Time to challenge the big lie about True Wales
Bubble — By Daran Hill on February 19, 2010 7:00 am
Truth will win out over lies
THOSE opposed to increasing the powers of the National Assembly for Wales aren’t too choosy in terms of the arguments they are prepared to deploy.
The one they seem to trot out most often is that voting to extend the legislative powers of the Assembly is a further step on the “slippery slope” to independence. No matter how many times those who favour a positive and sensible extension of the Assembly’s legislative powers point out that this is a scaremongering tactic lacking substance, the more they repeat it.
It’s a common trick in propaganda. “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it,” said Joseph Goebbels. There isn’t a parallel between his politics and that of True Wales. But in terms of political communications, he spoke a truism. The big lie makes an impact if repeated often enough. And that is the True Wales tactic.
Anyone who has looked at the real issue at stake understands it is not in any way about embracing independence. That may be Plaid Cymru’s long term political agenda, and Plaid are indeed supporting the Yes campaign. But to suggest that a referendum which will, if passed, simply provide more coherent framework of primary law making powers for the Assembly is about any slope to independence, slippery or otherwise, is to lie to the electorate.
True Wales might equally claim the referendum is about creating a federal United Kingdom, since that is the Liberal Democrat position on constitutional matters. Or they might actually recognise that the referendum is at heart about enacting Labour policy embraced by Plaid through the One Wales agreement, and not the other way round. And that is an important distinction. It is Labour which put this referendum mechanic in place, and Plaid and others have decided to support it.
Does anyone who has looked at the issue seriously believe that, for one moment, the coming referendum is about independence? Let the proof of the argument be this: every single Conservative in the National Assembly for Wales has backed the referendum proposal. Similarly, every single Labour member in the Assembly supported the trigger vote last week. In no corner of either of those parties will you find people who embrace independence for Wales as a political concept, let alone a constitutional end goal. Do True Wales really believe that Nick Bourne, Peter Hain, David Melding and Carwyn Jones are political separatists? Or do they simply want you to believe the lie that that is the case?
Perhaps True Wales is so obsessed with false motivations because its own position is so unconvincing. How can it argue its supporters are opposed to simply increasing the Assembly’s powers when their whole approach comes from not being able to really say what’s on their minds and on their agenda: the abolition of the National Assembly. Why else would True Wales be meeting with UKIP, a party which this week is reaffirming abolition of the Assembly as a core theme in its General Election campaign? There can surely be no common ground other than a desire to not just stop the Assembly increasing its legislative powers, but also to reduce powers in the future, and work together toward the total abolition of the Assembly as an institution.
And why stop there? From the case examples cited by True Wales, they seem uncomfortable with any form of policy divergence between England and Wales. So why not scrap the Secretary of State for Wales too and take the administration and governance of the country back over half a century?
A defence of this True Wales position will surely be that they are a broad church which encompasses those who want to see the Assembly work better as well as those who favour its abolition. They might compare this standpoint to the pro-Yes campaigners, and argue that since the Yes side includes those seeking independence for Wales that this in some way balances out their abolitionist wing.
But this does not ring true. The focus of the Yes campaign is going to be firmly on increasing the legislative powers of the Assembly within a clearly defined scope. That will be what unites the Yes campaign – a desire to equip an Assembly with the right tools to do the job.
In contrast, what actually unites True Wales isn’t really opposing the move from Part 3 to Part 4 in the Government of Wales Act 2006. Their platform is something different. It is actually based on messages which are anti-politics and anti-Assembly. True Wales are the ones with the secret agenda and the real slippery slope – a slippery slope toward the abolition of the Assembly. This is the true ground which unites True Wales. If they win the referendum, they will have taken a step in this direction.
It reminds us of the old adage that begins, “What a tangled web…” It has never been more True. Especially when your web is a web of lies.
Tags: devolution, public debate, referendum, True Wales
Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
120 Comments
Illtyd Luke
“the LCO system is working”
I’ve referenced Peter Hain, Hwyel Francis who said it is and also Rhodri and D E Thomas who regard 25 laws a good result. I was willing to accept the AMs complaint but as it isn’t all bad and it appears to be what was originally wanted…I’m happy to accept that it is okay.
Daran Hill
“a column and discussion on big ideas”
The devil is in the detail and I’ve concentrated on these as a means of refuting the main allegation.
“many who were prepared to give the system a fair try”
Politics and politicians of all ilks in all times are variable. The LCO system has demonstrated this beyond doubt. There were elements in the Housing LCO that contravened/conflicted with UK arrangements and that caused debate and delays. The Language LCO had strong objections from businesses and I made representation on an intended application by a South Wales council. Modifications were needed and modifications were made.
