The next road lies before us
Bubble — By Jonathan Edwards MP on July 3, 2010 7:00 am
Fast forward: Jonathan Edwards says Plaid knows which way to go
I SUPPOSE I should start this article by eating humble pie. Despite my pre-election prophecy of near-meltdown for Labour in Wales, the party remarkably managed to hold on to 26 Welsh seats.
In mitigation, I wasn’t the only one to underplay the remarkable ability of the Labour party in Wales to beat the odds. My constituency neighbour Peter Hain admitted on election night that the result ”exceeded all expectations”. The Labour national vote fell by 6.5% (0.3% higher than the UK average), but in first-past-the-post elections it is seats won that counts, of course.
I have to admit that Westminster has been a very strange place since the election. Despite losing office, the Parliamentary Labour Party seems to be in euphoric mood. Perhaps the pre-election words of Mervyn King that the victors would find themselves out of office for a generation raises hopes that they might be back in power once again in the not-too-distant future. The current political trajectory of the new Westminster Government certainly makes a Labour UK victory in 2015 more than just a distinct possibility.
Even stranger has been Labour’s Damascene conversion to a range of issues. I must admit it has been somewhat strange to see even the most ardent unionist among the Welsh Labour contingent rallying to the call for an early referendum, and Barnett reform. Quite where they have been for the previous 13 years is another matter. But in the interests of the new politics, I welcome their conversion wholeheartedly.
However, the major strategic shift we have seen from the Labour party since the Westminster election has two primary strategic aims. The first is to polarise the political debate between Labour in Wales and the new ConDem coalition in London and, secondly, it attempts to triangulate my party by placing Labour firmly on our traditional territory. It’s on the latter that I wish to concentrate on for the remainder of this piece.
The recent YouGov poll for ITV Wales that reported a surge in Wales for Labour of 10% indicates that the strategy has so far been successful. The First Minister, who was docile during the Westminster campaign, probably to protect him in the expectation of a bad result, has finally stirred. If he continues at this rate we might have to call him y Mab Darogan.
Considering all this you would think that Plaid strategists would be in a state of panic. For Plaid, however, politics is far more than just electoral results. One concern is for political objectives and outcomes which are in the national interest. After all, party leader Ieuan Wyn Jones promised when the coalition was formed to create a new politics in Wales – a politics which would elevate the specific needs of Wales to the top of the Welsh political agenda. As we celebrate three years of the One Wales agreement, we can toast his foresight and his influence in ensuring that the Welsh Government, including the Labour party, has delivered on Plaid’s agenda.
The referendum on attaining political sovereignty over devolved fields, a growing consensus on the need for the devolution of extra policy fields, a new language Measure, structuring the NHS on a Plaid model, developing our transport infrastructure and the focus on affordable housing and sustainable communities – these all indicate that the aims of the national movement are being achieved both directly and indirectly. The condemnation of the One Wales deal by former Pontypridd MP Kim Howells was somewhat over the top when he said that the deal would transport the “nationalists to the gates of independence”. However, his suggestion that Labour’s decision to work with Plaid would effectively act as a vehicle for the aspirations of the national movement holds a great deal of truth.
Considering this, readers would undoubtedly expect me to firmly advocate a One Wales 2 agreement after the 2011 National Assembly elections. However, I believe it is imperative that the party maintains a position of being able to negotiate an alternative deal. The lesson of 2007 was that having two options enabled us as a party to get the maximum possible deal for Wales from one of the London parties. The primary motive for Plaid at all times must be achieving the best possible deal for Wales and that is why we must keep all options open after the next election.
Tags: One Wales, Plaid Cymru, Politics, Welsh Assembly Government
Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
37 Comments
An odd decision on Plaid’s part, as it basically says to the electorate that if you don’t want the condems brought into the Government of Wales then you must vote Welsh Labour. A Plaid vote risks a Rainbow coalition where Plaid will be outnumbered by the new right of centre alliance whose strings will be pulled by their colleagues in London. A very strange ambition for Plaid to want to cosy up to an alliance hell bent on destroying the very heart of the Welsh public services Plaid claim to cherish. I can think of a few principled Plaid members of the left who yet again find themselves feeling very uncomfortable indeed with the position taken by their so called socialist party.
Bingo! He said “London parties”! Bless.
It’s not surprising that Jonathan should claim that “As we celebrate three years of the One Wales agreement, we can toast [IWJ's] foresight and his influence in ensuring that the Welsh Government, including the Labour party, has delivered on Plaid’s agenda.” He would say that, wouldn’t he?
