Contempt agenda revealed by election dates ‘fix’
Bubble — By Daran Hill on July 5, 2010 5:34 pmSOMETIMES,when you’re about to write a blog post, you get a press release that completely sums up how you feel. Today Elfyn Llwyd speaks for me – and plenty of you too, I’m sure.
Contempt agenda revealed by election dates ‘fix’
Plaid Cymru Parliamentary leader Elfyn Llwyd MP has condemned the Con-Dem coalition at the UK Government as they announced that the next two Welsh Assembly election dates will coincide with major UK votes.
The Welsh Assembly election in May 2011 will take place on the same date as a UK referendum on whether the alternative vote should be used in Westminster elections, while a fixed term Parliament will mean that the next Westminster election will be held in May 2015 on the date scheduled for the Welsh Assembly election that year.
Mr Llwyd said: “This decision to fix the dates, and I really do mean ‘fix’ the dates, on which elections are held clearly show the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats contempt for the people of Wales.
“By holding the Assembly elections on the same day, firstly as the Alternative Vote referendum in 2011, and secondly the same day as the Westminster elections from 2015, will inevitably mean that there will be less discussion and scrutiny of the very important issues decided upon in Cardiff.
“It is clear from this decision that the Tory – Lib Dem coalition in London are using any opportunity possible to undermine the excellent work of the Welsh Assembly in Cardiff.
“The Welsh Government wrote formally to the Tory – Lib Dem coalition in London to ask them not to hold the AV referendum on the same day as the next Welsh Assembly elections.
“The Secretary of State has the power to vary the date of the Welsh elections if she wishes. Will she do that if requested by the Welsh Government or is she content to be Westminster’s voice in Wales rather than Wales’ voice in the cabinet?
“In setting the dates in this way, the Con-Dem Government has ignored good advice from the Welsh Assembly and the recommendations of the Gould and Arbuthnott reviews that this could cause serious problems and undermine democracy.
“There is no good reason why the AV vote needs to be held next Spring when there is a further four years before the next Westminster election takes place.
“We believe that Welsh issues should be the main focus of a Welsh election.
“As Mr Clegg admitted in the House of Commons, he has not even spoken or consulted with the devolved administrations about these issues.
“This is not a respect agenda that the Tories and Lib Dems have towards Wales – it is a contempt agenda.”
Tags: Assembly, election, Elfyn Llwyd, Plaid Cymru
Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
18 Comments
well said that man. Total disgrace. What’s worse all the fuss the lib dems and tories kicked up in the assembly about having a referendum on the same day as the assembly election now just looks like a piblicity stunt. No consistency, no care for welsh democracy and no care for real reform.
Now this is what happens when you run press releases.
“This decision to fix the dates, and I really do mean ‘fix’ the dates, on which elections are held clearly show the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats contempt for the people of Wales.”
The selection of these dates do not indicate a ‘contempt for the people of Wales’ – that’s an over-top and ill-considered reaction.
no Rob, because with the Dems and Tories it’s : say one thing in opposition, do another in Power. They don’t care about Wales. Peter Black and Kirsty Williams, opponents of the Powers+Assembly Elections plot, were jumping up today to defend the AV+Assembly Elections plan, saying “there is more to life than Wales” etc. In other words, since we’re in power in Westminster, all this playing at being Welsh politicians is a bit silly and irrelevant.
It does indicate contempt because the UK Govt Ministers will have been told by their advisers about the devolved elections. There is no way the fact there are devolved elections would not be known at the time those decisions have made.
Plenty of former Ministers and their staff have written on Wales Home. I am sure they would all confirm that when in office they were told when devolved elections were to take place.
I find the idea that it might be an “oversight” rather than contempt even more unsettling.
No, what’s happened is they wouldve known outright and simply don’t think the devolved elections are important enough to sway their precious referendum on AV (a system that neither UK governing party actually wants). This deserves an even stronger reaction. I don’t think the public will pay a moments attention but you can be sure that when the dates do roll around there will be monumental levels of confusion and frustration, leading to disaffection with the electoral process in an era when we have been promised a new politics. It is the duty of the constitutionally aware to yell from the roof tops about this. After all, democracy in our western system is meant to be more important than the economy or health or anything else.
They are mismanaging British democracy because they do not give a stuff about the devolved nations.
What is more worrying is that the decision was probably more about masking the budget impact on the English Council elections than any concern the ConDems have for Wales or Scotland, as this is where they both have more to lose.
Going to be fun, campaigning for the party, but no in the referendum, not because I don’t want AV but because it will be tied into the boundary stitch-up. Try explaining that on the doorstep to an electorate already hostile to politics.