“discusses legislative scrutiny”
This is an approach I have been pressing for from the publication of the AWC Report to deafening silence. I also would welcome such a piece because it is an essential pre-requirement prior to moving to further power.
“gone through the details (of the BBC poll)”
I can tell you the answer now 55% in favour of more powers. We had already made our own estimate of a poll based on the question that was used. It is more or less what we expected. The outcome of a poll is also determined by the question asked and how it is asked. We do not believe the question asked reflects the choice that the electorate will be required to decide on and will have increased a favourable vote by 8%. When the poll result is divided by 1.08 the figure is 51% not much different from 1997. In reality not an overwhelming mandate of approval after 11 years. But we have to consider the difference of the polls and the results in both of the previous referendum. The earlier polls made it appear that the ‘yes’ vote was overwhelming but in fact the difference was 11 whole points. 55 – 11 = 44%. The margin is 51% – 44% bears out Sir Emyr’s conclusion, a ‘yes’ vote can be obtained but not guaranteed. If we take a median 51 + 44 = 95 divided by 2 = 47.5% with a 3% +/- error reading = 50.5% – 44.5%. The balance is the ‘noes’ have it.
The poll figures are unreliable because it cannot gauge the turnout. My immediate objection to Sir Emyr on the day of the publication of the AWC Report was that the premise was a low turnout. I have estimated that it might be as low as 32%. The outcome is not going to be determined by how people are polled but by the people who bother to vote. The main result we have from our own polling is apathy.
“People have often asked me why I live in Wales and particularly Port Talbot, when I could have lived in many other places of the world or within the UK. I choose to do so because I am comfortable with who I am and where I am. Not infrequently non –Brits call me English or introduce me as English. I ALWAYS explain that I am Welsh and if I have the opportunity I explain to them who the Welsh are and where we are and why we are. And, a bit like Eddie Butler’s programme coming up this week on BBC, I explain the importance of the Welsh to world history, especially industrial development. I’m Welsh…and so is my wife who can trace her ancestry by documentation back to 1350AD. So, if you meet her and suggest she isn’t Welsh, she’ll handbag you!”
Yes I have to give a 45 minute explanation about Wales too. I never said that you were not Welsh. My beef is that you have the confidence to have a Rugby team (the Bretons don’t) or a football team (the *Bretons dont have that either). Yet do not have the confidence to govern yourself for whatever reason.
Separation? Really? The Quebecois are one of the most chauvinist lot in North America, and they have had referendums on more autonomy, are they independent? No.
I think you and Rachel Banner would probably prefer the pre 1997 status quo.
One thing for sure is the referendum will prove one of us wrong. I will accept that result. Will you?
Michael Cridland
“pre 1997 status quo”
“I will accept that result. Will you?”
To both questions my answer is that I am a constitutionalist.
My view is that the pre-1997 was an unsatisfactory arrangement because a large sum of public money was being administered by civil servants. I only voted against the Assembly then because the cost of running it hadn’t been worked out properly. It still hasn’t. However, True Wales is not campaigning for a return to 1997 or the interim Assembly up to 2007. Nor the proposed and intended unicameral centralised Assembly. I have made comment on these types of questions previously and I could live in a Wales that was a separate civic society. I’d campaign against it but I could live in it!
Tomorrow’s Wales has an entertaining piece about the same True Wales polling exercise in Carmarthen…
http://www.tomorrow-wales.co.uk/blog/?p=660&language=en
Daran.
Great post by tw.
We of course have yet to hear Len price defend these crap surveys, while with a straight face say he does not respect professional polling.
Marcus warner
“defend these crap surveys, ”
Simply. I have conducted commercial research surveys over many years and there are different types. There are Quantitative and Qualitative methods. You can conduct one single survey and make whatever adjustments you wish to weight the sample. The BBC sample is such. The problem is in weighting it correctly. To date the polls on referendum in Wales have not been able to match themselves to the actual result.
Then there is the issue of the question. This is very difficult as it may or may nor be the question that is actually asked, The BBC is asking an off the point question. However, it projects a trend. Useful.
The method True Wales is using is a raw random unweighted poll that is progressively undertaken. This also projects a trend. Having undertaken four of these random polls we will now introduce a second stage of questionning that has both a qualitative and quantitive aspect. This will determine a more exact opinion and will continue to project a trend. As I pointed about above, to date, the major result is APATHY. That’s the overwhelming trend. Having taken part in the Carmarthen questionning I have a better understanding of the issues that people (in actual face to face discussions, not set questions over a phone) are concerned about. It’s not just the marks on the paper that matter.