Better to big up Plaid’s role in the coalition than acknowledge the fact that it’s Welsh Labour that has led the coalition, and that it’s Welsh Labour’s manifesto commitments that have formed the basis of One Wales and of WAG’s programme. Of course Welsh Labour made concessions to Plaid, just as Cam made ‘concessions’ to Clegg. The issues, in both cases, are – which Party makes fewer concessions? And which Party will benefit at the next election?
“However, I believe it is imperative that the party maintains a position of being able to negotiate an alternative deal. The lesson of 2007 was that having two options enabled us as a party to get the maximum possible deal for Wales from one of the London parties. The primary motive for Plaid at all times must be achieving the best possible deal for Wales and that is why we must keep all options open after the next election.”
Bang on. I do wonder where the ConDem coalition leaves the state of any potential Lab/Lib pact in 2011 though?
I must admit I do think we in Plaid need to find a new narrative regarding Labour’s conversions to new positions that back up Plaid’s long term positions. Yes, we can point to conversions, hypocrisy etc, but frankly all that will be water off a duck’s back to most Labour MPs. I mean yesterday Alun Davies AM tweeted that Labour voters should vote against AV, two months after it was a manifesto committment.
As I blogged about, I reckon 10% of that 42% is soft and up for grabs.
David/Gez – You boys both seem cocksure of yourselves, both in your electoral prospects next year and in predicting how Plaid’s left wing will react to this piece. Good luck with that.
Excellent piece, Joni. Sets the tone nicely. Diolch yn fawr.
Gez,
I would take a more mature attitude to coalitions than that. A formal and proper coalition means taking responsibility for both failures and successes. I would argue that both parties in One Wales have been quite mature in recognising that, and it is a boon for One Wales ministers that they have done so also.
Leighton’s laptops?
He’s no Adam Price is he?
Not waving but drowning, I think. This is the message of a party that has most eggs in baskets in Labour seats just as Labour has got itself a convincing, opposition reason for seeking people’s support next year.
With the cuts in full effect, Labour might look to take seats like Llanelli, Carmarthen West, Blaenau Gwent Aberconwy, Preseli Pembs and even Arfon (leaving still one list seat). They might not need a coalition partner.
People haven’t heard from Plaid much in the last three years – that’s the real reason why they did so badly in the General Election. Plaid are bound to come second, by dint of not being either the Lib Dems or the Tories, but even if they can play kingmaker again it is difficult to know what they might demand. No-one is going to entertain a pledge to devolve more powers weeks after gaining law-making powers.
A very tribal piece that does a poor job of glossing over a weak strategic position for Plaid.
excellent piece joni and i think it sums up an interesting aspect of plaid which is that for large parts for them it is more about the project and the delivery of aspirations than elected members. They will look back on One Wales as a positive thing having delieverd much of their aims, especially with a successful referendum, i’m not so sure the lib dems will say quite the same about their coalition with the tories.
Will be interesting to see how Labour react, especially the unionist wing. It will frustrate them to see how Plaid are relaxed about things. Will impact on some more than others I guess.
As for future coalitions i think jonathan is right to say nothing is off the table. If plaid rule anything out it not only weakens their position it gives Labour the go ahead to form a minority gov. Only because of the possibility of a Rainbow did we get One Wales. Ultimatley this is about keeping Labour honest in their negotiations. I see it as less of a ‘we will go to the rainbow’ and more of a ‘labour need to convince us why we shouldn’t.’
The way I see it Plaid could very well make some losses at the next election but given Labour wouldn’t be able to go in with the Westminster parties and remain credible Plaid could be holding the keys to the First Ministers office. They could, like it or not, be the most important party in the immediate few days post election.
Aled you clearly are a bit ignorant if you think Labour are going to clean up in Carmarthen West, Arfon, Llanelli, Preseli, Aberconwy. The fact it is Alun Davies standing makes Blaenau not certain either.
I think Derek Bolsom made an excellent point in the Western Mail. Labour’s vote is up but it will impact more on increasing the majorities they have in seats already rather than winning new seats. Even if they were to take some back it would lead to lost list seats.
No adam price? You sir are no David Taylor.
“No adam price? You sir are no David Taylor.”
Beautiful riposte. Nathan, Marcus – let them tell us how well they’re going to do. I’d like to thank them for revealing some of their thinking.
The danger for Labour is that they are so happy being in opposition it leads to a false confience about the Assembly. You could have a position where Carwyn goes from crowing about being the most important man in Labour to finding himself responsible for loosing the most important position for the party in the UK.
