FMQs: Abortions, Smoking & Sport

Another summary of FMQs from the Senedd.

Read More

PISA: Denial to Anger to Depression

(Pic : E)

Climb into your bath, track your arteries with a razor blade and bring on The Smiths.

It's PISA time and there's nothing the Welsh enjoy more than a good moan, revelling in the doom as we all – once again - rubber neck the slow motion car crash that is the Welsh education syst....

....like Glyn over at National Left I'm getting a strange sense of deja vu.

As you all know, the OECD's PISA tests in reading, mathematics and science are used to draw comparisons between the performance of 15-year-olds in the world's major economies.

PISA tests – which have an heavy emphasis on problem-solving and application of theories learned in the classroom – are taken every three years with the latest results released yesterday (6^th December). There's a more detailed background on PISA's importance from the Assembly Research Service here.

There's been a growing sense from before May's Assembly election and the period after it that the Welsh Government have been softening us up for bad news.

Labour rolled back on promises that we would see improved PISA scores, while current Education Secretary, Kirsty Williams (Lib Dem, Brecon & Radnor), re-emphasised the long-standing need for XYZ (usually a mix of collaboration, curriculum changes and more spending on disadvantaged pupils) to improve matters.

In the end, the managing of expectations was justified....but it's not quite as bad as it seems.

The Results

PISA & Wales 2006-2015

The general report is available here (pdf), and the summary relevant to Wales and the UK is available here (pdf).

I'll get the good news out of the way first.

Welsh performances in mathematics has jumped significantly - up 10 points from 468 in 2012 to 478 in 2015. Although Wales is still ranked bottom of the Home Nations and below the OECD average, the gap has closed with England (493), Northern Ireland (493) and Scotland (491). It's actually our second-best result since Welsh students started taking the tests.

Now the bad news.

In reading, the Welsh score fell by 3 points compared to 2012 from 480 to 477 and remains below the OECD average. This still lags behind England (500), Scotland (493) and Northern Ireland (497) but because the other Home Nations have done worse than expected, the performance gap has closed slightly.

Finally, science – which has traditionally been Wales' strongest area. Welsh scores have fallen by 6 points from 491 to 485, with England (512), Northern Ireland (500) and Scotland (497) all out-performing Wales yet again. The 20-25 point gap hasn't changed much.

Overall, this is another set of disappointing results with one big bright spot on maths; but for once it's the other nations in the UK who have more to worry about – in particular Scotland and, considering the amount of effort that's gone into making their curriculum "more rigerous", England too.

Other key findings:

• There's no significant difference in performance between boys and girls in science. While girls out-perform boys in reading and boys out-perform girls in maths, the gender gap is narrower in Wales in both cases than the other Home Nations. Boys are marginally more likely to be "top performers" (proficient at the highest levels 5 & 6 in the tests) than girls.
• Only 4-5% of pupils in Wales are considered "top performers" in reading, maths and science, compared to the UK average of 10-12%.
• 28% of Welsh pupils expect to have a career where scientific knowledge is a prerequisite, near enough the same as the UK average but higher than the OECD average (24%). However, in Wales more top performers in science (55%) expect to have a career in science than the lowest performers (17%) when compared to the rest of the UK.
• Headteachers in Wales are significantly less likely (20%) to say shortages in teachers with a science degree impacts delivery of lessons than the rest of the UK (43%).
• 35% of Welsh pupils said they skipped at least one day of school in the two weeks prior to the PISA tests - the highest percentage in the UK and significantly higher than the OECD average (20%). This is more common in disadvantaged schools than advantaged schools.

International Comparisons

• In mathematics, the Welsh score (478) places us roughly mid-table alongside Malta (479), Hungary (477), but ahead of the United States (470), Israel (470) and most of eastern Europe.
• In reading, the Welsh score (477) again places us somewhere in the middle to lower-half alongside Argentina (475), Luxembourg (481) and Lithuania (472).
• When it comes to science, Wales (485) is just about in the top half of the table in between Russia (487) and Luxembourg (482), but out-performing Italy (481), Iceland (473) and Israel (467).
• Overall, the tables are dominated by Singapore, Japan, Estonia, Taiwan, Finland and Canada. Wales is about 10-15 points behind the scores attained by most EU member states.

Five Stages of Grief

Here's what previous education ministers have had to say following the release of PISA results.

Denial - Jane Hutt (2007):

"The real benefits of the PISA assessments will come not from the headline figures and league table rankings, but from the detailed analysis of strengths and weaknesses and what more we can learn from the best and most effective practice internationally."

Anger - Leighton Andrews (2010):

"These results are disappointing. They show an unacceptable fall in our overall performance - everyone involved in the education sector in Wales should be alarmed. There can be no alibis and no excuses. Countries with less money spent on education than Wales have done better than Wales. Schools, local authorities, and ourselves as government need to look honestly at these results and accept responsibility for them."

Bargaining - Huw Lewis (2013):

"Everybody working in and around the Welsh education sector needs to take a long hard look in the mirror this week. The PISA results are stark and the message is very clear, we must improve educational attainment and standards right across the board. I expect to see the impact of our reforms reflected in the next set of results. They're ambitious and I believe they will have a lasting, sustainable and positive effect on education in Wales."

Depression - Kirsty Williams (2016):

"We can all agree we are not yet where we want to be. While we have seen a 10 point lift in our maths score, the results for science are disappointing. Last month I invited the OECD to look at how we are doing in Wales; their advice to me was unambiguous: Stay the course, be brave, you are doing the right things. The easy thing to do would be rip up the plan and start again. But we owe it to our pupils, parents and the profession to do what is right."

Maybe in 2019 Wales will finally reach Acceptance.

PISA – useful tool as it is – isn't the be all and end all when it comes to measuring educational attainment, and its wider economic impact is negligible with very little correlation between good PISA scores and a strong economy.

For example, a large part of South Korea – which consistently ranks near the top in PISA – has a GVA per capita very similar to Wales, while Welsh workers are about 25% more productive than those in Shanghai. PISA isn't a qualification either so has no bearing on employment prospects or a factor in determining that pupils are being "abandoned".

That said, there are no more excuses and Wales should be doing better than we are.

Where next?

Despite the marked improvement in maths, the portents of doom from our media – even Wales Online graciously managed to drop advertising-masquerading-as-news about a bar in Cardiff to cover this – are as pronounced as previous years.

We can't see beyond the British Bubble and realise this is about 70+ nations and stateless nations. Everything comes down to England, when Wales is decidedly mid to upper-mid table both globally and at a European level, not at "the bottom" of anything. We really need to be looking at the likes of Estonia, Finland and the Republic of Ireland for a fair benchmark.