It will not matter to ‘yes’ or ‘no’ what the polls say, weighted or unweighted, if the electorate stay at home. The mismatch of the two previous polls on the referendum has been largely due to people expressing an opinion to pollsters but not going out to vote. The turnout this time may be as low as 32% and that will blow any poll results out of the water. Don’t bet on the result yet. I still hold that on the basis of the analysis I have prepared the figure is within the range of 51% to yes and a median 47.5% in favour of No. It’s all to play for.
Just a word of advice, don’t under-estimate your opponent. I’m in to win.
Blatant advert:
Twenty paintings by Len Gibbs, The Coast of Glamorgan and Beyond, Saturday 13th March, Washington Gallery, Penarth for a month. All are welcome.
Len,
Thanks for the continual update on your glittering professional career, and telling me how research is conducted.
The fact is that True Wales adopts a huge amount of heat with very little light way of conducting surveys. I have yet to see any sample sizes, indeed Tomorrow’s Wales challenges you to do so today. Will you please give us the exact amount of people who have offered an opinion to you? Your website says things like ’80% of Monmouth says no’ without sample sizes – it looks and sounds like a Maybelline advert when they say that 57% of women say it made them feel prettier (62 women were asked).
This apathy point will be made by True Wales as another diversion tactic. But the fact remains that a tiny turnout won’t matter a jot to you if the vote was NO. Elections and referendums are about the people who take part, that does not change regardless of the result. If the Yes vote wins on a small turnout, what must that say about the no vote?
Might I suggest that the people who do vote wont be your average person on the street, but more than likely people who vote regularly. I fail to see how someone apathetic to politics full stop will vote in this referendum. When you consider that, I feel that your standing outside Primark with a clip board and some sales patter is urinating in a decent gale.
In terms of not counting you out yet, I can only recall the first and only time we met. You approached me, you asked me immediately after introduction whether I had ‘read Adam Price’s diatribe in the Western Mail’. Trying to offer some good grace, I said that ‘whatever you think of the argument, there is not many in the Welsh political class who could write with such skill and intellect’. You abruptly said; “I know someone…me”.
Now you may be hiding from us all this glorious writing in an attempt for us to underestimate you, but a man of such self confidence merely made me feel that while not underestimating you, I will relish beating you in the referendum.
“don’t underestimate your opponent, I’m in to win”
What? It’s not about you, the people will decide. TW members have an overblown sense of their own importance imo. You’re just one voice. One opinion. So is Marcus. Darren. Rachel. Adam. Don’t forget that. You’re not some Churchill figure, so statements like that make you look ridiculous.
(sorry mods, I had to say it)
Ok, but that is enough Len-baiting now. Marcus should stop because he’s not very good at it, and others should desist because it’s off-putting for readers and other potential contributors. It should be perfectly possible to have a robust discussion of TW’s tactics and attitudes to surveys without resorting to catty swipes.
Thanks.
marcus warner
“very little light way of conducting surveys”
I have prepared a methodology based on a well understood and tried method of assessing views and trends that is appropriate to our requirement. The raw data is illustrative and shown, the extrapolation and assessment is not. I am satisfied with the indications to date.
“that a tiny turnout won’t matter a jot to you if the vote was NO”
If you recall when we were on the panel with Sir Emyr I made a complaint about the low numbers that attended the AWC Roadshows. Then I complained at the AWC Report presentation that the conclusion was predicated a low turnout. I have repeated this complaint in previous postings. I am against making significant changes in constitutional affairs on minority voting. If, as it appears, the referendum is going to be based on who turn-out regardless of numbers, everyone will have to accept the outcome.
“sales patter is urinating in a decent gale”
Not my choice of language but I understand your frustration at having an opponent that is prepared to do things you wouldn’t. Talking to people is the most important thing politicians can do and we are doing it.
“I said that ‘whatever you think of the argument, there is not many in the Welsh political class who could write with such skill and intellect’. You abruptly said; “I know someone…me”.”
And the BBC personnel laughed. Joke.
“I will relish beating you in the referendum.”
Enjoy the thought…it may be all you’ll ever get!
Al
“It’s not about you”
These posting s are addressed to me personally. I have said on previous occasions that my postings are mine and not official True Wales. I answer in a personal capacity. I’m in to win.
