There must be a price for failure
Westminster '10 — By Daran Hill on May 9, 2010 5:17 pm
Time for someone to pay the price
Of course David Cameron has no need to go anywhere and neither has Nick Clegg: the former made significant gains and the latter didn’t really lose much across the UK, even if the Lib Dem results in Wales were arguably their worst in any part of the UK.
The two other parties, though, need to ask themselves some serious questions. Looking first at Plaid, it seems to me they’ve got away with little serious analysis of their performance. They have not been criticised enough. As I wrote on Friday, those results were an utter disaster and were way worse than anything Plaid has achieved in recent times. Eleven lost deposits is appalling. And in three out of four target seats the party actually went backwards. Can anybody actually remember a time before when a party came fourth in a top target seat? That’s what happened last week to Plaid in Aberconwy.
But Plaid has already changed the narrative to talk up the role they can play in a coalition government. Old hands and newbies have jumped on this idea, and are keen to denounce anyone who dares to disagree. Actually the issue which David Taylor was objecting to on Twitter wasn’t the viability of a so called “progressive alliance” (he and the Secretary of State for Wales are united in desiring one), but the claim by Elfyn Llwyd that Plaid is in negotiation with Labour. And nobody from Labour has supported Elfyn Llwyd’s assertion either. Because, however much some people in Plaid may want it to be fact, they have only a tiny, tiny chance of entering government or being dealmakers on a UK level. And based on their results on Thursday that’s pretty much all they deserve.
And while I’m ranting about what people deserve, let me turn to Gordon Brown and state quite clearly that he does not deserve to be Prime Minister any longer. It may be constitutionally correct that he and his Ministers remain in office until an alternative government is formed, but does he have to be seen to be enjoying it so much? His demeanour is desperate and off putting. He has led his party into a disaster not any sort of triumph and it’s a pretence that “Only Gordon can save the world.” A pretence that the man himself has believed for a long time.
For god’s sake, man, have some bloody dignity.
Whether Labour manages somehow or not to cling on to power, Gordon Brown should not be allowed to be any part of that government. He deserves to be ejected from Downing Street.
The following email sent to Labour supporters (and which was passed on to me by several sources) is hopefully a prelude to that ejection:
Tags: 2010 General Election, Gordon Brown, Labour, Plaid, Plaid CymruThe past few days have seen us enter a political landscape not considered possible a few short weeks ago – with the outcome of the election leading to no single party able to form a majority government. My duty as Prime Minister has been to seek to resolve this situation, but I also have another important role.
As Leader of the Labour Party I am writing to you to thank you for answering my call. We entered this poll knowing there were an unprecedented number of undecided voters.
Over the course of the campaign you knocked on millions of doors, spoke to people in their homes, their workplaces and delivered tens of millions of leaflets. I could not have asked for a better or more dedicated team, but on polling day you excelled yourselves again – and the excellent results in so many of our most marginal seats are testament to that.
Make no mistake, the voters who heard the case for Labour and chose to trust us with their vote – they heard it from you. This truly was the word of mouth election – whether face to face, via their own communities or online, people heard our message above the roar of a hostile media and a very well funded opposition.
My resolve has not, and will not, change. I pledged to do everything in my power to fight for the people of this country – to secure the recovery, to protect their livelihoods and to continue to fight for a future fair for all.
Let us not forget the passion of the hundreds of thousands of activists who took pride in Labour’s record, and our vision for the future and then with unparalleled conviction acted upon it.
Thank you.
Gordon
Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
25 Comments
“My resolve has not, and will not, change. I pledged to do everything in my power to fight for the people of this country – to secure the recovery, to protect their livelihoods and to continue to fight for a future fair for all. ”
Doesn’r sound like someone voluntarily heading for the exit door does it?
” let me turn to Gordon Brown and state quite clearly that he does not deserve to be Prime Minister any longer. It may be constitutionally correct that he and his Ministers remain in office until an alternative government is formed, but does he have to be seen to be enjoying it so much?”
Calm down, Daran. On the one hand you acknowledge that Gordon Brown SHOULD remain PM until someone else can command a majority in the Commons, yet on the other you demand his defenestration because – well, because you don’t LIKE him staying on? He stays until he goes. Deal with it.
