Wrexham’s future is about more than Wales vs England
Keep out - The Mersey Dee Alliance strategy has reopened an explosive debate
ONE of the largest petitions in the history of the National Assembly has been debated this week at Glyndwr University in Wrexham.
Since 2007, the Petitions Committee at the National Assembly has been able to receive signed representations, both electronically and in written form. Most of these come in with less than 50 signatures. But not the one presented in Wrexham – this one has around 15,000 signatures on it.
To put this extraordinary figure in context, it is estimated that, in comparison, only 20,000 Wrexham people turned out to vote in the Assembly elections of 2007. That it is a significant issue is clear from the considerable response. The signatures were gathered in just three months.
The petition, started by the People’s Council for North Wales, is against the proposed West Cheshire/North East Wales sub-regional strategy. The plan proposes tightening the links between Welsh and English counties in the North West. It was created by the Mersey Dee Alliance, a partnership which includes the local authorities of Cheshire West, Chester, Denbighshire, Ellesmere Port, Neston, Flintshire, the Wirral and Wrexham.
The plan is supported by a number of councils, including Wrexham’s. Supporters of the proposals argue that they will help maximise co-operation and coordination in the cross border areas, increasing investment to maintain employment levels while creating economic benefits for the people of North Wales.
However, the PCNW opposes the plan based for a number of reasons. They argue the plan will affect societal sustainability (in terms of demographics, economics, politics and communities), the environment (covering sustainability, ecology, natural habitat and the built environment), and identity and human rights (meaning Welsh identity, language, character and expression). There is significant concern about ongoing and perceived over-development in the Wrexham area that is causing environmental and social damage.
There is also concern about lack of affordable housing for people in Wrexham. Campaigners say that continued large-scale but unaffordable development means that many new homes remain empty, in spite of a housing shortage.
What is clear in the debate is that many feel that North East Wales is being prepped for an influx of workers from across the border, workers who are keen to find affordable housing at much more reasonable prices than those found in Cheshire’s leafy suburbs.
The language from some of the opposition to the plan has been belligerent, uncompromising and passionate. Some councillors have stated that the plan is “subversive” and that it amounts to “social engineering” that will “kill” the Welsh identity, turning Wrexham, Flintshire and Denbighshire into “suburbs” of Merseyside. The plan has been called an English land grab, a strategy that will benefit the people of North West England far more than it will the people of North East Wales.
Along with the wider row, a number of smaller debates have broken out surrounding what Janet Ryder called the “creeping Chesterfication” of North East Wales. The North Wales AM commented earlier this month on the re-branding of a Flintshire hotel formerly known as The Gateway to Wales as Days Hotel – Chester North.
She argued that the re-branding was:
‘…one of the unforeseen consequences of councils like Flintshire signing up to a long term plan called the West Cheshire/North East Wales strategy.’
Controversy about the national identity of border towns like Wrexham is clearly not a new thing, but what is relatively new of course, is the existence of a National Assembly with power. Some campaigners have also argued that the MDA strategy is actually a threat to the One Wales agreement and that it undermines the role of the Assembly itself.
Last year, a much smaller but no less controversial campaign was launched in Wrexham in an attempt to make the town more Welsh. Freelance writer Jane Redfern Jones set up the campaign, urging local businesses and residents to give Wrexham a stronger Welsh identity in order to boost tourism. She claimed that there was little in Wrexham to identify clearly that it was in Wales. The campaign sparked an interesting debate about whether the town was Welsh enough with some, like Professor Michael Scott, vice-chancellor of Glyndwr University stating that:
‘Wrexham couldn’t be more Welsh’
Others drew attention to the long and close links the area has with North West England, and Liverpool in particular. The response to both of these campaigns has been astonishing at a time when interest in politics is at an all time low, and what is clear is that the debate has reignited old tensions about border towns being regarded as the back-garden of England.
The presentation of a petition with between 15,000 and 20,000 signatures to the National Assembly makes a clear but non-too-subtle point. It is an issue people care about hugely.
Unfortunately, however, it must be said that some of the language used to raise and debate these issues seems unnecessarily jingoistic and rampantly nationalist in a new and more politically mature Wales.
Should we really be talking about land grabs, and social engineering anymore? And more pointedly is this really about social engineering and the English taking Welsh land anyway? Or is it actually about something much simpler though no less sinister – the inexorable grip of globalisation and the free market economy?