Adam Higgitt
“Len-baiting”
I don’t particularly mind but it does make it difficult to reply in a developing argument. One of the problems I have with some of the comments (not directly personal) is the assumption that every person in True Wales is incapable. When references are made that suggest my comments are without base of knowledge I include my work experience by way of explanation to support my point of view. I worked for forty years, doing varies things but there was a consistent theme, I was in the persuation business. I persuaded people to buy a product, a service, a system, me and now to vote ‘no’. For the latter I have a strategy and a set of tactics that have been defined and are being deployed. If I lose, I lose, but you can’t win if you are not in and I am in to win. I mean True Wales.
“Ok, but that is enough Len-baiting now. ”
Hear, hear. Am I the only one who is bored stiff of this thread?
“Twenty paintings by Len Gibbs, The Coast of Glamorgan and Beyond, Saturday 13th March, Washington Gallery, Penarth for a month. All are welcome.”
Len – will definitely make a point of popping in. And who knows, I may even buy one.
Adam Higgitt
Perhaps an explanation would be helpful on why I am actively defending the True Wales argument. It may assist your contributors in making comments.
I was only mildly interested in the possibility of a referendum until I realised that there wasn’t an alternative voice being expressed. I am of the opinion that there is an alternative case, the case should be put and someone should be putting it. When I met True Wales I considered it was a suitable vehicle to put the case.
If I had been on the AWC Panel I would have made a Minority Report. There is sufficient within the Report to form a Minority Report. If I were an AM I would have made the case on the floor and voted against the referendum, only because at least 35% of the electorate are against moving to Part 4. The failure of any AM to do so is a dereliction of due care.
There is a need to express the opinions of those who will vote ‘no’ and also to present reasons why people who have not yet made up their minds as to why they should either vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Currently, except for True Wales there is no such voice. For good democracy the case needs to be presented. The ‘yes’ camp needs a ‘no’ camp in order to validate it’s own arguments because if the alternative case is not put, the result will be capable of continual dispute. An argued campaign is necessary to both camps.
I am in no doubt of the task the ‘no’ camp have in winning the referendum vote. Inherently it is at a disadvantage but there is a strong base as a start and in the uncertainties of elections the reported margin difference can be sufficiently reversed. In order to win, not only does there have to a strategy to win and tactics to achieve targets and objectives but there has to be a conviction the referendum can be won. At this date there is nothing that prevents me from believing the referendum is winnable.
In making the case I have decided, when in my own name, to use evidence based arguments and to use them within the competency of my experience. I understand the rules of debate and the devices that can be properly used to advance the idea or scupper the opposing argument, and when appropriate, an acerbic comment in reply to similar.
Overall the discussions on the site have been well conducted and a useful exchange of opinions. This can only be a good thing in the context of the pros and cons of the campaign that is ahead. If people don’t want me to argue my corner all they have to do is to stop addressing me directly. When they do, and I believe a comment is necessary I will reply.
Daran Hill
“a point of popping in”
I was going to get the Gallery send the WalesHome.org Editors an invitation to the Friday 12th 6 – 8pm evening meet the Artist gathering. The event is being opened by the Sheriff of South Glamorgan and if anyone who reads the site wishes to attend, please either email me or contact the Gallery and they will send you an invitation (up to a limit). Please do buy a painting, they aren’t expensive as we want to sell as many of the twenty as possible as much of the purchase price is going to the Gallery (a charity) to support its continuance. Every purchase welcome.
To Len Gibbs
Regarding the surveys that True Wales has conducted you said that the raw data is shown.
I’ve had a look at the True Wales website and can find views given as percentages but nothing on the raw data of number of people interviewed on which those percentages are based. Can you direct me to where those figures are shown or if it’s easier reproduce them here.
You also mention that the methodology used to assess the views is “based” on a well understood and tried method. Does this mean that the methodology is the same or different to a well understood and tried method. Can you confirm which and either way are you able to provide details. Diolch.
“CapM”
We are now niggling at detail.
“raw data of number of people interviewed ”
I don’t think it is necessary to go through the technicalities of the survey . However, some explanation:
The concept is that the first few results contains in-principle the final result and each additional survey modifies/refines the result.
A fixed number of interviews are made in a fixed period of time and over an extended period of surveys a large number of interviews are undertaken, up to 1,024 in total. (That is the actual number for the formula.)
A BELL curve is produced after the first research session.
Each session produces a Bell curve that averaged with the previous others, then plotted on a linear graph indicating a trend. This shows whether ground is being gained or lost.
The mathematical formula used produces results that are usually fairly reliable within +/- parameters. The averaging method is well understood and is also tried and tested. It is more commonly used in product market research but translates to this sphere easily.