(Oh, and you’re right that Plaid seem so far to have got away with their miserable performance last Thursday. In truth, Welsh Labour and Lib Dems too should be taking a long, hard look at last week’s results. The next few months may prove interesting.)
Absolute codswalop, Daran!
Brown is easily the best man Labour have got. Look at his level of experience. Crafty Blair saw the recession coming and got out and left the downturn to Gordon.
Who on earth could do a better job than Gordie out of any of the parties? Ed Balls – no way; Dav Milliband – lack of experience; Alan Johnston – no.
Daran.
I think you will see honest criticism about the Plaid campaign and the results, but I am not sure that having a public discussion about that is the best place to start.
I have just hosted a meeting of local activists, we have already discussed what we thought went wrong, what went right and what we needed. This will be passed onto the party, as will a whole range of views. To me, the main problem was that the information regarding target seats was clearly not as firm as we thought, but I honestly believe we were caught out by factors mainly out of control.
The economy – ultimately this was a very Westminster/UK issue. Although I think the maximum wage idea was far too abstract, it was especially so when we had far better pro business policies that needed communicating. The election was framed as who was to be in charge of the economic recovery, in that frame, it was always likely to be difficult for Plaid.
Not having Adam Price at the forefront of our campaign was a loss most definitely. I will walk to his house and drag him to a selection hustings for 2011 if I have to!
To be honest, I did clearly sound off about the results. I said it was a ‘wake up call but not a disaster’.
I have all manner of strong words and views on the campaign, but I think as a party we need to have these discussions between ourselves first. Imagine if Plaid politicians and members did make their views public on the next day – we would see the ‘split’ stories appear straight away.
I think this election certainly does highlight that Plaid’s ‘soft’ vote needs to be hardened up and probably that we need to not spread ourselves too thin. However, this election was probably the most difficult one we will ever face for the next decade – primarily because I think we will as a party will be a bit more savvy when it comes to Presidential Westminster elections and we may well have PR in those elections.
I guess that I agree with Marcus (no, not Nick) on this one: Plaid didn’t do as well as we’d hoped and thought we would, but in the face of what was, quite frankly, a media blackout in us as a party compared to the London Big 3, we did well to retain 3 seats. We as a party have to remember though, that our vote did decrease since ’05 so we’ve a lot of things to consider before our next elections. It’s important though, that we as a party have these discussions internally or there will be a very real danger posed to us.
I must say though Daran, that you talking down Plaid’s role now is completely off-the-mark. We haven’t changed our narrative as you suggest; the London Big 3 are tired and yes, they do still want to inflict savage cuts on our public services. That does not mean though, that simply because Plaid argued on these bases during the election run-up, it cannot officially join a Rainbow Coalition or agree to support the government on a bill-by-bill basis; especially because that would give us a golden opportunity to act on our manifesto pledge of speaking up for the people of Wales while the London Big 3 have only cuts, cuts and cuts on their minds. If the Libservatives do go ahead to form a government, no, Plaid will not be looked to. If however, the Labour Party (under someone other than Gordon Brown eventually) and the Lib Dems do form a coalition, they will have to look to us and other small Westminster parties to reach a majority or gain some stability for the government.
Regarding what you say of Mr Brown, I agree to some extent. I do believe that he did the right thing to remain in Downing Street. In the next few days though, he will have extremely important decisions to make. If David Cameron and Nick Clegg go ahead to form a goverent, he will have no choice but to resign and I have no doubt that ge will do this. If however, the Libservative talks break down and a Rainbow Coalition becomes likelier, what I believe he should do is to iform the people that he will remain as Prime Minister to oversee the new government coming into power, but will then make way for a new Labour leader (David Miliband?) to become Prime Minister.
Dros Gymru, CRJ.
