Activists accuse Plaid Cymru of deceit in ‘arms fair’ row
Martin Shipton
Anti-war campaigners have raised concerns that Plaid Cymru MSs may have misled constituents who called for the Welsh Government to withdraw its sponsorship from what critics have dubbed an “arms fair”.
Organisers of the Defence Security Resilience Cymru summit in Newport on September 3 and 4 said it aimed to “connect buyers, suppliers and innovators across defence, security and national resilience” and help businesses benefit from increased defence spending, but the event attracted controversy over the involvement of companies linked to arms exports to Israel and Saudi Arabia.
In a standard email reply, multiple Plaid Cymru MSs told constituents that the Welsh Government could not withdraw because of contractual obligations agreed by the previous Labour administration.
Appearing on Radio Wales Breakfast on September 3, Health Minister Mabon ap Gwynfor also said the more than £60,000 sponsorship was “part of the agreement” made by the previous Labour government. “You have to respect agreements,” he said.
But campaigners have now pointed to the Welsh Government’s own procurement record on its Sell2Wales website, which gives August 24, 2026, as the estimated date for signing the sponsorship contract – more than three months after Plaid Cymru took office.
They argue this means the Plaid Cymru-led Welsh Government could have withdrawn from the event, but instead chose to use public money to sponsor it.
Adam Johannes, joint secretary of Cardiff Stop the War Coalition, said he wrote to his three Plaid Cymru MSs – Dafydd Trystan Davies, Zaynub Akbar and Nick Carter – last month asking them to join calls for the Welsh Government to withdraw from the event.
He said: “On August 24 came the reply, sent on behalf of all three by Welsh Government Minister Dafydd Trystan Davies, former chief executive and chair of Plaid Cymru. The explanation was admirably bureaucratic: ‘It is not possible to withdraw from the Newport event due to contractual obligations agreed to by the previous Welsh Labour Government.’”
Mr Johannes said identical replies were sent to campaigners in north Wales by their Plaid representatives, which he argued gave the impression that the previous Labour government had already entered into a legally binding contract.
He said Plaid appeared to be suggesting it was being forced to honour a commitment it could not escape.
But Mr Johannes questioned that explanation after examining the Welsh Government’s procurement record.
He said: “The Welsh Government’s own procurement record gives August 24 as the likely date on which the sponsorship contract would be signed. August 24. The very same day Dafydd Trystan Davies emailed me telling me Plaid Cymru couldn’t withdraw because of a contract supposedly entered into by the previous Labour Government.
“Many will now be asking whether the Plaid Cymru Welsh Government had any obligation to sponsor the event at all. Or did they simply make a political choice to get down and dirty with the global arms trade and back an arms fair? If an earlier binding agreement exists, where is it?”
Campaigners say they are also raising the issue in light of the new Senedd Code of Conduct, approved in March 2026, which states that Members must act truthfully and must not make deliberately misleading statements.
Senedd Commissioner for Standards
Mr Johannes said: “I would urge anyone who received a similar email from a Plaid Cymru elected representative to consider writing to the Senedd Commissioner for Standards and ask whether their MS complied with the requirement to act truthfully and not make deliberately misleading statements when implying participation in the arms fair was required by a contractual commitment entered into by the previous administration.”
Adam Price, the Cabinet Minister for Enterprise, Connectivity and Energy, has sought to fend off criticism by saying that the Plaid Cymru government is in the process of drafting a new Welsh Defence Ethical Framework. He is due to make a statement in the Senedd about the framework on the afternoon of September 22.
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
Get more trusted Welsh news
Choose Nation.Cymru as a preferred source in Google News to see more of our journalism.
What’s the defence sector worth to the UK economy? 40bn? Nah, let’s leave all that to the other home nations. Who needs jobs anyway? Let’s not defend ourselves. Let’s throw Ukraine to the wolves etc etc etc.
None of what you have mentioned is in this news article. What was mentioned is the absence of ethics by the war death manufacturers who supply weapons of murder to an evil zionist genocidal regime and an authoritarian Arab one.
That’s true. However the issue of Ukraine is a much more difficult one for peace campaigners.
It would be harder to argue against supplying weapons for defence (Ukraine) than offence (zion and Saudi).
Indeed. And that difference isn’t discussed enough.
Israel (you use Zion as an insult) has a right to defend its people against Hamas and Hezbollah, while Saudi also has a right to defend itself against Houthis.
Zion is the name of the region the zionists are murdering semitic Palestinians and their innocent children and stealing their lands.
Hardly a defence.
Saudi attacked the houthi controlled region in 2015.
They like the zionists attacked first.
There’s Israel, home of Jewish folk who were persecuted after the holocaust and needed somewhere else because everyone else was apparently too racist to help.