The MDA plan is reprehensible in many ways. First, and perhaps the most important of these, is that there was little or no consultation with the public over whether this proposed plan should be adopted. Indeed, there was little discussion with some of the politicians who represented these voiceless masses. The proposal was considered a given good, and presented as a fait accompli. This is, of course, completely unacceptable in a modern and supposedly democratic society.
The second, and equally significant problem with these proposals, is that they are not tailored to the needs of the people in the communities they are supposed to benefit. They are designed for purely economic effectiveness.
The puff and piffle of politicians and tiresome council officials who drone on endlessly about quality of life matters not a jot to those whose lives are not being improved, and will not be improved by these proposals. To be talking about further expansion in a town like Wrexham, which has such a large number of unoccupied and unaffordable properties, is utterly fallacious. Unless, that is, you are talking about affordable property, which they are not. Further development of this kind is also bound to have environmental consequences, how could it not? And how can this decision have been made so lightly and with such little consideration?
Then we come to subject of identity, and how important it is or is not. This, is perhaps the most contentious of the issues to fight the battle on. It does, however, seem to have been the chosen one. This is for a number of reasons. It certainly grabs press attention, and it certainly ignites the spirit of those who are passionate about Welsh identity. There is often, though, something that is lost in promoting the debate in such a way. This loss is evident in any comment thread you would care to peruse on this subject. What is lost is credibility.
The argument becomes about shutting the door and locking out the English invaders rather than defending our communities and standing up for the rights of those in them to have a say on their development. It becomes about the threat to our language and our Welsh identity (what is this anyway?) rather than the damage to our environment and our quality of life.
It becomes about the Welsh and the English rather than people, and rather than the real enemy – a democratic system that often has little or no regard for ordinary people, and far too much for business and profit.
Fingers crossed that the Welsh Assembly’s Petitions Committee manages to see sense and decides that the MDA plans are undemocratic, damaging and not likely to benefit the people of Wales. If they do so, however, they will have had to wade through a ditch of pugnacious polemic and petulant grandstanding.
Here’s hoping they can be bothered.
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flickr
There seems a be quite a bit of missing information here.
Firstly, of the 15,000 signatures, how many came from the people of Wexham and other council areas involved and what percentage of the population are those relevant signatures.
Secondly this appears to be a one-answer-to-a-question petition, it would be interesting to know if a petition in favour of the MDA was presented to the populations involved only what level of support it would get.
Thirdly, what is the political structure of the People’s Council for North Wales? This looks as if it involves a larger area that Wrexham and its environs.
Fourthly, does the MDA put forward any economic advantages for the proposed population, as the Wrexham area has not been the most prosperous? Similarly what are the economic proposals of the People’s Council for North Wales?
Fifthly, border towns are not unique to Wales. I have worked in Mexico where the Mexicans in those towns (on the US border) make the most of the advantages of their geographical situation.
Since the A483 and even before, people have been traveling across the boarder to work. Both from Wales to Chester and Chester to Wales. Many people in North Wales travel to Chester regular as it is there local major city. This has been the case for many years. The Welsh Assembly seem to concentrate their efforts on rural regions and the south M4 corridor.
Many people from Chester like myself have moved to Wrexham because of the cheap living costs and this has been the case since the house price boom.
So what do they want to do? close the border, welsh jobs for Welsh people? The Welsh economy is struggling as it is. North Wales benefits from Liverpool and Chester. Companies in these regions who expand, look towards North Wales for more space plus it has good transport links. Look at the Pharmaceutical company Quay Pharma who are moving to Deeside from the Wirral.
Its not the case of loss of Identity either. The Welsh have been repressed by the English for hundreds of years now and Wales has still retained its identity. Its the welsh people that will retain the identity moving forward.
Financier: Regarding the ‘missing’ information -
Firstly: The petition is in the public domain, a brief and unscientific scroll through it suggests that the majority of signatures are from the areas affected, this would makes sense of course. If you’d like to count them be my guest.
Secondly: As above. I suspect the petition was signed in the main by people from the relevant areas. I don’t know what you mean by a ‘one-answer-to-a-question’ petition. There was no question in the petition, it is simply opposing the strategy. There is no question.
Thirdly: The People’s Council for North Wales has an excellent website, have a read. That was not the subject of this article.