Part of this post is clearly a riposte to my blog, which was about Labour making anti-nat noises at the same time as they are wanting to involve Plaid and the SNP in an arrangement to complement any Lab-Lib coalition. Whether Elfyn Llwyd is lying about talking to Labour is not an issue I can comment on as I have not seen any statement from him saying he or Salmond have talked to Labour, the SNP comment was that they were talking to civil servants, with no party mentioned. So my conclusion that people are indulging in tribalism isn’t far-fetched, particularly as the string of comments on the issue also says things like ‘IWJ and Salmond are deluded’. All i’m saying is that there is an alternative. Plaid had a crap election (quote if you like) but they stayed on 3. SNP likewise failed, but they stayed on 6.
How come Plaid ‘don’t deserve’ a role, but the Lib Dems who actually lost seats can be the kingmakers?
The truth is performance does not matter in terms of who gets represented. Labour took a hiding in 2007 but still got to lead the government. Plaid simply haven’t taken a hiding or even declined from any meaningful level. Their share of vote is down but the seats stayed the same. Yes their amount of lost deposits is dreadful, but it seems like you’re just having a pop to try and balance things out- which is obviously completely acceptable and welcome, but means the point about SNP-Plaid helping (in an admittedly small way) to keep the Tories out (rather than being talked about as being deluded) remains valid.
I don’t think there is any need for Plaid to publicly dissect themselves over an election they were clearly sidelined from. Their result is bad and needs to be looked at internally, but there isn’t any kind of problem with their campaign or message.
Read the opinion polls, there is a direct drop from 15% before the leaders debates to 9% after them, then settling at 11%. We can argue all we want or call it an excuse or whinging, but rational people would conclude that the evidence is right in front of us. I’d love to have some problem with Plaid’s campaign to scrutinise or talk about but there was nothing wrong with it. Their drop in vote IS media related because you can compare the polling data.
Reacting to being excluded, now that’s a challenge that needs addressing, otherwise Plaid will see themselves become even more marginalised from UK-wide elections in the long-term.
“I have just hosted a meeting of local activists, we have already discussed what we thought went wrong, what went right and what we needed. This will be passed onto the party, as will a whole range of views. To me, the main problem was that the information regarding target seats was clearly not as firm as we thought, but I honestly believe we were caught out by factors mainly out of control.”
This point makes sense!
If you consider the European elections in June 2009, that’s the closest election before May 6th 2010. Plaid came top in all 4 of their target seats, at a time when they didn’t do as well as they had predicted. To me that clearly says that some other factor in the run-up to the election affected their tally, and nothing from their manifesto or campaign leapt out as sounding off alarms. It isn’t rocket science.
The fact is President Brown has lost a vote of confidence from the British people and should resign anything less shows him to be man of no principle. As for this “progressive alliance”? that sounds like a dogs dinner that will go nowhere. Lib Dems dont trust Labour because of their record on civil liberties, whilst Plaid and the SNP see Labour as just using the same neo liberal policies as Thatcher, whilst Labour think that the “nats” are just a bunch of Fascists! As much as in common as the Tories!.
Ramblings the Liberals won about 20% of the Welsh vote (if I am correct) and lost a seat whilst Plaid got 11% and won a seat. It seems that FPTP benefited Plaid in a small way!
” Plaid didn’t do as well as we’d hoped and thought we would, but in the face of what was, quite frankly, a media blackout in us as a party compared to the London Big 3, we did well to retain 3 seats”, says Cerith. Let’s nail this Plaid hype.
Yes, the Nationalist party leaders were excluded from the UK leadership debates – because they weren’t UK party leaders. BUT Plaid was given fair coverage in ALL the Welsh tv election coverage I saw (and I’m inferring radio likewise); and they had the same number of Welsh Party Election Broadcasts as “the London Big 3″ [sic]. So, since they had parity of coverage across the Welsh news media (covering the whole area where Plaid were standing candidates) throughout the election campaign, can we please stop hearing whingeing about “a media blackout in us as a party”? It’s tosh.
Thanks!
Gez wrote: “On the one hand you acknowledge that Gordon Brown SHOULD remain PM until someone else can command a majority in the Commons, yet on the other you demand his defenestration because – well, because you don’t LIKE him staying on? He stays until he goes. Deal with it.”
The constitutional situation is one thing, the desperation of a man in bunker mentality is quite another.