Government AMs have gone through the usual platitudes of saying how disappointed they are and that things will improve, while opposition AMs are screaming for "something to be done" without actually saying what.

Based on Kirsty Williams' reaction, there's a realisation that it's perhaps better to let reforms filter through than take knee-jerk action, but I'm fully expecting the Education Secretary to still come under pressure from certain quarters. There's no such thing as long-term thinking in Wales, particularly when we feel "embarrassed" in front of the English, when they're more concerned about being embarrassed in front of the Chinese.

Some of those reforms – the introduction of numeracy tests and the start of separate numeracy and mathematics GCSEs - may well have contributed in part to the improvement we've seen in maths. Our reading and maths scores have remained relatively stable since 2006; it's our science scores that are dragging us down  - as you can see from the graph earlier. Science rarely gets a look in when it comes to discussions on Welsh education, it's all about literacy and numeracy.

However, one of the key lessons which the OECD themselves say nations should take on board, is that the best performing nations value and respect teachers. It's not about class sizes. It's not about selective schools. It's not about bilingualism. It's not about how much money you spend per pupil.

As much as I don't want to let Labour off the hook for their failure, for the next PISA cycle - and ahead of the eventual introduction of the new National Curriculum - let's try something really radical: do nothing.

Read More

FMQs : Curious Tales, Cwmbran Hospital & Ireland

There was a varied FMQs today, with questions ranging from the M4, average earnings, the planning system and also a polite warning from the Llywydd.

Read More

The Big Brexit To Do List

Before Brexit can happen, we need to know what needs to be done beforehand.

I'm getting as fed up with the endless hot air surrounding Brexit as much as you probably are. This will be my final post on Brexit for the foreseeable future. I'm also considering ignoring any future statements/questions on this in the Senedd as nothing's actually happened yet and nobody seems to be in a rush to make anything happen either.

Read More

EU Referendum : The IWA Debate

We still don't know when the referendum will be held on the UK's membership of the European Union but, to much fanfare, the first Welsh debate was hosted last night in Cardiff by the Institute of Welsh Affairs (IWA) and Cardiff University, with the First Minister lining up against UKIP leader, Nigel Farage MEP.

Read More

The Draft Wales Bill (Number Two)

(Pic : ITV Wales)

Yesterday, the Welsh Secretary, Stephen Crabb MP (Con, Preseli Pembs.) introduced the draft Wales Bill to the UK Parliament on behalf of the UK Government – you can read it here (pdf).

Read More

A Comprehensive Review of Welsh Law-Making

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

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

Read More

Local Government Bill edges towards statute book

As the law outlining how councils can voluntarily merger reaches its
conclusion, opposition AMs tabled important amendments.
(Pic : Wales Online)

The Local Government Bill outlines how the 22 local authorities can merge voluntarily in light of the new proposed map for local government which has been formed as part of the fallout from the Williams Commission (Back to the Future). On Tuesday (29^th September), the Bill was debated at Stage 3, where amendments can be added by AMs.

Any voluntarily-merged authorities will come into being by May 2018, but a second local government law on compulsory mergers will be introduced after the National Assembly election next year, which makes you question if this Bill is really all that necessary.

Anyway, the content of the Bill isn't particularly exciting in itself, but there were a number of amendments tabled by AMs which could (have) add(ed) significant meat to the Bill.

You can read a full list of amendments here (pdf), but I'm going to focus on some of the more significant ones and what AMs and the Public Services Minister, Leighton Andrews (Lab, Rhondda), had to say.

Local Referendums on Council Mergers

• Amendments 14, 26 and 27 – all introduced by Shadow Local Government Minister, Janet Finch-Saunders (Con, Aberconwy).
• Proposes that voluntary local authority mergers be approved by a majority of voters in each merging authority.
• Proposes the question on ballot papers : "Are you in favour of the proposed merger between [ ] and [ ]?".

Janet argued that any changes need to be driven by local people and communities in a way which strengthens the democratic process. Council mergers would have a "profound effect" on all residents involved and it's right they have a say, with Labour placing "proud counties" under threat without consultation. Referendums would mean mergers will have to be justified accordingly.

Simon Thomas AM (Plaid, Mid & West Wales) said his party accepts the point on extra consultation including in amendment 14, but rejects the case for referendums, as we shouldn't allow local considerations to interfere with process at a national level – saying there was no referendum or much in the way of consultation when the Conservatives reorganised local government in 1994-1996. He said referendums were a way of "hiding lack of vision".

Peter Black AM (Lib Dem, South Wales West) said referendums were the wrong way to approach it, though the Lib Dems would support amendment 14. There was a need to draw a line between national leadership and local determination, and the Assembly was best placed to determine the shape of local services. Peter criticised the Bill as "no longer necessary", adding that the Lib Dems wouldn't support the Bill at all unless their amendments were accepted.

The Minister said the amendments were unnecessary, again raising the point that there were no referendums for previous local government reorganisations in the 1970s and 1990s. Authorities must undertake "full and comprehensive" public consultation as set out in the Bill, so it was already delivering key points of amendment 14. He urged AMs to vote down the referendum amendments as there wasn't enough detail on the campaign periods, spending limits or costings for referendums – which Leighton estimated would cost between £100,000-£400,000 per local authority.

Amendment 14 tied in the vote 27-27, with the Deputy Presiding Officer used his casting vote against the amendment – as is convention. Amendment 26 was rejected by 13 votes to 41 meaning Amendment 27 was rejected too.

The Election Cycle

• Amendment 17 – introduced by Janet Finch-Saunders AM
• Proposes that elections cannot be cancelled/postponed under the Bill if it results in councillors serving terms greater than 5 years in length.

One of the carrots dangled in front of local authorities to encourage them to merge voluntarily is that councillors will have their terms extended until the first elections of the combined local authority – meaning councillors will be able to pick up their allowances and salaries for longer than they otherwise would.

Janet told the Assembly it was crucial that councillors aren't serving more time than they were democratically elected to do. Extending terms without facing re-election was "an affront to democracy, public accountability and transparency".

The Minister said that the amendment would create uncertainty and distraction in the lead up to a voluntary merger. He said cancelling elections was "not something we would do lightly", but it would otherwise mean bringing forward the merged authority to May 2017 – which was unachievable given the timetables involved. He asked who would want to stand for election for an authority that has less than a year left?