The biggest mistake Plaid made at the last election is thinking that Assembly support would transfer to Westminster. Clearly that is not the case. However, equally it shouldn’t be assumed that Westminster voting trends lend themselves to the Assembly. Which is why for example Plaid were nowhere to be seen in Carmarthen West in May but I think Nerys Evans, who is very popular locally there, could win that constituency, at the very least make it a straight Tory – Plaid fight.
This is an interesting piece from Jonathan Edwards, most notibly as it will make Labour think twice about their ‘given right’ to be leading or even involved in the next Assembly government. Personally I favour a One Wales 2, I imagine from his politics so does Jonathan Edwards, but as outlined here, especially when Jonathan speaks of Labour being used for a delivery vehicle, my guess is its more about what objectives can be achieved for Plaid rather than who can achieve them.
The poll was very good news and with Labour up ten points from 2007 it suggests they will make some gains. I would have thought those gains would more likely come from the Tories and even the Lib Dems.
Plaid being down a few points must be of concern to them. If you cannot gain support now when can you? The authors admission about the general election was telling as well. Perhaps as with many Plaid members your desire for Labour to come unstuck clouds your judgement.
thanks duncan.
good to labour supporters reacting here. Maybe jonathan has hit a nerve?
An interesting analysis, Jonathan. Very many of us underestimated the resilience of Labour and this will be a factor next year too. If they pick up just one extra seat then, unlike 2007, they will have momentum on their side and it will be more difficult to exclude them from government.
Though I agree that Plaid won through in 2007 because you had options – see my article Trump to Win (http://waleshome.org/2009/07/vote-for-don/) – those options will be a lot more difficult to realise in 2011 than 2007. You are right to look for them though.
I’ll follow up this interesting column with a response piece that more fully explains my thinking.
Jonathan,
Having read your interesting article twice, I am still not sure regarding the point you wish to make, unless it is that after the 2011 election PC wishes to keep its options open and perhaps maintain a degree of separation from Labour..
Living in Wales for the first time for either a GE or an Assembly Election, I was able to take an unpreconceived view of the parties and their candidates. Labour did better than expected because most of is supporters believed Peter Hain’s (often uncontested) assertion that a change of government would mean cuts to the standard of living of those on benefits or employed and/or dependent on the public sector – areas where Wales is especially vulnerable.
Plaid’s campaign I found unconvincing. Calling itself to The Party of Wales, both its candidates and workers from its HQ told me that it is left wing (does it ignore those who are not?) and when I asked about economic policy, I was told that it was a devolved matter (quite correct) and so not the business of the GE candidate. This failed to acknowledge that policies made at Westminster can have a significant effect on the economic conditions and climate of Wales. Also at the PC meetings I attended, most of the proceedings were held in Welsh so ignoring the non-Welsh speaking electorate. All very puzzling to a newcomer and does contrast somewhat with policies and practices of the SNP.
So Jonathan, are these some of the reasons why in your constituency the PC vote declined by more than 10% whilst Labour’s fell by less than 2%. If not I would like your thoughts on this matter.
You make claim for “a new language Measure, structuring the NHS on a Plaid model, developing our transport infrastructure and the focus on affordable housing and sustainable communities.” At present the main item focus of transport infrastructure seems to be “Ieuan-Air” and perhaps significant affordable housing is not yet evident in my part of Wales.
Yet Wales is crying out for economic development and jobs (difficult I know) – why is this not PC’s number one priority rather than “a new language Measure” or further devolution – or are you saying that one cannot be achieved without the other?
“maybe Jonathan has hit a raw nerve?”
Geez, you could just as well say that Labour hit a raw nerve by jumping 10 points in a poll.
Let’s stick to the arguments. We have a very interesting analysis from Jonathan about how he thinks his party should approach the next Assembly elections and what opportunities it presents. Calling people who reply to that piece names adds nothing to the sum of human knowledge, and is also really boring.
If you disagree with Jonathan’s argument, say why. If you disagree with those who disagree with him, say why. Let’s leave the playground abuse out.
Duncan – couldn’t agree more! They’re simply reeling off their anti-Plaid narrative which, frankly, lacks any substance whatsoever. Of course Labour leads the One Wales Government, and I don’t think Jonathan would deny that; how could he? It’s the truth. However, what Jonathan rightly focuses on is the fact that while Labour have led the coalition, them being the senior partner, Plaid as coalition partner in the Welsh Government have had influence, and have helped make the right decisions for Wales.