Senn wrote: “Brown is easily the best man Labour have got. Look at his level of experience. Crafty Blair saw the recession coming and got out and left the downturn to Gordon.”
If you want to try and construct 1000 words to support those two ridiculous theories, then we’ll happily publish it on WalesHome. Small point: Blair hardly left Downing St at a time of his own choosing, did he?
Marcus wrote: “I think you will see honest criticism about the Plaid campaign and the results, but I am not sure that having a public discussion about that is the best place to start.”
I can accept that. It’s just I didn’t think you’d been given enough external context to enable that to happen meaningfully. People in other parties were actually laughing at you on Friday – and not out of relief.
Welsh Ramblings wrote: “I don’t think there is any need for Plaid to publicly dissect themselves over an election they were clearly sidelined from. Their result is bad and needs to be looked at internally, but there isn’t any kind of problem with their campaign or message.”
Big mistake, my friend. You need a root and branch examination. You didn’t just miss out, you went into reverse in 3 of your 4 target seats. That shows a massive problem to me.
Cerith wrote: “I must say though Daran, that you talking down Plaid’s role now is completely off-the-mark. We haven’t changed our narrative as you suggest;”
I suggest you’ve not changed the policy narrative, but the narrative around the results. With regard to now, it is clear there are lots of you who want to be part of a so called “progressive consensus.” And you can want it all you want because at the moment it just ain’t happening. Plaid are 3 MPs in 650 – it would be like Labour dealing with Sylvia Herman, Caroline Lucas and whoever the new Alliance person is. Indeed, to build this mythical “progressive consensus” would probably need everyone I’ve just mentioned, plus you, plus Tom, Dick and Harry too.
The way I see it people are desparate to be included in the narrative now, even though circumstances dictate otherwise. It’s 90% likely that current events will pass without Plaid having any impact or influence at all. That may be galling, but it’s the way it is. So, as I see it, Plaid are keen to write themselves into the current narrative as best you can so that you can say you tried to stop a Conservative government happening. All of which fits with your objectives, but not necessarily the facts.
Maybe if you’d picked up a few MPs, this might have been different. Elections are about momentum and not just numbers. That’s why David Cameron’s in pole position now and why he will almost definitely become Prime Minister. And there’s little – if not anything at all – which you can do about it.
Perhaps some calm reflection is in order?
This was an odd election, a multi-party system has emerged in an electoral system designed for two parties with a media fixated on three party leaders – and their wives.
I doubt we’ll properly understand what went on for some time (at the publiciation of the British Election Survey).
Now in terms of Plaid, clearly they did badly. Though not everywhere, the good Dr Trystan (Davies) showed that irrational effort can pay off.
We’ve not yet had enough experience under a devolved system to say for sure, but it does seem that the international experience applies here: people vote differently in ‘national’ and ‘regional’ elections. Let’s see what happens next year but it may be that Plaid will have to reconcile themselves to being a less relevant force in Westminster elections than in Assembly elections.
I’m afraid I agree with Daran about a root-and-branch review. To assume that there “isn’t any kind of problem with their campaign or message” is an invitation to sleepwalk into disaster. Everything must be looked at.
I find it incredibly dismaying that there has been such a rush to put a gloss on what happened on Thursday. Only John Dixon and my boss, Bethan Jenkins, so far appear to appreciate the value of complete honesty with ourselves. This inquest will – and should – take time to do properly.
Dunc.
You are going to be more specific, because you are arguing that bethan and john dixon are lone honest voices in this, when that simply is not true. I haven’t read Bethan’s views so cannot comment, but John Dixon speaking sense is as standard. Having spoke to a lot of Plaid people, from the top to the bottom, sweeping this under the carpet seems unlikely.
Unless I am reading what you said wrong?
Like I said, having a bun fight on Wales Home is not the place to start the necessary strategic overhaul that is needed.
Speaking as a Plaid Cymru member (and County Councillor), I wholeheartedly agree with Daran in his analysis of the results. What happened in Mon, Ceredigion and Aberconwy was disasterous, and cannot be explained away by the leaders debate. If there is to be another British election in the coming months – as is likely – then we will have to re-think our strategy. We are a small party, with meagre resources, and need to think about how those resources are best used.