There were 18 votes in favour, 27 votes against and 9 (Plaid Cymru) abstentions, so the amendment was rejected.

The Electoral System for Local Authorities

• Amendments 5, 13, 28, 30 and 31 – all introduced by Peter Black AM
• Proposes the electoral system for local government be changed to Single Transferable Vote, where voters rank candidates in order of preference.

These are probably the most important ones, or the amendments I was most interested in.

Peter Black AM said Leighton Andrews understands STV as he fought an election in Gillingham in support of introducing it, adding that it produces a fair outcome for election. Creating larger authorities with fewer councillors should mean ensuring elections reflect how people vote. It would lead to a more transparent, more accountable local authority that's representative of its communities.

Simon Thomas AM offered Plaid Cymru's support to the amendments, saying STV had been introduced with little difficulty in Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland and at local elections in Scotland. He said it was a far more effective way of "opening up the electoral process" by ending unopposed elections, adding that one thing that stops people standing against incumbent councillors in rural areas was a "personal element" which is interpreted as a grudge. Simon said STV would challenge all parties, but they have to decide what's best for the whole nation, and ensure every vote counts.

In response, the Minister said Labour were elected on a platform of opposing any change to the local government election system, and the rejection of the Alternative Vote in a 2011 referendum reflects that voters don't want to change the system either.

14 AMs voted in favour of Amendment 5, 40 voted against, so all the amendments were rejected.

Read More

Devolution : Last Stand of the Human Rights Act?

(Pic : via Flickr)

One Conservative manifesto commitment prior to their election victory was the repeal of the Human Rights Act 1998 and its replacement with a "British Bill of Rights" - possibly including a subsequent full withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) if certain demands aren't met. The task has been passed to new Justice Secretary, the shy and retiring Michael Gove.

Read More

Westminster 2015 : The Results

(Pic : Reuters via The Guardian)

First thing's first - I can rip my crap predictions up. Predicting is a mug's game as the polling companies are finding out to their cost. As has been said elsewhere, it's the most surprising result in a UK election since 1992, even 1945.

Read More

Westminster 2015 : Predictions

Um....

Tonight's the night, so it's time for the real fun to begin....

Read More

Indyref - The National Assembly Reacts

(Pic : preventdisease.com)

There's been a lot of discussion from the Bay Bubble (too much in my opinion) on what last week's Scottish independence referendum, and its result, "means for Wales" .

I consider yesterday's statement from the First Minister (and debate) the "official" National Assembly and Welsh Government response. Until Westminster decides to put something on paper, everything else is constitutional nut-busting and bean-flicking.

I should take this opportunity to highlight some new features on the National Assembly's website(s) which myself and others played a minor role in helping to develop.

The web pages have been made mobile/tablet-friendly, while the search function has been revamped to make it easier to find specifics in the Assembly's archives; whether that's in the record of proceedings, by committee topic, location, AM etc.

Senedd TV – which was crap – has been radically overhauled. The picture quality's now high-definition, which is better than that provided by BBC's Democracy Live (plus it covers all Assembly meetings, which includes the committees and Assembly-related events).

Senedd TV now has a live rewind and pause facility, a much simpler way of embedding videos in third-party websites with the ability to create clips (unfortunately they always autostart, which created a wall of noise when I attempted it here - hence the slight delay to posting this blog FIXED), and will eventually put transcripts alongside the video to act as de-facto subtitling.

I suppose the time's come to test this out....

The Assembly Indyref Debate



The First Minister started off (clip) by saying that he spoke with the Prime Minister last Friday, and he would hold David Cameron to his promise that Wales would be "at the heart of the debate". Despite Scotland's "positive choice to remain in the UK", he said the status quo was gone and there was no going back to the way things were.

The future of the UK needs to be decided by the whole UK, and we need to move on from "short-term sticking plaster solutions", as "change in one part of the UK should mean change in the others". He plugged Silk I, and called for the "swift implementation of Silk II" – as long as any extra powers considered for Scotland are considered for Wales too.

Leader of the Opposition, Andrew Davies (Con, South Wales Central) said (clip) that the constitution needed to be looked at as a whole, with no nations in isolation – including England. He said there was no automatic need for powers that might be going to Scotland to come to Wales due to the closer interconnection with England in terms of public services. He asked how the Welsh Government would take this forward, and whether the role and number of MPs from the devolved nations needed to be looked at?

The First Minister said the response from the UK Government and Prime Minister was "woefully inadequate", believing a Westminster cabinet sub-committee isn't suitable, with the solution requiring involvement from all of the UK's governments – including on the issue of MPs.

He said English votes for English laws (EV4EL) wouldn't work, citing an example where privatising parts of the English NHS would impact spending in the devolved administrations. He added that each of the nations needed to be recognised as "different, but not second best", saying Scotland remained in the UK "by a whisker", and could still secede if the UK isn't properly rebalanced.

In response to questions from Julie Morgan AM (Lab, Cardiff North), Carwyn said that there needed to be a "sensible and calm way forward" on reform, and that "The Vow" was given in haste. He had sympathy for House of Lords reform (which Julie attempted whilst an MP), and suggested a model similar to the US Senate, where geographical regions are given equal representation. The First Minister supports the voting age being reduced to 16 across all elections - which is becoming a cross-party consensus since the Scottish referendum.

Plaid Cymru leader, Leanne Wood (Plaid, South Wales Central), said (clip) the Prime Minister was yet to elaborate on his comment that Wales would "be at the heart of the debate", and criticised the UK Government's position on the Wales Bill, which she believes is too weak. She also raised the lack of vision from the First Minister on his preferred structure for devolution.

Leanne asked whether a cross-party position would be agreed before any negotiations with the UK Government, or whether individual parties would submit their own proposals? She said Plaid would work for a common agreement if possible, and asked what the First Minister meant by "swift implementation of Silk II" and whether that meant by or during the next Assembly term? She rattled off a list of possible powers including corporation tax and the Assembly's electoral arrangements.

The First Minister expected the "lockstep" to go from the Wales Bill. He also expected the current timetable for Silk II to be adhered to, but it needs to address the £300million underfunding issue first. He said tax powers needed to be looked at across the UK as a whole, with a certain level raised UK wide with devolved top-ups – this should include the tax credit system. He agreed that electoral arrangements should be a matter for the Assembly, but that a two-thirds majority should be needed to make fundamental changes.

Welsh Lib Dem leader, Kirsty Williams (Lib Dem, Brecon & Radnor), said (clip) the status quo was never going to be an option after the referendum result. She said changes to the Welsh devolution settlement "must provide greater clarity....stability....and accountability", and that Silks I & II provided a "blueprint for Westminster negotiations".

