There are other, seedier, effects. Ann Jones AM (Lab, Vale of Clwyd) recently warned of doorstep loan sharks taking advantage of flood victims in Denbighshire. As to what I think of those sharks, insert strong epithet. Sounds like "runts".
The Welsh Government has flood action plans and strategies, and works with the Environment Agency and Dwr Cymru to plan flood defences out of its capital budget alongside water management.
The (Welsh) Environment Agency is due to merge with the Countryside Council for Wales and Forestry Commission to form Natural Resources Wales in April. I doubt that will affect the flood protection programme, but obviously merging three large bodies like that could cause administrative problems for the sheer scale of it.
It also doesn't help that the Welsh Government are cutting £30million in capital spending on flood defences over the next four years. That could blemish their – to date - decent record on the environment.
As all things, prevention is the best cure – stop building on flood plains, or at the very least, where flood plains need to be built on, provide extensive flood protection. That could become a statutory requirement as part of planning reforms, or form part of Section 106 agreements.
The Welsh Conservatives included the creation "Blue Belts" in their 2011 manifesto, maybe it's time for the Welsh Government to consider that in any sustainable development or planning bills. If any of these things make a development site "unviable", then developing such a site in the first place should be reconsidered.
By extensive flood protection I mean :
The three stand-out flooding events have been Ceredigion and Powys in June 2012, Denbighshire in November 2012 and the aforementioned flooding last month, which affected south Wales particularly severely and still ongoing in some areas.
There's no such thing as "bad weather" really, just bad responses to it.
We're used to rain and some flooding as a residential hazard of living in Wales, but what were "once every 50 year events" are becoming "twice/thrice a decade" events. Climate change will inevitably be blamed - and I'm not going to debate the causes here. However, shifts in the North Atlantic jet stream – which has contributed to the rainfall - are (relatively) predictable, although those shifts are likely to happen more often with climate change.
 |
| The excess rain is likely to have been caused by shifts in the North Atlantic jet stream. Is excess building on flood plains making flooding worse than it otherwise would be? (Pic : BBC) |
I think (perhaps many others too) the one reason flooding is becoming perceiveably more common is past and present building on flood plains.
As most flat, developable land in Wales is alongside rivers, you can't blame developers for eyeing it up. But building too many houses right next to rivers without providing extensive flood protection is negligent. It's also negligent to plan for/allow too many houses in these areas. It's probably negligent to move next to a river or stream never expecting it to flood, as is a failure to keep streams and brooks clear of debris.
Llyr Huws Gruffydd AM (Plaid, North Wales), recently called for the establishment of a Flood Action Forum for Wales. England has a National Flood Forum, while Scotland has Community Flood Action Groups. The organisation would be an advocate for flood victims, help promote flood prevention and help plan flood defences. I'm actually surprised Wales doesn't currently have one.
There are other, seedier, effects. Ann Jones AM (Lab, Vale of Clwyd) recently warned of doorstep loan sharks taking advantage of flood victims in Denbighshire. As to what I think of those sharks, insert strong epithet. Sounds like "runts".
The Welsh Government has flood action plans and strategies, and works with the Environment Agency and Dwr Cymru to plan flood defences out of its capital budget alongside water management.
The (Welsh) Environment Agency is due to merge with the Countryside Council for Wales and Forestry Commission to form Natural Resources Wales in April. I doubt that will affect the flood protection programme, but obviously merging three large bodies like that could cause administrative problems for the sheer scale of it.
It also doesn't help that the Welsh Government are cutting £30million in capital spending on flood defences over the next four years. That could blemish their – to date - decent record on the environment.
As all things, prevention is the best cure – stop building on flood plains, or at the very least, where flood plains need to be built on, provide extensive flood protection. That could become a statutory requirement as part of planning reforms, or form part of Section 106 agreements.
The Welsh Conservatives included the creation "Blue Belts" in their 2011 manifesto, maybe it's time for the Welsh Government to consider that in any sustainable development or planning bills. If any of these things make a development site "unviable", then developing such a site in the first place should be reconsidered.
By extensive flood protection I mean :
- Concrete walls/flood barriers
- Redirection of rivers and streams
- Levees/Dykes/Embankments
- Fines/prosecutions for not adequately maintaining watercourses
 |
| Are more extensive flood defences required in large parts of Wales? Will they need to be funded by developers? (Pic : South Wales Argus) |
We also need to consider flood preparation and emergency planning. Concerns were recently raised by the Wales Audit Office about the Welsh Government's responses to civil emergencies.
Some of the criticisms seem a little unfair to be honest. I think the Welsh Government, emergency services and local authorities do a good job in emergencies. Most of the criticism stems from confused boundaries when it comes to responsibilities – so more administrative than practical.
I believe a major issue there is that flood warnings are never taken seriously enough by the media or the public.
Once an emergency becomes apparent, the media are quick to provide extensive coverage – especially local radio and via Twitter feeds etc. But in the period building up to an emergency, they seem reluctant to point out the seriousness of a situation, perhaps in fear of "crying wolf". People usually only take action when it's too late or when a situation becomes life-threatening.
 |
| Does the flood warning system in Wales - and elsewhere - need another revamp? (Pic : floodwarn.co.uk) |
I've mentioned an "emergency alert system" before. I think warnings - not just for flooding but all sorts of severe weather (and perhaps missing children too - aka "Amber Alert") - are going to have to become more invasive. Yes, that means interrupting TV and radio programmes if necessary, perhaps even an expansion of text messaging services that the Environment Agency already provide.
This doesn't need to be Wales-only. It can't anyway as broadcasting isn't devolved. But maybe it's something the UK Government can re-visit. If the climate is going to get rougher over the coming decades, then the public need to be more aware – or at the very least treat a changing climate and severe weather as an immediate danger.
It should also mean greater use of the military (in particular Territorial Army units) in emergency preparations as and when required. It's supposed to be a "Ministry of Defence" after all. How can the UK spend £35billion on defence every year, yet not properly protect its own citizens from excess rainfall?
