How Vaughan Gething’s short period as first minister fell apart – and what it means for Welsh Labour
Huw Lewis, Senior Lecturer in Politics, Aberystwyth University
Vaughan Gething’s short but tumultuous period as first minister of Wales was brought to a dramatic end following the resignation of four key ministers from his cabinet.
Only a fortnight after Keir Starmer entered 10 Downing Street with a three-figure majority, Labour in Wales has been plunged into crisis and faces difficult questions regarding its future direction.
Gething became first minister in March this year following a close Welsh Labour leadership election. He beat Jeremy Miles by only a narrow margin. However, even before securing the leadership, Gething was under intense pressure.
His campaign was marred by controversy over his acceptance of a £200,000 donation – a huge sum in the context of Welsh politics – from a firm owned by a man previously convicted of environmental offences.
Gething insisted that he followed the rules around campaign donations and that he had no questions to answer. However, he never managed to move on from this story and subsequent developments served to compound his political difficulties.
In May, Gething sacked one of his cabinet ministers – Hannah Blythyn – after messages between Welsh ministers during the pandemic were leaked to Nation.Cymru. The messages showed Gething claiming he would delete all correspondence from a message group of Welsh ministers to avoid being “captured by an FOI”.
Blythyn strenuously denied that she was the source of the leak, which was later echoed by Nation.Cymru.
Political consequences
Later in May, Plaid Cymru ended its cooperation deal with Labour in the Senedd, after Plaid’s leader Rhun ap Iorwerth said he was “deeply concerned” about the donations Gething had accepted during his leadership campaign. With only 30 seats in the 60-member Senedd, this left Labour without a governing majority.
In June, Gething lost a vote of no confidence in the Senedd. The motion was brought forward by the opposition parties but passed because two Labour members failed to attend, claiming that they were unwell. In response, Gething described the vote as a “transparent gimmick” and insisted he would not resign.
Therefore, after only four months as first minister, Gething led a Labour group in the Senedd that was riddled by deep divisions. His minority government lacked any credible partners, which meant that agreeing a budget by the autumn looked like an extremely challenging task.
Adding to these difficulties was the growing evidence that the Welsh public was rapidly losing confidence in Gething’s leadership.
It appeared to be a matter of when, not if, he would stand down. Yet the sudden and acrimonious nature of the endgame was still unexpected.
Lost confidence
In seeking to explain recent events, a lot of emphasis has been placed on Gething’s political judgment.
Clearly, the decision to accept the £200,000 donation and to then refuse to acknowledge (even if no rules were broken) that the episode raised legitimate concerns, was a serious error.
Another error was the style of leadership that Gething chose to adopt after becoming first minister. In sacking Blythyn, his dismissive approach to the cooperation agreement with Plaid Cymru and his defiant response to the vote of no confidence in the Senedd, Gething struck the tone of a leader at the head of a majority administration who enjoyed overwhelming internal support in his party. Neither of these things were true.
An old maxim often attributed to US president Lyndon B. Johnson is that the first rule of politics is to learn how to count. This could certainly have been heeded by Gething and his team in recent weeks.
Gething’s short-lived period as first minister also sheds light on deeper cultural trends that continue to characterise at least some quarters of the Labour party in Wales.
Labour has dominated Welsh politics for over a century. Adjusting to a multiparty devolved politics, where the party cannot assume it will always hold a majority and where it is often forced to cooperate and bargain with opposition parties, has required a significant shift in mindset.
Developments during Carwyn Jones and Mark Drakeford’s periods as the two most recent first ministers seemed to suggest that Labour was becoming more adept at negotiating these challenges. For example, it was Drakeford who negotiated the recently ended cooperation agreement with Plaid Cymru. However, recent months suggest that it is not a style of politics that has been embraced by all sections of the party.
As we look ahead to the next Senedd election in 2026 (which will be fought using a fully proportional electoral system), the multiparty nature of Welsh devolved politics is only likely to increase. How Labour responds to that challenge is a question that the party should consider carefully as it moves to elect its third Welsh leader within a year.
This article was first published on The Conversation
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.
It will be a nightmare to form a workable coalition in a Senedd which closely reflects the support for each of five parties (Labour, PC, Conservative, LibDem, Reform). All parties will need leaders with considerable diplomatic skills. Judging by the calibre of people currently in the Senedd that may be too much to hope for. It’s safe to predict some rocky times ahead.
A coalition government doesn’t need to reflect all the parties, it just needs a majority. PR is just about having a proportion of elected representatives from each party that matches their vote share.
Thank you for that reminder of the basics of PR. If the votes for a Senedd of 96 reflected this month’s GE, Labour would have about 36 seats, the Tories 18, Reform 17, Plaid 15, the LibDems 6 and the Greens 4. It would be difficult to form a stable coalition from those elements. It is likely the Labour share will fall between now and 2026, which may make it impossible to form a coalition of just two parties. Countries that have had PR for a significant time have often have had extended periods when it was impossible to put… Read more »
With those numbers it’d be Labour and Plaid. When Labour falls it’ll be Plaid’s gain so again a Labour-Plaid coalition, perhaps with a PC FM. The horse trading that comes with coalitions isn’t an inconvenience or weakness. It forces parties to decide what really matters to their voters and focus on that. It’s only bad for vanity projects and ideology. And who cares if it takes time? Better right than quick.