Fourthly: The MDA plan is in the public domain, and argues for better cross-border communication in order to help develop the ‘region’ economically. As above, feel welcome to trawl through it. The specific plans were not the subject of this article.
Fifthly: I’m not sure the model of the Mexican border is relevant or a particularly good one.
Important and significant as this petition is, it is not the largest received by the Welsh Assembly. That was in 2003 or thereabouts and contained 100,000 plus signatures asking the Government to keep emergency neurosurgery in Swansea. They subsequently ignored this plea and moved it to Cardiff anyway.
An interesting article. I think there is a fair argument that the unelected body being proposed is not the best way forward however it is absurd to class it as an “English land grab”. It is important that the border towns and cities understand and maximise the potential of their cross-border connections. In South Wales we have a situation where on the other side of the Severn Bridge is Bristol, the third fastest growing city in England, with the second highest GDP per head of population in England. It would be sheer madness for Newport, Monmouthshire and the Gwent Valleys to seek to pursue a Wales only economic approach.
Clear water, whether it be of the Rhodri Morgan “red” variety or the more traditional shades, should not over-ride common sense. There is no contradiction to a culturally aware Wales and cross-border economic initiatives.
‘…It becomes about the Welsh and the English rather than people, and rather than the real enemy – a democratic system that often has little or no regard for ordinary people, and far too much for business and profit.’
It is all about business and profit, isn’t it? It is assumed that there is nothing more important, and that anyone who questions these values is stuck in the dark ages. The pursuit of profit seems to plough through everything without any apology and with the pretense that it is of much benefit to all.
Peter’s technically right … but so is Rob. The petition from the People’s Council for North Wales is the biggest received by Petitions Committee, which started in 2007.
Before that petitions came in, like the one Peter refers to, but they were unable to go anywhere because there was no procedure for dealing with them.
However, this all gets away from the main thrust of the piece. So many debates in Wales quickly become bogged in matters of Welsh identity that they often lose their focus and their shape. We have seen this many times on this site.
All the while, our local authority system grows more decrepid, with more powers centred in the hands of council executives, who are able to technify issues to the point where the layman representative no longer feels authoritative enough to comment upon them, and so goes along with whatever the officers recommend.
There is also a growing tendency for senior figures in local government to refer everything upwards, explaining away their actions as “It’s what the Assembly wants”. I suppose a decade of micro-intervention by the Westminster Government has conveniently given them this excuse, but some of these officers have become complacent and trot out these reasons all too easily.
In Neath Port Talbot, for example, both the hugely unpopular schools reorganisation programme and last week’s announcement that as many as 750 jobs will have to go was blamed either directly or indirectly on “the Assembly”. Nothing could be further from the truth, but it is believed, and this shrugged-shoulders approach helps remove responsibility from those who argue that they should be highly remunerated precisely because of their responsibilities.
So I would join Rob in arguing that this needs to be less about Wales vs England, and more about calling our local authorities, quangos and other partners properly to question. They are well paid, and it’s time they felt the heat of some serious scrutiny.
I listened to the Petitions Committee proceedings (yes, I know; I should get out more) and it reinforced the impressions gained from the MDA and other literature.
The project is described as a comprehensive housing, employment, recreation and retail strategy for a wide area. Except that when one considers what is planned on the Welsh side of the border one finds only housing. Which confirms for me that this whole scheme is about maintaining property values in Wilmslow and similar communities in the Cheshire stockbroker / footballer / soap actor belt.
Then there’s the secrecy. The committee was unimpressed by the answers given in response to questions asked about public consultation. Which is damning. For chief officers in Wrexham, Denbighshire and Flintshire have secretly signed up to plans that will increase their salaries and their (secret) bonuses. How would we respond if councillors had secretly drawn up plans from which they would benefit financially?
Further, the MDA documention states that this strategy takes precedence over local development plans, which runs counter to Assembly directives. When asked to reconcile this contradiction Aled Roberts, Wrexham’s chief executive, was struck dumb, remaining dumb despite a member of the audience shouting out “Answer the question!”.
No, it’s clear that north east Wales is being asked to accommodate thousands of people from north west England who will continue to work over the border. With all the travelling involved. So in a world where just about everyone is trying to cut down on journey-to-work times it would appear that those who have drawn up this absurd plan have exemption. Or maybe they just don’t care.
Whichever way you look at it it don’t make sense and from whichever angle you approach it don’t smell good.