(Pic : maestegtowncentre.com)

Following yesterday's look at the Bridgend constituency, it's time to look at the second seat in Bridgend county - Ogmore.

Electoral History

• Created in 1918 from Mid Glamorganshire and South Glamorganshire constituencies.
• 1918-1931 – Vernon Hartshore (Lab)
• 1931-1946 – Edward John Williams (Lab)
• 1946-1950 – John Evans (Lab)
• 1950-1979 – Walter Ernest Padley (Lab)
• 1979-2002 – Raymond Powell (Lab)
• 2002-2015 – Huw Irranca-Davies (Lab)

• Laurie Brophy (Green) – Retired teaching assistant and local campaigner from Pencoed. Probably one of the oldest candidates standing anywhere in the UK at age 82/83.
• Glenda Davies (UKIP) – Former science teacher and nurse, reportedly from Tondu.
• Gerald Francis (Lib Dem) - Anti-wind farm campaigner. Stood in Ogmore for the Lib Dems in the 2011 Assembly election.
• Huw Irranca-Davies (Lab) – Former Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Wales. Shadow Minister for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. First elected in 2002.
• Jane March (Con) – Conservative councillor for....Brenchley & Horsmonden in Tunbridge Wells, Kent.
• Emma Saunders (TUSC)
• Cllr. Tim Thomas (Plaid) – Town Councillor for Penprysg (Pencoed). Researcher for Communities First and has previously worked in a family-run business. Chaired the Yes campaign for Bridgend & Ogmore in 2011. Most definitely not UKIP (c/o Glamorgan Gazette).

Profile

(Pic : via National Assembly Members Research Service)

Ogmore consists of the northern half of Bridgend county (the Llynfi, Garw and Ogmore Valleys, as well as their confluence around Tondu/Sarn), Pencoed, and the villages of Gilfach Goch, Llanharan, Llanharry and Brynna in neighbouring Rhondda Cynon Taf.

With good road and rail links, Pencoed is now a dormitory town of Cardiff and Bridgend. In addition to being home to a major campus for cash-strapped Bridgend College, it's home to a technology park being developed at the Sony factory. It does feel like the poor relation of the big towns in Bridgend county, with no significant plans for regeneration (although there is a modest one) and hamstrung by access problems caused by the south Wales railway line.

Nearby Llanharan has been earmarked for a major housing development, Parc Llanilid, which has been put forward as an alternative to the defunct Dragon International Studios (aka. "Valleywood"). It's expected to make a significant contribution to Rhondda Cynon Taf's housing plans, but the village/town has been promised a bypass for at least two decades to ease traffic, as well as a direct link to the M4.

Maesteg is the second biggest town in Bridgend county and one of the largest towns in the south Wales valleys. Maesteg hasn't suffered as badly during the recession due to more direct links to the M4 and retains a sizable middle class (similarly to Aberdare, which is probably the best comparison). However, the upper Llynfi Valley area – in particular Caerau – contains some of the most deprived neighbourhoods in Wales (Bridgend's Deprivation Mapped). Maesteg outdoor market has been redeveloped, along with the main high street, in an attempt to revive the town's fortunes, but the town centre struggleslike many others.

There's a long-running campaign to improve transport links via a half-hourly rail service, but it's yet to be delivered despite years of promises. Opposition to the proposed/rejected merger between Bridgend and the Vale of Glamorgan is strongest in the Llynfi Valley - which has close ties to Port Talbot - while Maesteg and the mid-Llynfi valley around Llangynwyd contain the highest concentration of Welsh-speakers in Bridgend county.

The Ogmore and Garw valleys are sometimes considered"the forgotten parts"of Bridgend county due to possessing a semi-rural sparsity. There are ambitions to use the scenery for the community's benefit through developing mountain biking facilities, but this area is also at the forefront of renewable energy rows, with controversial wind farms developed in and around Gilfach Goch.

Due to large numbers of social housing tenants, Bettws has been hit particularly hard by the "bedroom tax", while there has been strong local opposition to proposals to close Tynyrheol Primary School in Llangeinor.

The areas of Sarn, Tondu, Aberkenfig and Bryncethin have been dubbed the "Valleys Gateway". At one end, Cefn Cribwr overlooks the controversial Parc Slip opencast mine, with direct views of Celtic Energy's handiwork. At the other end, several major housing developments have seen the population in the area grow significantly over the last decade, to the point of nearly becoming an extension of Bridgend town itself. This is putting pressure on local services due to the failure to develop a single "town centre" to provide a focal point for primary health care and retail.

Predictions

Why first-past-the-post is bad in a nutshell. If only we had an opportunity to change the voting system in a referend....oh. (Pic : via voterpower.org.uk)

This one's more straightforward than Bridgend.

Ogmore's one of Labour's safest seats in the UK, let alone Wales. It would be foolish to suggest any other outcome than Huw Irranca-Davies (MP Report Card) retaining it - the graphic above tells its own story. As you would expect, as a junior shadow cabinet member Huw's a party loyalist, only rebelling against the party line once during a vote on whether Gibraltarians should vote in any future EU in-out referendum (and that appears to be because he was acting as teller).

All things considered, previous Conservative and Lib Dem performances in Ogmore haven't been too bad. Various luminaries from both parties have passed through this seat on their way to bigger and better things, including Guto Bebb and Kirsty Williams.