Plaid is set up to do well in the 2011 election and be under no illusion gentlemen, to lead the fourth Assembly is what Plaid aims to do. It will be a lot of work, we know that; I agree with Marcus, that Plaid really needs to think about its strategy for the election, and I’d say that we as a party really need to be more focused. Although we didn’t win any more seats in this election, we did raise our vote in many, many seats. We all know that Plaid always does better in the Assembly than in Westminster, so it’s looking good for the party.
Aled Price said, “He’s no Adam Price is he?” To be honest, I don’t think Jonathan’s aiming to be a carbon copy of Adam. What Jonathan does in this article, and in his work, is bring a new shine on things, and his own view – which is very important. He doesn’t want to “[gloss] over a weak strategic position for Plaid,” simply tell the truth about Plaid’s motivation and its aim for 2011 which, in my view, is commendable.
Da iawn Jonathan! Cadw ati!
Financier says
“So Jonathan, are these some of the reasons why in your constituency the PC vote declined by more than 10% whilst Labour’s fell by less than 2%. If not I would like your thoughts on this matter.”
You have to know a bit about the constituency before you can make assumptions like that, Financier.
I was an activist in Jonathan’s campaign and not once did he shy away from questions on the economy. More so since the election, but certainly during the campaign, Jonathan has proved himself to be highly knowlegable on the economy; putting forward some credible arguments against the UK Government’s policies.
I fail to see also how holding meetings through the medium of Welsh in Carmarthen East & Dinefwr (where approximately two-thirds of the constituency speak the language) would have had a negative effect. If anything, the fact that Jonathan was the only Welsh speaking candidate won him many votes.
There are a number of reasons as to why the Plaid vote went down in Carmarthen East and in any analysis the make up of the constituency is important…..Waleshome’s constituency profile before the election explains this well….
Plaid were strangulated by the main parties and there seemed to be two mini elections going on……Plaid v Labour in the Amman and Gwendraeth Valleys and Plaid v Tory in the Towy and Teifi Valleys.
One has to remember that, love him or loath him, Adam Price was a respected member by all in Carmarthen East and carried a strong personal vote. With Adam gone many people went back to their traditional voting ways.
The fact that Plaid managed fight off both parties in their respective “quite strong-holds” is a testament to a good campaign and an excellent candidate. Let’s not forget Jonathan’s majority is bigger than that of Adam’s first General Election in 2001.
OK lets get back to the point. It is not unreasonable for political parties in systems where it is difficult to achieve absolute majorities to investigate the possibilities for coalition partners. But any such thing has to stand the test of being credible in terms of that party’s ideology, values and principles and feasible in terms of being delivered.
In the case of the ‘One Wales’ government (which incidentally I strongly support) both tests were passed. Welsh Labour and Plaid have ideological differences but on the key issues devolved to Wales, i.e. public services, social justice, economy and environment there was a common enough ideological foundation for the policy platform built upon it to be credible. Equally, the numbers of AMs, who was the senior and junior partner and the respective leaderships made the coalition feasible.
The reality is that government is not just about the programme for government but the miriad of administrative decisions made by Ministers and dealing with unexpected events not covered by the programme. On these matters it is a similarity of beliefs and principles that allow the coalition to function coherently, as broadly decisions are guided by a similar ‘red lines’ e.g. in the case of these two parties – no markets in public services, no privatisation, no PFI. Edwina Hart believes in and firmly sticks to these principles and as a result has no difficulty elliciting genuine support from Plaid AMs.
The problem in Jonathan’s analysis is none of the underpining belief infrastructure is in place for a Rainbow coalition. Plaid would be putting Tory Ministers into office who the Plaid AMs would have profound ideological differences with and could not be expected to reliably support. Bringing the Tories into government would seem cynical in the extreme, with Plaid trading Welsh interests and its principles for power. As I said earlier electorally it is perverse as voters would know that a Plaid vote could give them Tory Ministers. Who on earth thinks that by May 2011, there will be any electoral appetite for that?
So as much as Plaid would like to have a credible Rainbow option, there isn’t one. Not unless Plaid is prepared to change its ideological centre of gravity with the inevitable split that would follow. The fact is that under this strategy voters who want to see the guaranteed continuation of a left of centre governemnt in Wales and to keep the Condems out are given only one option – vote Welsh Labour.
Adam, I don’t think I was calling anyone names? If you or any other Labour supporter read it that way perhaps you should try approaching things without being so sensitive.