Then there’s the “other” Israel, Zion… the group of so called “Jewish” people, who are busy violating international law and committing genocide. There is no way what the IDF are doing is in any way proportionate to what happened.
But you’re right, Israel does have the right to defend itself. I and many others see a difference between, right and wrong.
The Palestinian people on The West Bank have every right to defend themselves under International Law against Neo Fascist Zionist Militias.
Plus I’m not going to apologise for using the word Zionist.
As for Saudi Arabia they are Muslim Quislings who are nothing more than Puppets for the USA.
Now go back to watching Tousi TV
Bibi Bot
The issue of export licences for weapons has nothing to do with the Welsh Government. That is a power reserved by Westminster.
How are we supposed to defend ourselves if we don’t manufacture weapons and/or buy them from our friends?
Wales is not an independent country.
Not yet.
Defend ourselves from what!
The interests of Billionaires, Tories and Labour Party Starmerites.
If those 3 mentioned groups want a war then they should be the only ones eligible for conscription.
The majority of people want nothing to do with wars for the Wasteminster establishment.
The English. Same as it’s always been. XD.
Do you read the news, Johnny? If not, atleast watch “20 Days in Mariupol”. You will find the answer there.
Yes I’m aware of Mariupol Like I was aware of the RAF conducting surveillance flights over Gaza to assist the IDF with their Genocide.
However unlike you I’m not decived by The BBC News,Sky and CNN
Amir there are Warmongering bots down voting your comments.
If the UK got involved in a war these down voters won’t be putting on their tin hats to go to the Frontline.
Yet they are happy for other people’s children to be used as canon foder when they will be hiding behind BBC News, Sky News and GB News in their living rooms.
These bots are just cowards.
If you want to defend yourself for the interests of Billionaires, Tories and Starmerite Labour Party Members then more fool you.
As was said in the USA in the 60’s
HELL NO WE WON’T GO.
They were on the right side of History as US Military intervention in Vietnam was a disaster.
These are the sort of people who would write a petition to stop an invading army at their doors. Defence can be used to save lives, if Ukraine was an iron fortress do you think they would have been invaded.
Ukraine was invaded because they gave up their nuclear weapons.
But they were invaded by Russia. You are obviously a Putin fan.
I was just making a point. Your wish to get personal and attack me is your perogative and shows your lack of strength..
Amir just ignore the Zio bot or ask her how many shekels she gets for posting on NC
‘ It is not possible to withdraw from the Newport event due to contractual obligations agreed to by the previous Welsh Labour Government’ is one of the most shameless, blame dodging comments I’ve seen. Of course you can. You can, for example, just not turn up. You won’t get sued. You might lose your money (as they would’ve had to pay for stands, talks, sponsorship etc). There is no commercial contract in the world that would expect you to turn up to a trade fair – do or die.
You… don’t get involved in contracts much do you? These people are incredibly likely to sue if they believe the contract that was signed is being undermined by bad faith. These people have fancy expensive lawyers and zero shame. They’d launch civil proceeding just because someone looked at them funny.
Pete Hegseth in a rare moment of honesty rebadged his Department of Defense to Department of War. I guess that was a clear acceptance that today’s means of defence is tomorrow’s tool for aggression. Maybe Plaid can’t accept that plain truth. Other politicians, activists and commenters have the same kind of difficulty.
I support giving weapons to Ukraine, but not Israel. With Trump in the White House we must also consider that at some point in the future the US could potentially become an adversary at some point in the future. Europe therefore needs its own security bracket as an alternative to NATO that would also include Ukraine and Canada.
Well said.
Israel does have a right to defend itself against destruction however.
Why then did Netanyahu continue to fund Hamas despite their mission statement?
Why did Netanyahu do nothing when uae warned him about the imminent October 7th attack?
Why do the settlers keep throwing out semitic Palestinians out of their homes? These people are citizens of zion and yet receive no protection from the police there.
The difference is Ukraine gave up its nuclear deterrent and was then invaded by a nuclear power. Israel, however, retains theirs and one of the strongest militaries in the region. Russia poses a direct threat to European security; Hamas does not. That is why support for Ukraine as a much clearer priority.
I do not support Hamas, but the scale of civilian suffering and destruction has gone far beyond what many would regard as legitimate self-defence, particularly at the expense of Western taxpayers.
why would plaid honour a commitment made by labour ,the contract was with the labour Government in the senydd not plaid ,I find plaids excuse rather flimsy ,A question should be asked in the senydd ,Dies plaid Decry Zionist Israel’s action in Gaza and will they commit to not backing companies in Wales that trade with Israel ,particularly arms ,if they don’t I forsee a very short Tenure by plaid.