She asked whether progress had been made on joint UK-Wales working groups? Whether extra powers beyond those in Silk would be assessed on whether they would be in the Welsh interest? And whether local councils should also have devolved powers?

The First Minister responded by saying the UK Government hadn't committed to any part of Silk II this side of the UK General Election. He said some uncontroversial parts – like reserved powers – could be visited sooner in the current Wales Bill.

He said it wasn't his decision whether powers are appropriate for Wales or not – it's a matter for the Assembly as a whole. However, he added a cautionary note that new powers shouldn't come without financial cover. He also added that the Williams Commission provided an opportunity to devolve powers downwards from the Assembly.

In response to questions from Mick Antoniw AM (Lab, Pontypridd), Mike Hedges AM (Lab, Swansea East) and John Griffiths AM (Lab, Newport East), the First Minister said that it wasn't good enough that Westminster leads with everyone else feeding in - "those days are gone". He also pointed out the importance of redistribution of wealth, which was part of "The Vow" and – as John Griffiths pointed out – played a key part in the referendum debate.

The most interesting contribution came from Simon Thomas AM (Plaid, Mid & West Wales). He said (clip) the high turn-out showed that Scottish independence/the constitution was, "an issue people were concerned about and interested in" (we're constantly told nobody is). He pointed out that it was ironic that what was now proposed for Scotland ("Devo Max") wasn't on the ballot paper and should be proposed for Wales too.

He asked the First Minister to expand on what he means by "Home Rule", and brought up the question of the income tax referendum, and whether it would be better to have a referendum on the principle of "Home Rule" itself (something I've hinted at before too)? He also asked whether a written constitution for the UK would be appropriate?

The First Minister underlined that were "pros and cons" to having an unwritten constitution, one of the pros being the flexibility if offered. He repeated that it was important that the "lockstep" went, and described his definition of "Home Rule" as a guarantee of devolution, with powers clearly under the control of the people of Wales (reserved powers?). He said, "We're all partners in the UK" and, "not all powers under the sun should reside in Westminster."

Constitutional Vinegar Strokes

When the Welsh political class discuss the constitution, it makes me want to pant hoot my way up into the hills and forests on my knuckles never to return, a little piece of me dying each time. Once again I feel as though my soul is being slowly harvested.

Consider just how many constitutional conventions we've had in Wales since 1999. It reads like a war memorial; Richards, Holtham, Jones-Parry, Silk (I, II), Williams – that's on-off constitutional masturbation for the best part of 12 years. You can add the Institute of Welsh Affairs' well-meaning but baffling proposal for a "crowd-sourced" convention to that list too.

Every single time extra powers for the Assembly have been proposed, there's a watering down of said proposals; proposals which could settle the matter now are kicked down the road through "death by committee". 5 to 10 years later, when the political class realise they might actually need the powers they rejected in the last round of constitutional hand shandy, the process starts all over again.

The harsh fact is that while supporters of independence know what we want, and those who want to abolish the Assembly know what they want, those in Wales who fall "in between" (every single party, bubble insider and politician in Wales) don't have a f**king clue what they want - and they've lost control of the debate as events have overtaken them.

It's only now, with the Union suitably threatened, that we're starting to get some strong desire for reform. I've already lost interest.

"Home Rule" (in the Irish sense) is what we would now call "Devo Max" (devolution of all domestic/internal policies, like the Isle of Man and Channel Islands), except Welsh Labour have never wanted that. For all the harnessing of Lloyd-George's ghost, the First Minister is trying to sell Silk II as "Home Rule" as if it'll settle the matter for generations when it'll do nothing of the sort - energy powers for one.

In fairness, the Lib Dems have always supported federalism, but have never outlined what that means in practice. Plus, it's not as if they've pushed hard for that whilst in power at Westminster.

The Welsh Conservatives now appear to back federalism, but couldn't even agree on something as basic as the income tax lockstep. They appear to want all the trappings of a nation state (Treasury, "Welsh Parliament") without the nation state bit, and it looks like Carwyn is willing to go along with that too. I think that's called, "Having your cake and eating it." There are those of us who are a bit more grown up.

Plaid Cymru have launched another discussion paper, this time relating to the constitution (pdf), which is essentially a repackaging and rewording of their Silk Commission submissions (they're not going to pull one over on me that easily). This should be right up their street, but they've wrapped their latent support for independence in so many euphemisms and meaningless management-speak phrases down the years they've confused themselves and the rest of us.

They held another sodding debate on this today; "rebalancing powers between nations" and "sovereignty resting with the people of Wales" becoming the new "self-government" and "independence in Europe/Europe of the regions". The fact they've said more on Scottish independence in the last two years than they have on Welsh independence in the last ten speaks volumes.

This is a debate where Wales is quite firmly on the sidelines. That's wrong, and the First Minister spoke a lot of sense on this yesterday. But because Westminster can't see what's in front of its face constitution-wise, it's been reduced to a matter between England and Scotland.

As far as Westminster are concerned, we've had our constitutional convention – Silk I & II – and if the Welsh political class aren't satisfied with that, too bad, that's all you're getting because it's all you said you wanted. There's no point bleating for more powers (when they were rejected whilst they were on the table) just because Scotland might get them – I'm talking welfare, broadcasting etc. They blew their load too soon.

As I support independence, no tinkering with the UK's archaic constitution is going to satisfy me. Though having said that, I can live with a federal or (preferably) confederal UK, that retains some semblance of wealth redistribution, whilst giving the respective parts maximum control over what to do with those funds and policies (including England and Cornwall).

The biggest mistake Unionists in Wales are making is thinking that the UK is a partnership of equal nations when it's actually an English socio-economic hegemony. Westminster is an English Parliament controlling the whole UK's affairs despite devolution.

Once you take the economics out of the equation, perhaps they'll start to see that unless they can manufacture a working federal model for the UK, Welsh independence isn't as silly a proposition as it sounds. It's actually very practical, and it'll save me some skin on my knuckles at least.

Read More

500th Post : The Sliding Scale of Nationalism

I've reached an important milestone today - the heady heights of 500 blogs.

I'd like to thank everyone who's read or scanned over my ramblings for the last three years. I might make it look easy, but it's hard work - often miserable, sometimes fun – but always rewarding. Taking time to read it means a lot and I hope I can continue to count on your support for however long this blog continues. Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi.

To "celebrate", I'm going to do what I usually do and over-analyse an abstract topic.