If you read Brian Taylor’s blog it seems that under the Scotland Act the Presiding Officer of the Scottish parlaiment could vary the date of the Scottish parliament election by a month in 2015. All this nonsense of contempt for Wales and lack of ‘respect’ is just way over the top. If you have a fixed term Parliament of 5 years then the election should be in 2015. Rather than rabbiting on like Ali Gee about ‘respect’ a rational, level headed politician would be arguing that five years is too long for a fixed term for any Parliament. Instead that argument will be lost because of general mirth and merriment amongst most of the media at the tone of press releases such as the one above.
In 1979 the General Election was held on the same day as the Welsh district council elections. It produced the highest turn probably ever for council elections in Wales. In my own ward the Liberal candidate who topped the poll had about 4000 votes out of a possible 4200. She also polled over 14000 as the Liberal candidate in the UK General election. Possibly what might be worrying the nationalists in both Wales and Scotland is that a high turnout in 2015 could mean ,meltdown time at the devolved level as thousands of voters in both countries return to Labour to express their anger at the policies of the Coalition at Westminster.
As for 2011 what’s the problem? In the States and many other countries referenda are often held on the same day as elections. Most voters would probably rather see the £17 million saved spent on something else. Who knows it might even lead to a majority of Welsh voters actually taking part in an Assembly election. It’s also all a bit ironic given the decision in 1999 to hold the first Assembly election on the same day as the unitary authority election in order to increase turnout. It also enabled Plaid to win seats such as Rhondda and Islwyn as bvoters punished soem good Labour canAssembly candidates for the perceived failings of the Local labour controlled council.
“Possibly what might be worrying the nationalists in both Wales and Scotland is that a high turnout in 2015 could mean meltdown time at the devolved level as thousands of voters in both countries return to Labour to express their anger at the policies of the Coalition at Westminster.”
Am I the only one who finds this incredibly patronising? Well there must have been some reason why Labour lost the General Election. Shall we leave it to the voters to decide if and when they will come rushing back to a party that is currently floundering on its busted scaremongering and possesses all the momentum of a snail that finds itself on the tip of a gradually hardening Prittstick?
Jeff, whether it is intended or not, you sound you believe like voters will always return to Labour. Sure, you have history on your side. But it’s a Hell of a presumption. And all of this doomsaying aimed at nationalists – you never miss an opportunity, and nor do a growing number of Labourites. We thank you for your concern. But are you repeating this over and over just to reassure yourselves?
You’re reading into Jeff’s statement what you want to, Dunc. I don’t think he’s suggesting voters will always return to Labour, merely that they may do so in an instance where two of the three main UK parties are enjoined in a programme of cuts deeper and more drastic than most voters contemplated (or were educated about by any party during the election).
The polls (the UK ones, not last week’s ITV Wales one) are illuminating; Labour has remained in the mid 30s, the Conservatives have hardened a little and the Lib Dems have dipped. When the cuts kick in, and providing Labour develops a critique that is not merely seen as opportunistic, Jeff’s scenario is plausible.
I know every single expression of support for Labour by a Labour supporter must be automatically branded as “arrogance”, “patronising” or “tribalist” but sometimes – just sometimes – it might be nice to just leave it alone.
I’m sorry, but when someone begins a sentence “possibly what might be worrying the nationalists”, where is the evidence to back this? Who says the nationalists are worried? Where does this come from? When there is no discernible evidence, it is surprising when political opponents begin guessing at ulterior motives?
I haven’t used words like arrogance or tribalist. I used patronising, and I used it specifically because that is what I inferred from Jeff’s comment. If there was a failure at all here, it was in Jeff’s ability to communicate. Presumably Plaid members can scrutinise what Labour members say and be allowed to draw conclusions from it without being pulled up on whether it is right to argue or not? This just sounds like the application of double standards.
Jeff’s more than capable of speaking for himself, but a little conjecture on his part about why Plaid have reacted so strongly to should not prompt such an OTT reply.
There’s an argument here – namely that a referendum will induce people who don’t normally vote in the Assembly elections to come out and vote, and that those people might disproportionately vote for UK parties. Personally, I find the idea that the referendum will drive high turnout to be slightly implausible – I suspect constitutional fine-tuning leaves most voters cold, more’s the pity. But I think it is entirely reasonable to suggest that people who don’t vote normally in an Assembly election may not vote strongly on, if you like, Welsh grounds. So if turnout does rise on the back of this referendum, there’s a good chance Plaid might lose out.
You say Plaid members can scrutinise what Labour members say and be allowed to draw conclusions from it without being pulled up. I trust this means that Labour members can offer their own theories about the statements of Plaid without all the usual cliched charges of taking the voters for granted being trotted out? There’s a reasoned argument here – let’s deal with it on its merits.
Ok, how’s about this then – postpone the Assembly election till June and hold the two referenda in May. That way you’ll be mixing like with like and we might even get some more Uk coverage of the Welsh referendum as well. Just a thought
I seem to be missing something.