However, I disagree with Daran’s analysis of our importance in any future coalition. The numbers mean that any coalition which includes Labour must also include the SNP, SDLP, Alliance, Greens and Plaid Cymru. Now this isn’t looking at all likely at the moment, but I don’t understand the argument that to talk about it is to fantasise.
Where you’re partially right is when you talk about Plaid Cymru’s narrative. It may be vital to our success in next year’s elections for us to position ourselves as part of an unfulfilled “progressive consensus”. This is not a matter of making ourselves feel important, but rather an attempt to give the voters a sense of clarity about our aims.
It is vital that during the next general election, we are able to categorically say to the voters that in the event of a hung parliament, not only will we stand up for Wales, but we will also stand against the Tories. This will help us in constituencies where last Thursday’s result was too close for comfort – Arfon and Dinefwr – but may also be crucial in our target seats, Ceredigion and Mon.
I don’t think Daran Hill was saying Plaid are fantasising, but he is suggesting Elfyn Llwyd is not being truthful if he is telling people he’s been talking to Labour.
Can anyone link to a single report of Llwyd saying he’s talked to Labour? Having followed the coverage closely i’m not even sure Llwyd has even made that claim.
Of course, looking at things logically an anti-Tory government would HAVE to involve Plaid and the SNP and even the Green party’s sole MP. The numbers demand it.
Ruling that out on the grounds of disliking Plaid means inviting Tory rule. And considering the strategy Labour have just fought the election on in Wales, that’s nuts.
And when Dyfrig states “What happened in Mon, Ceredigion and Aberconwy was disasterous, and cannot be explained away by the leaders debate.” I think I understand where you are coming from, surely one single event cannot be responsible for those lapses? Just what has happened then? As has been said above, the Plaid opinion poll (from the same company) changed from
March 2010- 14% (a historic high and 5 seats according to electoral calculus)
to
April 19th 2010- 9%
What happened in the space of those few weeks, apart from the leaders debate?
The Lib Dems in Wales:
March 2010- 12% (below Plaid Cymru)
to
April 19th 2010- 29%
Did anything else happen to make Plaid’s vote collapse?? Was there any kind of policy announcement that created a 5% drop? What happened to the other parties poll ratings in Wales during those weeks?
Was there correspondingly any kind of Lib Dem announcement in that space that could have more than doubled their Wales voting intentions for Westminster?
I followed the election campaign to the letter and indeed was fighting it on the ground. There was no other event in Wales during the period in between the March and April 19th polls (which were both by the same company with same methodology and samples) except for manifesto launches. And i’m not sure manifesto launches can generate 17% swings!
I think WalesHome is an entirely valid forum for Plaid supporters to discuss this. Their internal goings on will need to be as secret and unreported as the current Tory-Liberal talks.
By the way, the final opinion polls for Plaid on May 4th put them on 10.8% (a slight recovery after the leaders debates had died down perhaps?) which was within the margin of error of their actual result (11.6%), so that particular poll looks relatively accurate, and indeed is within the margin of error for the other 3 main parties as well.
Marcus,
You want me to be specific, but then you don’t want me to start a bun fight?
All I asked for was an end to all those bright-eyed and bushy-tailed Tweets and Facebook statuses. You say you and local activists in your area have already worked it all out and put it to bed. I’m sorry, but I just don’t buy that. It’s going to take time to gather all the data and then sift it properly (after deciding the best method if sifting) before arriving at such a conclusion.
I’m not up for a bunfight. I just can’t abide complacency or – worse – delusion. I haven’t said that’s happened yet, but the social media signs are not good.
Chaps, no need for a public bun fight here…
Lee wrote: “Now in terms of Plaid, clearly they did badly. Though not everywhere, the good Dr Trystan (Davies) showed that irrational effort can pay off.”
A credible result indeed. But not a patch on what Amy Kitcher achieved for the Lib Dems in Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney – now that’s what I call a swing.
Dyfrig wrote – “It is vital that during the next general election, we are able to categorically say to the voters that in the event of a hung parliament, not only will we stand up for Wales, but we will also stand against the Tories. This will help us in constituencies where last Thursday’s result was too close for comfort – Arfon and Dinefwr – but may also be crucial in our target seats, Ceredigion and Mon.”