There's been some discussion on here, and for many years elsewhere, about different strands of nationalism. Some people in Plaid Cymru, for example, don't support independence. Meanwhile, people who I would consider hardcore unionists have been tarred with the "nationalist" brush simply for backing Silk Commission recommendations.

In the light of a high-profile Twitter row involving the Welsh rugby captain, it's fair to say there's little  understanding of other people's points of view and how they might form their opinion on the matter.

A person's relationship with a nation can change based across a range of different factors. In my opinion, there are three broad identities that engender a sense of nationalism.

• National Identity : The stomach – This is the primal, visual manifestation of nationalism. It's a "gut instinct" where you define who and what you are, and the visible outward label. This could also be expanded to include ethnic identity too. This asks the question, "Who am I?"
• Cultural Identity : The heart – This is the more fluid, dainty identity by expressing what you feel about the nation you belong to, trying to figure out how to express that, and trying to determine what being Welsh/British/English represents. This asks the question, "What does it mean?"
• Political Identity : The head – The rational, thinking side of it. This determines how you express nationalism based on decision-making, policy and democracy. It determines how far you're willing to go in terms of self-determination and how the nation fits into that. This asks the question, "How does it work?"

In trying to determine what all this actually looks like, I've come up with a sort of Kinsey Scale of nationalist sentiment for each of them, based on two poles - Welsh & British nationalism. It's worth pointing out that there are no "right" or "wrong" answers here.

National Identity

(Click to enlarge)

The only solid figures we have from this are from the 2011 census (covered in more detail here).

The results clearly showed that a majority of people in Wales consider themselves exclusively Welsh with no British identity whatsoever. This sentiment was stronger in some parts of Wales than others – in particular the south Wales Valleys.

People who consider themselves Welsh & British are in a withered minority. In fact, more people in Wales consider themselves English-only (11.2%) than Welsh & British. It seems most people have a very firm idea of what their national identity is : Welsh, English or British – not a mix.

You would think, therefore, that the fortunes of nationalist politics in Wales would be much better than they are currently.

Clearly, national identity isn't that important in political terms. It's been successfully adopted by all of the main political parties in Wales to such an extent that it's become rather elastic, or is being used as a dog whistle when it suits their ends – as we saw recently with Welsh Labour's claims of a Tory "War on Wales".

It can be a successful tactic too, as playing to national identity illicits a primal, somewhat territorial, response in voters and public. As a living embodiment of Welsh self-determination, many of us probably will defend politicians - and devolution as an institution - if there's any hint of an outside attack that would infringe upon Welsh identity or self-respect.

An exception there would be those who would consider themselves British, and/or have an outward antipathy towards all forms of Welshness.

The real nuanced layers of nationalism and its outward expression perhaps lie in cultural identity.

Cultural Identity

(Click to enlarge)

Although culture and nationality are inextricably linked, they needn't be symbiotic. You can measure national identity in the census, and you can measure its political expression in voting intentions. Cultural nationality is very hard to quantify.

So, how can you tell if you're culturally Welsh, culturally British, or a mix of both? I suppose it's what's in your heart. If you feel Welsh you are Welsh, likewise with British. If you're comfortable with both – so be it.

The outward signs of a person's cultural identity involve those things outside the formality of national identity, ethnicity or voting. That includes : attitudes towards the Welsh language, sports, literature, arts, hobbies and media consumption habits.

Those at either end of the scale are more romantic in their cultural identity. They probably get a sentimental glint in their eye thinking of traditions and are highly involved in cultural affairs of their chosen identity. They're proud of what they are, and aren't afraid to tell the world. When that level of patriotism turns unpleasant it becomes chauvinism.

The next step down would be those who are very firm in their cultural identity. On the Welsh side, they might speak Welsh or really enjoy things like Welsh literature and Welsh music but aren't obsessive about it and are a bit more flexible.

Logically speaking, those who identify themselves as culturally British
will have to accept things like the Eisteddfod and Welsh language as
a part of British culture despite being uniquely Welsh.
(Pic : Ynni Cymru)

Likewise, anyone considering themselves "culturally British" will still have to accept all of Welsh culture – including the language – as a part of that identity. British culture without the Welsh bits isn't "Britishness" but "Englishness" because it rejects a key part of what makes "Britain" Britain.

Then there are those with a more fluid cultural identity, but with a clear preference for one. On the Welsh side they would be "Ninety Minute Nationalists". I've come up with "Olympic Unionists" for a British equivalent as I couldn't think of anything better.

Someone supporting Wales at the Six Nations, or the Welsh national football team, is 100% Welsh for ninety minutes. Even an ardent Unionist is advocating Welsh independence by supporting the Welsh national side - which by most normal conventions of international sport shouldn't even exist.

However, once the game is over, their Welshness disappears and they don't think about it too much.

That's why "Ninety Minute Nationalist" is adopted as a pejorative. To the hard nationalist, the position is nonsensical, as Welsh culture should be – and is – linked not only to national identity, but political nationalism. To use footballing terms, 90 minute nationalists are seen as glory hunters and armchair fans, while nationalists are season ticket holders and will question anyone not seen to be pulling their weight. Similarly, from the opposite end, hardcore royalists might have similar suspicions of of Celtic republicans.

Things become a lot more complicated when you come to ethnic minorities, who are cited as feeling more British than white ethnicities, despite coming from cultures and backgrounds which are very different and contribute to the "melting pot" of Welsh and British society. Ethnic minorities might see adopting "Britishness" as a safer option, as Englishness in England has been claimed by the far-right - though that's starting to change.

Even the most ardent unionist can support Welsh independence
for 90 minutes - plus time to chug a beer or two.
(Pic : City School of Languages)

Being stuck in the middle might be a sign of cultural apathy and no real strong connection to either pole than a cultural identity in itself.

I was born in a former colony, have an Irish surname, support an English football team, haven't read much Welsh literature and most of my favourite authors and books are American. I don't speak much Welsh and I've listen to more Norwegian and German music.

In cultural terms, I should be about as British as they come or don't have a cultural identity at all, placing me somewhere slap bang in the middle. Based on that alone I probably have more in common with the Lib Dems and Greens than Plaid Cymru.

Yet I'm still one of the more prominent hard nationalists and supporters of Welsh independence out there. I can only relate to this from my own anecdotal experiences, but far from nationalism being solely about identity issues, it clearly goes a lot, lot deeper.

You can like British culture and still be a Welsh nationalist. Likewise, you can even live and breathe Wales in everything you do and still be a British nationalist. Look at the some of the Tories.