Why don’t folks want these types of important questions decided on a regular ballot when turnout is highest vs. a separate initiative where very few ever bother to vote?
I know that cynical RW (Republican) politicians in the USA forced special elections to pass white-hot misunderstood initiatives creating abortion restrictions or balanced budget state constitutional amendments, but most states have enacted legislation forcing those initiatives to be part of a general election ballot.
I would think folks would want those important questions decided by more than 20-30% of the population.
In these tight budgetary times when the cost of holding an election is certainly in the hundreds of thousands of pounds, does it not make god fiscal sense to reduce/consolidate the total number of them?
I’m basing my argument on what happened between 1981 and 1995 as the Tories were wiped out by people returning to Labour after deserting the party in 1979. Compare the County Council election results of 1977 with those of 1981 and 1985. In 1981 one of the reasons why I was able to beat the Liberal who polled 4000 voters only two years earlier was Mrs Thatcher. They could have gone to Plaid but instead they returned to Labour. Both the You Gov poll and the fact that many people have actually joined the Labour party since May 6th suggests that this is a plausible scenario. All the evidence suggests that Plaid’s vote increases when there is dissatisfaction with the Labour Party at either a UK level or local level. It is more often than not a protest vote which then returns to Labour. It will be intersting to see if Plaid ,for example, keep control of Caerphilli CBC in 2012.
One of the problems with many Plaid supporters is that like Marxists in the early 20th century they believe that their ideas will eventually prevail once the false consciousness of the voters has been stripped away. Becoming part of the coalition in Cardiff Bay at a time when a Labour government in Westminster was increasingly unpopular has produced an air of triumphalism amongst some Plaid members. To argue that somehow the party will make a breakthrough in 2011 flies completely in the face of history, opinion polls and actual election results. There are only two results possible in 2011. Either Labour will have a majority which is a tall order given the electoral system or Labour will be the largest party in the Assembly. Given that Plaid will probably not want to be associated with either the Tories or the Liberal Democrats this leaves again only two possible scenarios. A minority Labour Government or another coalition with Labour as the much stronger senior partner . Given the scale of the cuts the real debate within Plaid should be which scenario do members believe serves the Party’s long term interests. All of this must be incredibly frustrating for those who passionately believe in independence for Wales but I’m afraid that it is the reality. Plaid really needs to build up a party organisation in most parts of Wales and recruit some outstanding candidates if it wishes to make any breakthrough. Many of the election results in May showed that for many voters in Wales ,Plaid is an irrelevance. Given the unpopularity of the Labour government in Westminster and disillusionment amongst many Labour voters Plaid should have done much better. In many valley seats Labour’s vote might be thousands less than in 1997 but those lost voters did not go to Plaid or anyone else for that matter. Coming a poor third in constituencies such as Ogmore which Plaid needs to win to be a real ‘Party of Wales’. with less than 4000 votes and a poor fourth behind the Tories shows how high the hill to power is. This figure with a candidate who conducted an aggressive campaign was 5000 less than Plaid polled in 1979.
On the other issue of the AV referendum I still believe that individuals who use the word ‘contempt’ and phrases such as ‘lack of respect’ are going right over the top. With the result that valid arguments against the length of the fixed term Parliament and even AV will be lost .
“Contempt” seems a much more accurate term to apply to the way the decision has been arrived at rather than “respect”, the term Cameron has coined for how he sees the relationship between the UK’s parliaments and assemblies working.
Unless he’s using “respect” in a one way obey and defer sense.
The 2015 clash raises some different matters from the 2011 clash.
During the Westminister election campaign we had Tory NHS posters in Wales even though health is a devolved matter and let’s not forget poor old Julie from Llandudno who was a big fan of Cameron’s education policy.
On contacting the Electoral Commission about the deliberate conflation/confusion of devolved and reserved matters on the Conservative website I was informed that there was no sanction against it. So is 2015 going to be a similar free-for-all with parties mixing and matching their devolved/reserved electoral promises?
I just wonder if those that are worrying about the votes being on the same day are underestimating the electorate – perhaps a little patronising of our fellow citizens?
This is just a ridiculous comment!! Looking for injustice and grievance where there is none (as usual!).
It costs a lot of money for elections to take place so why not combine them? Sensible, at a time when stringent economy is needed. Perhaps if there had been less profligacy and more economy over the 13 years of Labour government then we would not be in the mess we are now in, needing all the “cuts”.
It is also insulting to the people of Wales that they may not be able to think about two issues at the same time. If Elwyn Llwyd is not able to multi-task then he is in the wrong job.
“If Elwyn Llwyd is not able to multi-task then he is in the wrong job.”
It’s not a case of multi-tasking; it’s about the information given to the electorate. During last May’s general election, the Tories in particular showed a complete lack of principle in their presentation of policy, deliberately muddling reserved and devolved matters.