Labour are trying to frame the debate as Labour vs the Tories. Us vs them. Here Jonathan has shown that Plaid will have a critical role post-Assembly election and given Labour’s inability to deal with the Lib Dems without becoming complicit by association in Westminster cuts then clearly it is fair to say that at present Plaid, irrespective of gains or losses could determine the next Assembly government.
In that sense by stating the party should maintain a dual option negotiation strategy Jonathan possibly undermines Labour strategy, or at least to a certain extent exposes it. With that in mind I stated that he may have touched a nerve. It wasn’t a dig on personality but the reaction by Labour supporters to the ideas expressed in this piece? I would have thought that’s part of the debate? I hope this isn’t another example of you shouting down commentators who don’t debate in the way you determine they should, something that is sadly becoming a common feature of your input to this blog.
I really find Plaid supports amusing. In another article their supporters were commenting that it was ashame that their was hardly any Welsh Labour supporters on this website. When Welsh Labour supporters start to comment, they start to crow about them hitting a nerve.
The ITV poll was very good for Welsh Labour, but, it should also have a health warning. The poll is off a back of a very damaging, very right wing budget, and after a ConDem coalition in Westminister which no-one in Wales voted for, by any way, shape for form.
What Welsh Labour need to do now is to start to build beyond the ability to defend ourselves in consituency, and start to be capable of winning back the more difficult seats, outside our traditional socialsit heartlands.
We need to ensure that the message gets out that this is a Welsh Labour lead coalition, and that most of what this coalition has achieved are Welsh Labour driven, and not to let Plaid take the credit for them.
We have been slightly weak in managing to stand up to Plaid, despite the fact we are in coalition with them, we must be as willing to slap them, as they have been to slap Labour.
Nathan
I’m not participating in this debate. I am merely emphasising that the sort of name calling which featured in your previous comment isn’t welcome here.
If you want to comment, do so without that sort of thing. Then you can make whatever points you like. Pretty straightforward, really.
Nathan, we all try to frame the debate to our advantage. You cannot deny that that it what you are doing by suggesting that Plaid are the centre of the piece.
Another way of looking at the poll would be that you have gone backwards, failed to explain to the electorate why you are relevant. Whereas Labour gaining ten points since May have got it right.
It is obviously more complicated than this, but I would suggest you need to be a little less complacent about Plaid being in gov after next year.
“The fact is that under this strategy voters who want to see the guaranteed continuation of a left of centre government in Wales and to keep the Condems out are given only one option – vote Welsh Labour.”
Vote Labour – keep the Tories out. Many commentators – including the party’s own – attributed Labour’s better-than-expected Welsh polling in the General Election to this successful strategy. However, it didn’t stop a Conservative government. David, you think this will work with voters again?
As far as I can see, Welsh Labour finds itself on the horns of a dilemma, and more resolutely at a crossroads than Plaid. It has clearly benefited from going into opposition already, which must give its supporters some comfort. But supposing it does as well as it hopes to, and returns to government in Cardiff Bay (in or out of coalition). What then? How does it define its programme of government and reconcile that with narrative of the UK party, which will almost certainly base its strategy on laying the ills of the world at the doorstep of Number 10.
On the one hand, a Labour-led Welsh Government will want to press ahead with such a programme, to demonstrate that it is a party of action, while, on the other, it will want to say that there are many, many things it cannot do because it is being underfunded, or because the Tories won’t give it the powers. Additionally, if it is successful, it has to be so in a way that neither the Westminster Government nor any coalition partner can possibly claim any credit. It’s opposition government. God knows how it works, but it’s sure to be a Hell of a balancing act and could lead to strategic dithering, perhaps even paralysis.
It is also a situation that hardly behoves a Labour-led administration to seek more powers. After all, if its competency is extended, it will have to take sole responsibilities in more areas. You need to be bold to take responsibility in these years. Meanwhile, Labour in London and elsewhere will be making hay out of the austere climate they helped hand to the Tories.
I’ve long had this theory that most of what Welsh Labour does comes about as a consequence of holding a conversation with itself. But this situation could be worse. This could be a deep huddle, always looking inwards.
Plaid is not burdened with such issues. It can argue that much of what is happening to Wales is down to Labour when it was in government in Westminster. It can also argue that the pace of change in Cardiff Bay wasn’t as swift as it would have liked and it can also argue that Labour has held sway over the industrial south for the better part of 80 years and has failed to deal with the systemic and infrastructural problems that have bedevilled these solid Labour areas since their economies went into decline.