Political Ideology & The Constitution

(Click to enlarge)

I suppose this is the meat when it comes to nationalism and national identity. It mostly manifests itself as support (or lack of) for varying levels of self-determination, without which a nation can't exist.

At either end, you're going to have the fanatical nationalists - people who are exclusively and stridently Welsh or British. On the Welsh side, they'd support independence by any means necessary, and completely reject Britishness. On the British side, they'll show an antagonism towards any outward sign of "Welshness" and would equally support the union by any means necessary. You're talking Northern Irish paramilitary groups, historical figures like Owain Glyndwr and protest organisations. So they're thin on the ground, if they even exist at all in modern Wales.

A step down from that at either end would be those who support Welsh independence on both an ethnic and civic basis, and those who oppose all forms of devolution – but would stop short of violent direct action, just be very, very vocal about it.

There are differences between between ethnic and civic nationalism . The former is generally seen as more right-wing because it links blood to soil, while the latter is bog-standard social democracy with extra flags, and has pretty much been adopted by all the main parties in Wales to varying degrees.

I probably count as an "8" – a civic nationalist who supports independence more strongly than mainstream opinion and perhaps stronger than Plaid Cymru. Such people are often called "hard/dry nationalists".

The vast, vast majority of people will fall somewhere in the middle. This includes those who are civic nationalists but don't support independence strongly (Plaid Cymru in general). Also, "wet nationalist" Home Rulers who support further devolution or a form of federalism and consider themselves happy to be Welsh – this would include the likes of David Melding AM (Con, South Wales Central).

Welsh Labour are arguably slap bang in the middle – they're happy with devolution as it is, and are open to more powers, but would fall short of federalism, considering themselves both "Welsh & British". Yet, as the census figures paradoxically show, being "Welsh & British" is something of a minority thing and enjoys less support than Welsh independence. So playing up dual-identity is unlikely to win support on its own. It looks like, quite frankly, nobody cares if they're Welsh or British when it comes to politics, unless they're already a nationalist.

Also lurking are the devo-sceptics (or devo-realists), who think devolution has gone far enough. They perhaps consider themselves more British than Welsh (but will play up the Welshness when it suits them) and would likely oppose further powers, but not the principle of limited self-determination as a compromise. I'd image the Conservative grass roots would be found here, as would many Old Labour and Labour MPs.

(Click on Wales)

It's worth noting this perceived spread of nationalism within parties as it can cause problems. Plaid and UKIP are fairly obvious candidates to be placed at either end – one a Welsh nationalist party, the other a British nationalist party. The Lib Dems have historically been "Home Rule" party so are fairly easy to place too.

But even within those parties, there are going to be differences. Dafydd Elis-Thomas AM (Plaid, Dwyfor Meirionnydd) is clearly a Lib Dem style "Home Ruler", while UKIP have come around to tolerating the Assembly's existence.

People who consider themselves "internationalists/citizens of the world" might often fall under British nationalism too because they support the status quo by default. The Green Party of EnglandandWales  gives the impression of having quite a few of these - and have really struggled to adapt to post-devolution Wales, despite being officially federalist - so are arguably closer to UKIP than Plaid in terms of nationalism, but not general ideology.

Having said all this, it's worth being careful in strictly equating levels of support for independence with nationalism. If there were a Welsh independence referendum tomorrow, with no underlying case along the same lines as Scotland's Future, even I'd vote no. It's one thing to support something superficially, it's another thing entirely to check the details - and there are plenty of details on Welsh independence that need to be ironed out if a realistic case is ever going to be made.

Although it's true that you can't eat a flag, they can make very good tablecloths for a skilled chef.

Nationalists shouldn't get too despondent about low levels of support for independence, as all the foundations are there for a sudden change in opinion given the right circumstances. However, it's off the menu for now and we should perhaps learn to accept it and play the long game. Many hard nationalists might not like the idea of Plaid sidelining independence, but they're broadly right to do so.

Likewise, unionists shouldn't get complacent about high levels of support for the Union, which is perhaps all head and no heart. Technocratic arguments about finance and borders will only get you so far. As the Scottish independence campaign is proving, heads can be turned and the positive case for union is – in some areas - built on sand.

You're going to cause controversy in politics when you try to mix the three identities or try and stamp a single one on people.

One of the most important modern human virtues is tolerance. Tolerating something doesn't mean have to like or accept it. You should just respect that some people are going to have different ideas and values from you. When we can all tolerate something or someone you don't like, without resorting to smears or hyperbole, it's a sign our society is starting to mature and our media along with it.

Read More

Towards a Cornish Assembly?

Cornish nationalist party, Mebyon Kernow, recently launched a
consultation on the format of Cornish devolution.
(Pic : Western Morning News)

While most of the constitutional focus in Wales has been on Silk II, and constitutional focus across the UK on the Scottish independence referendum, the fifth nation of the UK has thrown its own hat into the ring.

Cornish nationalist party, Mebyon Kernow (MK), launched a consultation document on proposals for a devolved Cornish Assembly on March 5^th – St Piran's Day. It's available here (pdf).

Fifty thousand Cornishmen will know the reason why

As I've covered before (The Case for Cornwall), Cornwall meets most of the standard requirements and historical precedents to be considered a nation rather than an English region or county. Back in 2001, more than 50,000 signed a declaration calling for Cornish devolution. It was Liberal Democrat policy, with the closest Cornwall coming to devolution being a backbench Government of Cornwall Bill (pdf) introduced by Dan Rogerson MP (Lib Dem, North Cornwall) in 2009.

As I post this, the Lib Dems have made it official party policy again.

Many of the problems facing Cornwall are very similar to those facing
us in Wales  - especially in terms of economic development
and demographic change.
(Pic : BBC)

With the UK constitution now in flux, MK believes "there needs to be a mature, respectful and wide-ranging debate about the future of the whole of the UK and how it is governed." A constitutional convention then - something our First Minister and others in the National Assembly would no doubt agree with.

If it's agreed that Cornwall should see devolution, and a detailed proposal fleshed out, MK supports holding a referendum.

Many of the challenges facing Cornwall are all to familiar to us in Wales : an ageing population caused, in part, by in-migration of retirees; high house prices in rural areas, a relatively weak economy (Cornish GDP per capita was 61.2% of the UK average in 2012, compared to 72.3% for Wales) and "peripheral neglect" by being so far from Westminster.

Except, of course, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland have their own devolved legislatures to deal with some of these issues to varying degrees of success (or failure).