I would give up my membership if Plaid went in to a coalition with Labour. The latter are a spent force in Wales and shouldn’t be propped up
So how would you form a government with least 49 seats from these numbers, or would hand back control to Westminster as they did in NI?
“Labour would have about 36 seats, the Tories 18, Reform 17, Plaid 15, the LibDems 6 and the Greens 4.”
It’s a mistake to predict results of the coming new system based on how votes have been cast in the previous system. However proportional representation systems as a rule end up with agreements of greater or lesser formality between parties that can find common interests and quid pro quo arrangements. The new system will test how able both the electorate and political parties are at adapting to the compromises and concessions that will inevitably have to happen in order for Cymru to be governed. Although there are hard line voters and politicians in every party I think the acceptance and… Read more »
I don’t see how party lists will change the way people vote. If you only have one vote you have to vote tactically. PR only ensures the result better represents the vote share.
I looks to me that you don’t know how PR in general works, what the new system looks like or do know and don’t understand. Try the following websites
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/voting-systems/types-of-voting-system/party-list-pr/
https://www.gov.wales/senedd-reform
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%27Hondt_method
The closed list system is proposed so someone puts one mark next to their choice of party (no longer can they pick the person they want to represent them). Faced with that choice they will either vote for the party they want if there’s a good chance of them winning. Or they will vote for the party with the best chance of beating the party they don’t want. That’s exactly what happens today. Unless you offer a preference system where the choices can be ranked in order, people won’t do anything differently no matter what jiggerypokery chicanery might happen in… Read more »
There are SIX winners per constituency not one. That could result in all six winners coming from one party or all six winners coming from six different parties. And ANY combination between those scenarios. The complexity of prediction and number of possible outcomes mean that the attractiveness and effectiveness of voting tactically is diminished to a point where it becomes in any normal situation useless and pointless. That is for those who understand how the system works. We have used the d’Hondt system in a multi seat constituency (of Cymru) a number of times already in elections for the European… Read more »
The Labour Party in Wales seems to be a spent force, it has no vision or ideas on how to solve the major issues facing Wales. There are no stand out achievements of late, just more incompetence and playing politics while cotowing to Westminster. Lets hope the current trend continues and they lose power at the next Senedd elections. Plaid is the only party to take the lead
While I agree – however let us not forget that is Wales, and our people will probably turn to the Tories before Plaid. Such is the levels of political ignorance within this country.
Plaid share of votes went up, they came second in election in Wales while the Labour share dropped considerably
Have I got this right?
No messages were actually deleted.
The leak came from HB’s phone.
No donation rules were broken.
There’s no evidence of improper influence.
The problem is Gething is echoing the Tory mantra of “broke no rules” like when they kept the money from Frank Hester.
Are the donors’ offences equivalent?
Yes
If the official “players” are now openly divided and lacking leadership strategy, vision and competence, then how much more alienated and angry the spectators lining the ground?
I think we may be on a cliff edge, the barbarian “hoards” of Refom about to sweep in. If all is visibly unpopular and irrelevant, then the “populist” fills the gaps. We’ve been here before.
I think the spelling is ‘hordes’ unless you’re thinking of a different meaning? But yes, certainly food for thought, and hopefully Reform will be seen of and become about as relevant as the Abolish the Welsh Assembly Party. Equally barking mad and similar politics.
Yes, the Labour group is now very divided. This is entirely because of Gethings choices. Had he not accepted £200k and not lobbied for his donors business, had he not lied about deleting messages and had he shown just a little humility in addressing his errors I doubt very much that events would have unfolded the way they did. It is regrettable because unfortunately, the Senedd is tied to Welsh Labour in the eyes of many voters. As a result, Gething’s choices have brought the Senedd into disrepute and damaged the institution. I genuinely hope their next leader shows greater… Read more »
A politician can be competent and effective in a senior ministerial role and yet be temperamentally unsuitable to head the government. And above all a political leader absolutely has to have the confidence of his or her parliamentary party., and the persistent rumour is that Mr Gething wasn’t his colleagues’ choice.
My hunch is that those twin deficiencies more or less guaranteed that Mr G. wouldn’t survive very long in the role which he’s now laid down.
Gething was not competent or effective in ministerial roles. The recent covid enquiry report highlights that. Thousands died unnecessarily in Wales because of incompetence
You have a point. I posted the above comment before I’d seen any detail about Lady Hallett’s report.
Yes and the incompetents walk away scot free I hope they sleep well at night
I have long believed VG was a closet Indy guy. And someone found out about it, which they reported to their masters in London and they engineered a way to get rid of him.
No.
Well, it’s the only thing that makes sense as to why they supported him until he got in and yet were so quick to turn on him. Corruption and politicians have long since gone hand in hand, if that was the benchmark for resigning then politicians wouldn’t exist….they vast majority are like it, so why him?! You really believe they weren’t aware of his dealings before he got into office?!
“Blythyn strenuously denied that she was the source of the leak, which was later echoed by Nation.Cymru”. Perhaps but it is fact that the screenshot was taken in Blythyn’s phone. An inconvenient fact the Welsh media appear happy to overlook.
She was sacked without an appropriate investigation or communication. Gething arrogance won through
Moving on is the theme, give another party a chance. We may even be surprised