Devolution & Plaid’s Dilemma
Ben Wildsmith
The Anglo-Welsh political relationship is at an uncertain juncture, and how the Plaid-led government plays its hand could have far-reaching consequences.
Andy Burnham’s noncommittal replies today when questioned about constitutional issues suggest that he’s now aware that his rather crass approach upon assuming office wasn’t the PM’s best work. Today’s line emphasised the primacy of Welsh Government and the Senedd as partners with Westminster.
His initial remarks on the subject had seemed to signal a preference for dealing with local authorities rather than devolved governments. Whilst today’s tonal adjustment acknowledged anxiety over the by-passing of nationally devolved institutions, Burnham again pressed his call for ‘deeper’ devolution within Wales.
This is a novel dilemma for a Welsh government, and one that could prove definitive as Plaid attempts to establish itself as a permanent governing force. Politically, it is a tricky issue. Whilst the term ‘nationalist’ tends to be used pejoratively nowadays, the vision of Wales as a unified political entity is very much Plaid’s thing.
The creation of autonomous political units within Wales risks a dilution of the nation’s political identity and cohesion. For Plaid, this is a whole new headache. A political machine that has been built and honed over a century to rip power away from London, is now tasked with holding on to it.
This poses significant problems both in strategy and messaging. Were Westminster to suggest devolving powers directly to local authorities in Wales, how could Plaid mount a case against that didn’t carry echoes of ‘Better Together’ unionism that could be exploited by opponents for years to come? How would Welsh voters feel about their English counterparts enjoying greater local empowerment if that were opposed by their government in Cardiff?
Burnham’s most interesting remark today was a suggestion that local government in Wales should be reorganised, taking into account the mayoral model in England. There are two points to note here. Firstly, somebody has evidently informed the PM that local authorities in Wales have neither the staff nor logistics to take on direct powers from Westminster.
Implicit in his suggestion, however, was his preferred solution to rolling out devolution outside of England. Powers will be more forthcoming for the Welsh Government, it seems, if that government is committed to downstreaming devolution and seen to be creating the political infrastructure for it.
Damaging rows
Here lies the potential for political gains in Wales, but also for damaging rows. There are those who have always argued, with much justification, that devolution is, at its heart, designed to prevent independence. They point out that any governing body that is dependent on external funding cannot be considered a meaningful government. It can be constrained, made to fail, or even abolished by the whims of others. The illusion of power that devolution brings, they argue, postpones the ultimate decision over sovereignty that Wales must eventually face.
On the other hand, a devolved national government acts as a formal expression of the political culture here. The proof of that lies in the regular tantrums thrown by anti-devolutionist unionists whenever the government diverges from Westminster. Our government may lack real power, but it has provided a national voice for Wales that couldn’t be transmitted through the dubious intentions of the Welsh Office.
Most importantly, though, devolution is popular. It has been confirmed in every election since 1998. Various iterations of the abolition movement have all been exposed as a minority position at the ballot box.
So, the trap laid for Plaid is to take an unpopular line against deeper devolution that risks disadvantaging Welsh regions in terms of local powers. It would be a political disaster for Plaid if they were seen to be hoarding powers in Cardiff that were being distributed around England by Labour. One can assume that the PR campaign around the success of mayoralties will be enthusiastic as the PM has made their empowerment his signature policy.
Play ball
Will Plaid play ball? If it seeks to become the natural party of government here, cooperation over this issue might be the wise move. Strengthening local government here is a laudable goal in itself, and something that would absolutely be necessary in an independent Wales.
The key demand from Plaid should be that powers be devolved from Westminster to Cardiff, on agreement that onward devolution will be honoured. If powers and money are on the table for such a reorganisation then Plaid should grab them while they are. What emerges in England next might be very different indeed.
If the majority party of a devolved government allows itself to be cast as anti-devolutionary, it will have been gamed.
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.
The situation in Wales is completely different to England. As a result of Tory duplicity in 1996 in reorganising into 22 ‘county’ councils, of which only 4 or 5 are viable and effective, and Labour’s failure to reorganise since then, the only recipients of further devolution are the city regions, informal organisations that have only indirect public accountability – and where does that leave the small authorities that don’t fit neatly into the regions? Pembrokeshire, Ceredigion, Gwynedd, Ynys Môn, Conwy, Denbighshire – and Powys? Wales local government on the whole is a shambles
Labour, the self-styled “architects of devolution”, are once again playing cynical political games with Wales—especially now that Plaid Cymru leads the Welsh Government. Back in 1997, factions within the Labour Party, including Paul Murphy, Llew Smith and Neil Kinnock—an arch-antagonist of devolution—interfered to ensure that devolution for Wales was diluted and limited. This led to 12 wasted years before the successful 2011 legislative powers referendum. Two costly devolution commissions later— The Richard Silk’s and Ivor Richard’s— where both advocated the phased devolution of criminal justice, yet these have become wasted opportunities, blocked by factions in the Labour Party who are… Read more »
So, basically you are suggesting that Plaid do nothing and ignore Burham’s agenda? Where will that get us?
If Burnham bypasses Cardiff Bay he’ll have to bypass the combined authorities in England which makes no sense for someone with his background. Everyone should support power sitting where it’s most effective, and that must include empowering local government to do much more for their communities. Those fearing a return to toxic local government political fiefdoms can avoid this outcome by abolishing FPTP in council elections.
The article is basically correct. We have to move away from this sterile debate that devolution beyond Cardiff Bay is almost automatically an attempt by Westminster to bypass the Senedd. There is a deal to be done on new powers AND more local autonomy within Wales. Is anyone seriously arguing that we still need 22 Councils and the hotchpotch of other bodies? If Plaid cling to the status quo, we will be disadvantaged.
Well said. It’s wasteful. So much money could be saved which could in turn be used for local services.
I’m no fan of UK Labour; but unlike Starmer and the Tories before him, Burnham does at least seem to have a serious devolution agenda. Plaid won’t get everything they want (eg Barnett reform) but there are positive outcomes to grab here. The alternative is to rinse and repeat some very tired old speeches (some of which appear on here frequently). They get us nowhere.
It seems that Burnham is signalling devolving police powers. This being politics, he won’t give something for nothing. In exchange for.this, he will require the acceptance of his devolution agenda. I don’t think he’ll give anything on the Crown Estates but might say further work is needed thus keeping the door open. Everything else is off the table.
Ben encapsulates neatly the whole dilemma originating from the poor reorganisation of local authorities in Cymru. Labours deliberate neglect during the devolution farce has left us with 22 expensive inefficient monstrosities! 22 expensive CEOs & other senior staff. Duplicate IT systems & crazy rivalries! Senedd must bite the bullet & either restrict the the LAs powers by taking over planning, housing etc., or reducing them to five or six authorities. The salaries alone of the 22 chief execs totals around £3.5 Million, with an estimate of the executive salaries approaching £70 million! Senedd should get a grip on this!
To what extent is the apparent success of metro-mayorships in England down to redirecting resources and investment away from other areas? In a country of the size and geography of Wales planning and coordination should be with the WG. Rather than create institutions, with their tendency to become self-serving, devolution in Wales should be hyper-local enabling local people to buy, control and profit from local projects and enterprises. If “muscular unionism” chips away at WG from above and powers get devolved away from it below, the Senedd could be left with debating the menu of its own cafeteria!
What is going on in Biwmares, the town are fighting the council for control. Sounds like the Wild West Rhun?