MK believe a Cornish Assembly would "be in a strong position to built a more prosperous economy....support Cornwall's traditional and emerging industries, build on Cornwall's sense of place, it's unique brand, and maritime potential".

Chuckles' "Prince of Wales" title is exactly that - a title and nothing more.
His role in Cornwall, however, is significantly more hands on
- perhaps to Cornwall's detriment.
(Pic : The Telegraph)

The party also believe that Cornwall suffers from a "democratic deficit" as they only have 123 councillors serving a population of 534,000 in a single unitary authority. Devon has two and a half times the population but four times the councillors, while Somerset has 1.7 times the population and 3.5 times the number of councillors.

A National Assembly would also reinforce Cornwall's national status, with 73,200 people describing themselves as Cornish in the 2011 census, despite it not being on the official census form, working out at around 14% of the population. Also, 46% of children in the 2013 school census described themselves as Cornish (more from Cornish Republican).There's a very specific bone of contention too involving the Windsor clan. Chuck Windsor (and presumably in the short to medium term, Billy Windsor) enjoys near-feudal rights as Duke of Cornwall. MK believe devolution will make it easier to hold a full inquiry into "Cornwall's ambiguous constitutional relationship with the Crown and contradictions between this....and administrative arrangements".

What would a National Assembly of Cornwall look like?

Mebyon Kernow propose something for Cornwall near enough identical
to what we have in Wales, with some key differences - in particular the voting system.
(Pic : cornwallvsf.org)

• Devolved powers – Effectively the same powers as the Welsh Assembly (agriculture, tourism, health, education, culture, housing, local government etc.) - including primary law-making powers from the start. They also want the power to vary income tax, perhaps in light of what's on the table for Wales and Scotland.
• The Cornish Assembly – 40 Assembly Members (AMs) elected in multi-member constituencies by Single Transferable Vote (STV). This works out as roughly 1 AM per 13,350 people. The exact arrangements and constituencies will be decided by a special commission. Cornish AMs would sit in committees and work in a similar way to our AMs. Although there's nothing in the proposal about where a Cornish Assembly would be based, you would presume it would be at the existing Cornwall Council buildings in Truro without the need for a new building.
• Cornish Government – Made up of between 4 and 6 ministers with "a small number of junior ministers". It would be headed by a First Minister along the same lines as the Welsh Government and supported by a civil service.
• Finance – Cornwall would be funded via a Welsh-style block grant via a needs-based settlement, which MK estimate at being in the region of £4billion. They also want control of EU Structural Funding (Objective One), which Cornwall receives in the same way as West Wales & The Valleys, except it's administered from London and Bristol.
• Local Government Reorganisation – The single local authority covering Cornwall would be rescinded and replaced with four new councils, each with 35-45 councillors, set out by legislation. These councillors would also be elected by STV. Some decisions could be devolved further down to community and parish councils.
• External Relations – Cornwall should have representation on the British-Irish Council, and should have its own MEP, with offices in Brussels. Cornwall should also have its own Commonwealth Games team and the Cornish should be protected via the Convention for National Minorities in the same way as the Welsh and Scottish.

Devolution : Go for it, but don't repeat our mistakes

If a Cornish Assembly were formed,  these signs might have
more than a little bit a truth in them for once.
(Pic : libdemvoice.org)

Wales stands testament to the fact that while devolution does bring a means to make sometimes significant policy changes, it doesn't guarantee success, and is far from a "magic bullet" in itself.

Believe it or not, Mebyon Kernow have been "inspired" by some of the achievements of our National Assembly over the past 15 years (and the Scottish Parliament), picking out :

• Scrapping prescription charges and hospital car parking charges.
• Protection from the "creeping privatisation of the NHS in England".
• Statutory waste and recycling targets with an aim of "zero waste".
• Allowing suspension of "right to buy" in areas facing housing pressures.

So there are plenty of things the Cornish can learn from devolution elsewhere in the UK, but there are also plenty of mistakes they would do well not to repeat. I would pick out mismanagement of EU funds as the biggest lesson Cornwall could learn from Wales, as well as timidity in policy making and having too small a legislature to allow effective criticism of the executive.

Politically-speaking, a Cornish Assembly could throw up some interesting things.

If you want to compare it to Wales, it's likely the Lib Dems and Labour would swap positions, with Cornwall becoming a Lib Dem hegemony and Labour being a minor party that would struggle to get more than 3/4 seats in a 40-seat legislature. It would make the machinations of an STV system interesting for psephologists I suppose – and it's sensible that Mebyon Kernow have proposed that system from the start.

As to how to get in the position of being able to hold a referendum, MK would have to secure their "Gwynfor moment". By that I mean winning, or seriously challenging for, a Westminster seat. Then the party would probably have to become a major force on Cornwall Council, being in a position to form a government or some sort of coalition with the Lib Dems in order to get Cornish devolution on the Westminster agenda.

Read More

Health and social care sitting in a tree....

I-N-T-E-G-R-A-T-I-N-G
(Pic : carevisionsathome.co.uk)

Plaid's Shadow Minister for Health & Well-being, Elin Jones AM (Plaid, Ceredigion), launched a second policy consultation on Tuesday (first - Dr Plaid's NHS Treatment Plan – another several hours of voluntary work), outlining proposals to integrate the two services.

The paper is available here (pdf) and the consultation is open until May 30^th.

Why integrate health and social care?

Integrating health and social care will hopefully lead
to fewer scenes like this in Welsh hospitals.
(Pic : The Telegraph)

Firstly, it worth distinguishing between "health care" and "social care".

Health care includes diagnostic and treatment facilities provided by hospitals, GPs, allied professionals like physios, pharmacists, dentists and opticians and the ambulance service. These are provided by the NHS or on the NHS's behalf (in the case of dentists etc.)

Social care helps people with physical difficulties to "live their lives comfortably". That includes things like cooking, cleaning, home adaptions and more personal things like managing finances. This can be done in someone's home, or in a full-time residential complex. These services are provided both by local authorities and private companies.

The paper outlines several problems resulting from keeping the two services separate from each other :

• "Bureaucratic battles" over which service is responsible for the care, and for whom specifically.
• Unnecessary hospital admissions and delayed transfers of care ("bed blocking").
• Lack of sufficient community care through "chronic under-investment".
• Budgets for health services have generally been protected by the Welsh Government, but there are threats to social care services due to local government cuts.

Older patients in particular are often passed between different organisations – a concern raised by the Older People's Commissioner. It also means some patients with chronic illnesses go to hospital when it's better for them to be treated at home and given support so they can live independently again.