So if you want some indication to the numbers interviewed each session divide 1,024 by a probable number of interview sessions…but remember that the basis is that the first result contains the principle of the final result. Its odd but it seems to work. We have now undertaken 4 surveys with a trend pattern. I have made product launches on small numbers because the trend is repeated. Don’t get over fixed on the number interviewed. The questions asked is more important and because the interview is face to face, the results can be relied upon. And what is more, it is cheap and easy to do when you’ve got volunteers!
Hope that helps.
We prepared a predicted Bell curve for Carmarthen based on the 3 previous surveys and the known voting pattern for the area. Our resultant survey Bell was more favourable to a ‘no’ vote than we had anticipated. Don’t shout at me…I only asked the questions.
To Len Gibbs – Thanks for getting back with some info.
Regarding my niggling at the detail you were earlier in this thread pointing out to another poster that the devil is in the detail.
You point to a methodology involving Bell curves which from my unerstanding is based on two alternatives eg heads or tails, brand x or brand y. The Pie charts on True Wales website show four or five alternatives an interviewee might reply with.
I’m not sure how the tried and tested averaging method copes with the figures of 3% undecided (zero apathetic or included within the undecided ) in your first two interview sessions and 30% undecided / apathetic in your third.
I don’t exect you to provide an indepth technical explanation of how True Wales goes about it’s surveys and interprets the results. However I think it is something that should be available on the True Wales website after all The latest BBC poll and similar have information ton methodology and make up of sample that enables their veracity to be scrutinised.
You say you only asked the questions. Are you at liberty to say what those questions were?
Nomore said “True Wales will get the funding for the No Campaign, they are cross party, and there is no one else who will oppose more powers.”
A few senior people I have spoken to have said they’re pretty sure this won’t be the case. There will be some kind of set of guidelines set down by the Electoral Commission that two official campaign committees will have to abide by, dictating things like coverage, facts, fairness and general conduct.
True Wales is just a pressure group. They are the only ‘No’ voice at the moment, but the official campaign will also involve UKIP and probably Labour and Conservative MPs. Ron Davies believes there will be a Labour No campaign. True Wales will not be allowed to get their hands on any money themselves.
Adam made a point about Len baiting and a few people have been having a good go at Len on this comment thread. There’s a major point that needs to be recognised here, because Len has argued before on WalesHome that True Wales are a grassroots campaign achieving nationwide attention. They are not. The have only had about a dozen mentions in the scarcely-read Welsh media. They have had widespread attention from the political bubble and the much-maligned “Welsh political class” that congregates here, but the man and woman on the street don’t know their True Wales from their Tomorrow’s Wales.
Len Gibbs has been presented as the respectable face of True Wales, because he is accessible, likes to have his say, and can be easily reached on WalesHome. He’s also okay with devolution and wants to push for a decentralisation of power within Wales, and keeping the Assembly as it is.
However, as a group they are (according to John Dixon) doing quite different things like putting out leaflets calling for abolition of the Assembly, and as Marcus says doing dodgy surveys and ignoring or playing down the ACTUAL media surveys by professional companies, even having the cheek to question the survey methodology!
You can only give respect in an argument to those who earn it. The Welsh Ramblings blog had to earn it to get a fair hearing, but True Wales are an amateur outfit and have alot to learn.
Welsh Ramblings
“guidelines set down by the Electoral Commission that two official campaign committees will have to abide by”
We have been completely aware of the position from the beginning having written to the Electoral Commission at a very early stage and remain in correspondance with them.
“putting out leaflets calling for abolition of the Assembly,”
The Terms of Reference of True Wales do not include the abolishment of the Assembly. Although there are people who will campaign for a ‘no’ vote and may also want to abolish the Assembly, any documentation that suggests abolition is not published by or for and on behalf of True Wales.
“professional companies, even having the cheek ”
I founded a professional consultancy having had considerable experience in research for 20 years previously. There are different ways and approaches to research such as the one we use.
“True Wales are an amateur outfit”
We use the term ‘grassroots’. That is not the same as incompetent. There are experienced political people in True Wales.
“a lot to learn.”
If you want to attack the opinions of True Wales, okay, but do it evidentially. Making unsubstantiated accusations means someone beside True Wales has a lot to learn.
Len, I’ve seen you ignore evidence on this very website! You have had a hard time here and it got a little out of hand, but you previously questioned the methodology used by a BBC commissioned professional polling company…
Mr Editors:
We’re done here.
I’m signing out…
Ladies & Gentlemen, Elvis has left the building..