This means that Plaid can argue that now is the time to let another party have a go. It can ask if, at a time when low wage public sector workers in Wales are losing their jobs as the ultimate consequence (we hope) of the greed-driven frivolity of bankers (who the “London parties” – and the term appears apt here – each have some connection with), it might not be a good time to examine whether there should be more distance between our respective economies? If the electorate’s reply is yes, then we need more powers to make it happen. If you want more powers, well, only one party is a certainty for those.
When David Steel told his Liberal hordes in 1983 (I think) everyone laughed at him. However the Liberal vote was 26% the best vote since the 1920s and has not been equaled since.
I would suggest that you campaign like you plan to win, instead of being a “kingmaker”.
The probability is that Labour will be the largest party in the Assembly at the next election, the assumption seems to be it will be a sandwich short of a majority and will need to form an alliance with another party, and the only party with a similar philosophy is Plaid Cymru (the separatist party in Wales) …
… this is an incomplete picture, both the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives would, I believe, support a minority party governance, there is little need for another One Wales agreement.
The false assumption that PC are akin to the socialists in Wales is a flawed perception, speak to the Labour support in East Wales and you discover a disquiet … you will discover one of the reasons why support has haemorrhaged recently, Plaid …
I always enjoy Duncan’s posts on WalesHome, finely balanced as they so often are between interesting insight and tosh. Often his analysis can be valuable; but all too often his conclusions seem ill-founded. His last post above is a case in point.
Duncan says “Meanwhile, Labour in London and elsewhere will be making hay out of the austere climate they helped hand to the Tories”. Is he really blaming the global recession and the savage ConDem Budget’s cuts – which presumably he refers to by “austere climate” – on Labour? Is he saying Labour didn’t adequately contest the General Election? Ground Control to Major Dunc – put your helmet on and come on back down to Earth?
And I’m baffled by Duncan’s notion that Plaid can blame Labour at Westminster for any political/economic situation in Wales that it still doesn’t like after three years in coalition Government in Cardiff – and therefore, that “Plaid can argue [at the next Assembly election] that now is the time to let another party have a go”! So how can Plaid make a difference in Cardiff if the fault is Westminster’s (Labour or ConDem); and if Plaid have had three years in Government already in which they could have made a difference?
Oh – and bingo! Duncan said “London parties” again! (Apparently he claims “the term appears apt here”. Which kind of implies he admits the term isn’t apt elsewhere.)
Well, it seems I touched something of a raw nerve! From here it looks like the Wales Home Plaid regulars are the sensitive ones.
Nathan, all I’ve said is that Labour could be in a position to pick up seats next year. Like Darran says, if Labour has momentum it will be hard to exclude them from government.
I think I agree with Duncan Higgitt that Plaid won’t face much of a dilemma. The option of teaming up with the ConDems will rule itself out when Cameron and Clegg are busy slashing Welsh public services.
So Plaid can publish articles like this suggesting that they’ll keep their options open until the cows come home. In truth, the choice will most likely be between backing Labour again, or allowing them to go it alone with 28 odd seats. The flip side is that these will be the only options available to Labour.
Gez,
Thanks for your reply. Seems you’ve been given a pass on the “playground” rules here, but I’ll attempt to answer your arguments, conflated as they are.
Firstly, of course Labour “helped” (which is why I used the word) hand this austere climate to the next government, through regulatory light touch with the City and huge public spending. In anticipation of your raising a point about support for public services against me, let me pre-counter by arguing that Labour created a profligate climate in which process was placed above performance. There was (is, in some instances I could mention) no concern for return on investment.
Therefore, as I think I made clear, “London parties” is apt because it was in the English capital that contacts were forged between your’s and other Westminster parties and a banking sector which led us – your members – into this current state of affairs.
“And I’m baffled by Duncan’s notion that Plaid can blame Labour at Westminster for any political/economic situation in Wales that it still doesn’t like after three years in coalition Government in Cardiff.”
Help me here. I haven’t the foggiest how you arrived at this conclusion. You are well aware of the powers of the Welsh Government and the responsibilities of its individual ministers, so don’t suggest that any of them could have allayed what happened, what was partly – I’ll say partly again, just as I used “helped” in my previous post – to do with the conduct and policies of the Labour Westminster government of 13 years.
What has this got to do with the price of chips? Well, it speaks to my previous points about the situation that Welsh Labour finds itself in, considering busted strategies that attempts to frighten the electorate into voting not Tory, and working out how the Hell it will make an “opposition government” work.
You know, you can pass all kinds of judgements on my faculties. But all it does is sidestep the “point”, as your colleague David Davies puts it. Labour is not in half as an invidious position as the ITV poll suggests, with plenty of square pegs to fit to round holes ahead of next year’s Assembly elections.