The anti-Conservative message should have been a lot clearer, yes. That’s a key reason why Labour pretty much held up in Wales.
Dinefwr’s result wasn’t bad actually, considering the rise in the Conservative vote. Jonathan’s explanations on his blog are very plausible: http://www.jonathanedwards.org.uk/what-happens-next
Oh, and you might want to think about some new targets. I think you may have lost Ceredigion in Westminster for a decade.
Illtyd wrote: “Can anyone link to a single report of Llwyd saying he’s talked to Labour? Having followed the coverage closely i’m not even sure Llwyd has even made that claim.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/the_politics_show_wales
47 minutes in
OK fair do’s, but it’s quite possible he has talked to Labour. The Lib Dems, for example, had a little-reported meeting with Labour on the weekend.
To be honest the result in Dinefwr was closer than in 2005 for a number of reasons. One of which was a rise in Tory support. In that constituency the Labour vote actually went down, so I am not sure that an anti Tory message would have been the real key. I think it was a lot to do with the fact that the vote was always going to dip somewhat with a new candidate and the general rise of the Tory vote having an impact. I would expect Jonathan Edwards, who seems one of the more capable new Welsh MPs, to start building a strong base after the election.
I agree with Daran that in the national context and the way Plaid performed generally on Thrusday their performance in Dinefwr was actually quite good.
Illtyd, he may of course be talking to people now. It’s all a matter of pedantics, you see
Heads did go Brown has gone………
“Did anything else happen to make Plaid’s vote collapse?? Was there any kind of policy announcement that created a 5% drop? What happened to the other parties poll ratings in Wales during those weeks?
Was there correspondingly any kind of Lib Dem announcement in that space that could have more than doubled their Wales voting intentions for Westminster?
I followed the election campaign to the letter and indeed was fighting it on the ground. There was no other event in Wales during the period in between the March and April 19th polls (which were both by the same company with same methodology and samples) except for manifesto launches. And i’m not sure manifesto launches can generate 17% swings!”
Well, Illtyd PC fought a dismal campaign based on “standing up for Wales” in a kind of teenage nationalist sense, flirted with the Tories and were fronted by 2 lead spokespeople who were incoherent and limited (Helen Mary was much better when let out and Eurfyl ap Gwilym was of course a star). PC voters are surely interested in what PC MPs will do in Westminster other than fight for the best budget settlement. They want to know about macro economics, about welfare reform and foreign policy issues which are all non devolved; if you don’t talk about these (and it’s not as though PC don’t have policy) it’s not at all clear about the pratical benefits of having PC MPs, especially in a hung Parliament when their votes might count.
Just a minor correction needed. The Plaid vote share in Aberconwy increased compared to the imaginary election held by UK Polling report and Rallings and Thresher in 2005. This was the result every media outlet referred to throughout the campaign never mentioning, or rarely, the Assembly result. It was one factor in a relatively poor result.
There are some obvious weaknesses in the local party which can be addressed. We obviously have to look at the new systems that were introduced prior to 2007 and have never been used in a westminster election before. They indicated us heading for a good result right up until polling day.
Other factors in the result were the presence of very strong Labour and Lib Dem candidates. In particular the Lib Dem strength in one part of the constituency hurt us.
The idea that Plaid should have been more anti-Tory is absurd. There is a much more substantial group of voters who are happy to switch between us and Tories than we like to think.
There is little point talking about policies we cannot deliver better to talk about devolving more powers to wales and what we do with them.
The problems identified with our local campaign can be put right fairly easily and we are well placed to pick up support from Conservative and Lib dem supporters if the coalition becomes unpopular.
The problem for the “left” including Labour is the coalition will become unpopular with the Daily Mail voters first. Where will those people go? It may also be quite popular with voters if they can push through the raise in income tax thresholds. The key issue for Plaid to address is how we peel off a section of the voters who backed one or other of the coalition partners. Shouting “the Tories, the Tories” very loudly never cut it in the 80s and won’t cut it now.