Merging the two services has long been an aspiration in Wales, with a continued focus on partnerships, collaboration and pooled budgets.

During the recent Social Services and Well-being Bill debate, service integration was raised several times and amendments were proposed – including from Elin Jones herself – which would've paved the way towards limited integration.

The issue is even more urgent as a result of the Williams Commission. Echoing what Leanne Wood said during the debate on that, the Commission's proposals go beyond a simple reorganisation of local authorities. Plaid describe the omission of local health board and social care reform from the Commission's remit as a "flaw".

However, in one example – Powys – the Commission recommended Powys Local Health Board (LHB) merge with Powys County Council. That's because no acute services are provided in Powys (they're reliant on Shrewsbury, South Wales and Aberystwyth) making the process easier. The Commission also recommended the new local authorities don't straddle the 7 LHB boundaries.

So although it was outside of the Williams Commission's remit, they "future proofed" things to enable a smooth integration between health and social care in future.

Plaid argue a single Health and Social Care Service, with a single budget, means some services that would otherwise face cuts can be protected, with all staff involved in care working to the same end. This will improve services for those needing care and put less pressure on hospitals.

Learning from Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland has long had a system of integrated health and social care services.
(Pic : South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust)

Northern Ireland, in practice, merged health and social care system in 1973, though a direct merger was delayed until 2009 due to political problems. The driver of change there was also – coincidentally - local government reorganisation, though the advantages of integrated services weren't realised at the time.

In terms of how it works, GPs are at the head of a team of professionals that includes social workers and nurses, services aren't duplicated, people aren't passed between different organisations and care is co-ordinated between the health side and the social care side.

Scotland's currently pursuing integration of services through the Public Bodies (Joint Working) Bill, which, if passed, will offer two options to Scottish local authorities and health boards – joint boards with joint budgets, or functions and budgets being transferred between boards in order to set their respective roles in stone.

England's also experimented with integrated services, with Torbay given as an example, seeing "impressive" falls in bed occupancy rates, emergency bed occupation rates and bed blocking.


Plaid's Challenges

Plaid describe this as a "once in a generation opportunity for Wales to lead the way by fully integrating health and social care". However, they outline the significant challenges standing in the way.

The first is that health services are universally free at the point of use, but social care is means tested by local authorities - with only the poorest receiving free care. There are complications caused by what are described as "bureaucratic battles", where free care is only available depending on which organisation undertook the needs assessment. Governments are therefore reluctant to scrap means testing as it would increase expenditure.

Plaid would prefer to make all social care free at point of use – in line with health services. However, as the budget isn't there do that, they intend to put services into three bands :

• Free at the point of use – this includes GP appointments, NHS hospital treatment, prescriptions and health information etc.
• Capped charges with free services or reduced charges for the less well off – dental treatment, opticians, non-residential social care.
• Charges imposed with means testing available – residential social care and home adaptions.

This is, essentially, how services are provided now. If more money comes in, Plaid say they'll try to make more services free at the point of use.

Plaid also flagged up:

• Social care affordability – The Dilnot Commission recommended a cap on what a person pays for care, subsequently set by Westminster at £70,000. The Welsh Government hasn't decided whether to bring in a cap or not because of the potential impact on the Barnett Formula.
• Mental Health Services – A 2008 paper for the Welsh Government recommended the creation of a single body for mental health services in Wales which would "stretch across health and social care". These proposals were rejected by the Welsh Government because there were no links between mental and physical illness, a stand alone body might be subject to cuts they otherwise wouldn't be and there were objections to including learning disabilities within that structure. Plaid propose "revisiting" the idea, and ring-fencing the budget for mental health for the foreseeable future.
• Third Sector involvement – It's said the third sector has provided both innovation and a voice for service users. An integrated service would allow a review of how contracts are awarded to make it less bureaucratic.

Plaid's Integration Options

Handing control of adult social care to local health boards could result in fewer
hospital admissions and "bed blocking", as services would fall under a single umbrella.
(Pic : BBC Wales)

Option One : Adult Social Care becomes the responsibility of Local Health Boards

The Welsh Government "would retain control over strategic decisions" but the responsibility for commissioning social care and mental health services would be with LHBs, not local authorities. It's possible LHB boundaries could be reviewed too.

For democratic accountability, Plaid propose either nominating local councillors to sit on boards, or direct elections for board seats at the same time as local council elections.

They're not proposing the same for children's social care, because users of adult social care often have health problems, while children's social care is often related to things like child protection - a role for social workers, not the NHS.

One risk here – as experienced in Northern Ireland – is that health could dominate the integrated system, furthering under-investment in social care. Under this choice, the Welsh Government would, therefore, "play a stronger role in budget allocations", possibly ring-fencing social care funding.

Option Two : Local authorities are given control over primary (GP) and community health

This is described as "the radical option", where local authorities (presumably post-reorganisation) would control GP services, community hospitals, patient transport and community medicine (including community mental health). Current local health boards would be scrapped, and it's a similar, but not identical, set-up to Denmark.

Hospital services and things like ambulance services would be run either :

• directly by the Welsh Government.
• by a single National Hospital Board.
• three health boards based on fire and rescue service areas.

It would end problems caused by patients transferring for treatment between LHBs, and allows greater national planning.

Plaid say option two would also ensure "a greater emphasis on preventing ill health and looking after people in the community" with bed blocking reducing over time - as long as there's investment in community hospitals.

A risk is that continuing to have two seperate bodies responsible for health and care could continue arguments over who does what, and see no end to "postcode lotteries". There's also a risk current financial pressures on local authorities will transfer into the health service.

For both options, Plaid say it would take an Assembly term (5 years) to integrate services.

Conclusions

Option two sounds attractive, but after the experience of the old 22 local health boards, foisting responsibilities for primary care onto councils after they go through a very rough reorganisation would be a bad idea.

The first option seems sensible - and has been backed by the Royal College of Nursing. It's best to use existing structures for service delivery, while integrating health and social care makes sense for reasons clearly set out in the paper and in the Senedd chamber.

A similar set up has been argued for ambulance services too, and as regular readers will know, I would prefer services like these (and others) to be provided by a regional tier of government - but that boat's sailed.

What's also pleasing is the constructive response of Health Minister, Mark Drakeford (Lab, Cardiff West), who's quoted as saying he would read the paper "with interest" and that "ministers will look carefully at what the party is saying". That's much better than the nonsense we got last time from Labour.

It's fair to say Plaid are heading in the right direction (again). Shame about "other things".

Read More