Regards,
Duncan.
‘This means that Plaid can argue that now is the time to let another party have a go’
One last ‘point’ Duncan. Plaid will not be the ‘another party’ it can only be part of a coalition with the condems where it is in a minority. So it will be joining with the ‘London’ parties who are in a right wing coalition in Westminister whose assault on Welsh public services will by that time be clear for all to see. From your comments and your enthusiasm to join forces with the condems I take it you are on the right of Plaid but do you really think the socialist AMs in Plaid will be up for it or that it’s what the people would expect of ‘the Party of Wales’. As I said earlier neither credible or feasible.
David,
That’s not what I’m saying at all. Can I suggest you go back and read my comments again, please? So therefore pretty much all of your conclusions are wrong. I can see why Labour would be keen to trim down the outcomes to one or two for the voter, just as I can see the kernel of a “Vote Plaid, get Tories” narrative forming in your response, and in that, you know you are reaching.
Interesting article from Joni.
A party like Plaid always has to choose between delivering change or supporting the status quo.
The reality is that Labour is the status quo in Wales and although our ministers have performed well we have not delivered the level of change that Wales really needs. There is a serious question of how much we can achieve if we remain linked to Labour and Labour and their supporters within Plaid need to convince the rest of us why they should remain in office…just “we are not the Tories” is not enough.
Plaid also has to look at the very significant number of its voters who switch between Plaid and the Tories and think about how we bring those people back on board for the Assembly election. I for one was surprised by the extent of the “normally Plaid” defection to the Tories in the general election much deeper than we expected. On election day it got boring having people tell me “next year definitely Plaid but its time for a change”…
Its true Jon Edwards is no Adam Price. But, more to the point, Adam Price is/was no Jon Edwards.
Adam Price whether you agree or disagree with him is the only interesting thinker in Plaid Cymru. I found the piece by Jonathan Edwards pretty vacuous to be honest. But there again my response might have been influenced by looking at the Plaid ‘Street Surgery leaflet’ which was pushed through my door a couple of days ago. It was frankly nursery school politics.
Duncan – in answer to the question ‘Are there enough bins in your area?’. Of course there’s not. I’m fed up walking home swinging a bag of the proverbial dog stuff each morning. You might be amazed how much a Cavalier called Louis and a Jack Russell called Tiny can produce at 6.30 in the morning. Provide the bins and Louis who is not the brightest dog in the world will definitely vote Plaid. Tiny, on the other hand, worried about her pension, will still be Labour to the end.
In the 20th Century Irish Nationalists stormed the Post Office in Dublin whilst in the 21st Century the Welsh Nationalists ask me if I want more traffic calming measures. I just can’t wait to see Plaid’s manifesto in 2012!
Louis – I’ll get you on the list. What’s your email address?
Tiny – we work for all our constituents, no matter what their political persuasion. We will write back to you once we have spoken to the council about the lack of bins in your area.
(By the way, can one of you have a word with your owner? He seems to have been taking lessons in historical allegories from the English Democrats. And can you also let him know that the correct term for “nursery school politics” these days is the Foundation Phase?)
Of course Jeff Jones would say that Jonathan Edwards piece is vacuous. He is after all in the game of promoting the Labour Party and supports the Labour candidate against Jonathan Edwards. It’s perfectly natural for a political oponent to try and undermine your political rival. So as far as your first paragraph goes, it adds nothing to the debate, and should just be ignored.
As far as the rest of Jeff”s contribution, I’m not quite sure what you are saying. Are you saying that for someone to achieve its political aims effectively they need to ignore the political process and take up arms, a la Pearse, Plunkett, and Macdonagh?
Will Emyr Jones Parry convert to Nationalism and land at Pembroke from an Iranian Submarine, with Dafydd Iwan (Pearse) and Adam Price (Connolly – though Elfyn Llwyd is uncannily similar to James Connolly, must be the tash) ‘storming’ BBC Llandaf during the Six Nations and place a declaration of independence on their blogs?
What would they use for weapons? Water pistols?
As Jonathan quite rightly says, Plaid is about far more than election results. This could have been said about the Labour party at one time, alas not today.
David Davies at the top of this thread says that Jonathan’s comments are strange for Plaid claiming that the statement says that unless the people in Wales want athe condems in Government in Wales they should vote for Labour. Utter, utter, nonsense.
If Plaid committed themselves to a One Wales 2 now, and ruled out any other potential partnership, then there would be no point in Plaid putting forward a manifesto, because the Labour Party would have a free run. Plaid would have no leverage whatsoever.
With others saying that a Plaid supporter who does not rule out cooperation with the Conservatives (or is actively willing to cooperate with them) is ‘to the right’ of the party fails completely to understand the whole reason why Plaid is in existence and why the Party’s supporters do so.
Having said that, the British left-right axis is in flux – the Conservatives promotion of prison reform supporting offenders rehabilitation, and establishing and independent inquiry into Britain’s complicity in torture is a complete contrast to the trigger-happy Labour party.
Mabon picks up on an interesting issue at the end of his comment. Plaid must try really hard to resist being pulled into a left-right debate as some of the posters above have attempted to do. At the end of the day, we know it’s just mischief making that benefits all other parties save Plaid, and it is all speculation until the manifesto is ready to go.
Personally, I don’t see why we have to shape Plaid policy according to the traditional political axis. But that’s probably a matter for another day.
Anyway, back to Jeff’s idea. I was beginning to get taken away with myself, seeing all kinds of possibilities in Pooches 4 Plaid. But then I worried that we might see a rival organisation in Donkeys 4 Labour – or should that be Donkeys ‘Eeyore’ Labour? (Boo! You’re rubbish – get off! – ed)
Finding this debate lively if repetitive.
The only paragraph I feel like dissecting is this one early on from Cerith:
“Plaid is set up to do well in the 2011 election and be under no illusion gentlemen, to lead the fourth Assembly is what Plaid aims to do. It will be a lot of work, we know that; I agree with Marcus, that Plaid really needs to think about its strategy for the election, and I’d say that we as a party really need to be more focused. Although we didn’t win any more seats in this election, we did raise our vote in many, many seats. We all know that Plaid always does better in the Assembly than in Westminster, so it’s looking good for the party.”
So many sweeping statements in such a short bloc of text.
“…be under no illusion gentlemen, to lead the fourth Assembly is what Plaid aims to do.”
Be under no illusion Cerith, that is exactly what Plaid has set out to do in the last three Assembly elections, and failed.
“…we as a party really need to be more focused”
Couldn’t agree more
“Although we didn’t win any more seats in this election, we did raise our vote in many, many seats.”
You raised your vote in a few. You ended up behind the BNP in a couple. You came fourth in a target seat. The Conservatives raised their vote in virtually every seat in Wales.
“We all know that Plaid always does better in the Assembly than in Westminster, so it’s looking good for the party.”
Yes, you do better. But does that mean it’s automatically looking good? How many extra seats qualifies as good?
I’ll go further than anyone else on this thread and predict the result of the next Assembly election. No party’s representation will alter by more than +/-3 . Why do I say that? Because no party’s representation has changed by more than this in either 2003 or 2007. And I can’t see much of a ground swell this time either. Unless…
Marcus is right – the 10% uplift in the Labour vote is soft. But if that level of support remains consistent for six months they might (just might) be on course for a majority.
No other party can or will come close to governing alone, despite internal wishful thinking. Which is why Plaid – and Jonathan in particular – are right to start weighing up and creating options.
I’m as left as they come, but first and foremost I’m a Welsh nationalist. If some kind of Plaid-led government without Labour became electorally viable, it would have to be considered, to see what could be gotten out of it. The amount of “concessions” (though it’s not as inspiring a word as i’d like to use) would have to be stupendous to justify it at the moment, but the political situation may change.
At the same time, if Labour leads a minority administration there will need to be strong opposition, which the Condems are hardly in a position to present. Plaid has been an effective opposition in the past, proving it can work with its opponents. Plaid has also been effective in government, in my own obviously biased opinion- but I don’t think we have the media capacity to report that reality to the people of Wales.
The real tragedy is that this pluralistic, nuanced, mature and dare I say it exciting political environment can’t properly be conveyed to the people of Wales because we lack a national media, and any kind of wider national consciousness. Many people do know that Plaid is in government with Labour, but for every person who has seen Ieuan Wyn Jones on TV there is a person that thinks Westminster still controls health, and for every person that knows who Carwyn Jones is, there’s someone that thinks Rhodri Morgan was a Plaid Cymru member (trust me there are people who think that is the case).
To bring things full circle, that is one reason I believe in Welsh nationalism as my political theory. I would hope that Plaid’s strategic thinking, whilst clearly providing progressive, left-of-centre politics, will elevate nationalism and achieving national goals to the main priority for Plaid as a party. Jonathan’s article, by not ruling out a non-Labour government (even if we know such a thing is electorally and politically unlikely), certainly fulfils that expectation.