This year will provide a real scrum for second place. The Tories and Lib Dems are bound to take a hit, but UKIP are an unknown quantity. Although I don't expect UKIP to do as well as in Bridgend, according to various studies, Ogmore is ripe for UKIP : high numbers of poorly-qualified white working classes, who feel disillusioned with mainstream politics and areas of (ironically) low immigration.

The Greens have stood in the seat previously, and even under their former branding of the Ecology Party. They lost their deposit on both occasions, though they managed to get more than 1,000 votes in 1983.

As much as I want Tim Thomas to pull off one of the biggest upsets in Welsh political history, it's unlikely to happen this time around despite the positive campaign he's running by all accounts. Plaid have a bit more presence in and around the Llynfi Valley and that's where most of their campaigning in Bridgend county is concentrated on. The best Plaid have ever done in the constituency is Bleddyn Hancock's 20.8% in the 2002 by-election, but under normal electoral conditions their best is 14%.

So Plaid normally poll 9-15% in Westminster elections in Ogmore, whilst doing better in the Assembly. I'd expect them to do the same this time around. That might be enough for a perfectly reasonable, but distant, second place.

Still haven't made your mind up?

I'm sure the vast majority of people reading this will have already made their mind up on who to vote for (if they haven't voted already by post), and I'm guessing again that the vast majority of readers will vote Plaid Cymru - I'm guessing that's my core audience.

Nevertheless, if anyone reading this intends to vote but hasn't made up their mind, there are plenty of  tests out there to help you - Vote Match, iSideWith, Verto etc.

Vote for Policies is one of the more popular ones, and my results were (shock, horror) :

(Click to enlarge)

(Pic : castlewales.com)

It seems like a while since the last one, but it's worth turning to the latest Bill which has been introduced to the National Assembly by Deputy Minister for Culture & Sport, Ken Skates (Lab, Clwyd South).

The Historic Environment Bill (previously called a Heritage Bill) – Bill (pdf), explanatory memorandum (pdf) – "makes important improvements" to the existing measures in place to protect and manage historical sites. The memorandum claims that Wales' historic environment supports up to 30,000 jobs and contributes up to £840million to the Welsh economy, also accounting for up to one fifth of all tourist spending.

Historical sites are described as "a precious resource, but a fragile one" due to the threat from accidental or deliberate damage, where even the smallest amount of damage can quickly destroy "a site that has survived for centuries, if not millennia".

Currently, there are two laws which set out how historical sites are managed and protected : the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 and the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Both laws have led to the the designation of 4,000 scheduled ancient monuments, 30,000 listed buildings and 523 conservation areas in Wales alone.

Most of the provisions of the Bill are amendments to the two Acts, with three key aims in mind :

• Introduce greater transparency and accountability to decisions on historical sites.
• Give more protection to listed monuments and buildings.
• Enhance existing mechanisms to protect historical sites.

• Place a duty on Welsh Ministers to consult when adding or removing an ancient monument to/from the schedule (of ancient and historic monuments) and also places a duty on Welsh Ministers to maintain the schedule itself.
• Grant monuments interim protection pending a decision on whether it's to be added or removed from the schedule.
• Set out compensation arrangements for loss or damage caused during an interim protection where a subsequent decision has been made not to include the monument on the schedule.
• Sets out the procedure for a review (requested by landowners) of a Minister's decision to include a monument on the schedule, which could take the form of a public inquiry, hearing or written representation.
• Enable Welsh Ministers to make regulations to "simplify" the process for scheduled monument consents (SMCs). This will make it much easier and less bureaucratic to make "straightforward"alterations to scheduled monuments, such as replacing a broken fence. It will also enable retrospective SMCs to be granted after such works have been undertaken.
• Give Welsh Ministers the power to refuse"repeat applications"(similar applications submitted within 2 years of the first) for SMCs, and also "discretion" rather than "duty" to hold a public inquiry on SMC applications (presumably with regard to straightforward alterations).
• Enable Welsh Ministers to enter into a heritage partnership agreement (HPA) with landowners, interested groups, neighbours, site managers etc. which will enable the HPA to grant scheduled monument consents for works that repair, remove, make alterations to or make additions to a scheduled monument. More than one monument can be included in the agreement and terms for such agreements will be set out in regulations.
• Give Welsh Ministers the power to issue enforcement notices or temporary stop orders for unauthorised works on a scheduled monument, which will set out measures and deadlines to restore damage to or mitigate its effects. It also gives officers with written authority from the Welsh Government the power of entry to determine whether enforcement notices should be issued.
• Make it an offence not to comply with an enforcement notice, with those not complying being liable to a fine.
• Restrict the use of metal detectors near scheduled monuments.
• Place a duty on Welsh Ministers to maintain a register of historic gardens, parks, ornamental landscapes, cemeteries and recreational areas.
• Extend the definition of"monument" to include places where there's evidence of human activity but no structures or works (i.e. battlefields, stone age sites) as they currently can't be scheduled monuments.

• Generally extend the same measures outlined for scheduled historical monuments (above) to include listed buildings.
• Relax the rules relating to certificates of immunity (COI - explained here) for listed buildings so they can be issued at any time. It means owners won't have to make a full planning application to get a COI and can still get guarantees their building won't be listed for a certain period of time in order to make developments viable.
• Change the circumstances under which "urgent works" can be carried out to listed buildings, meaning urgent works (i.e roof repairs) can be carried out at any time as long as it doesn't impact its residential use (where applicable) - though owners/occupiers need to be given seven days notice. Local authorities will also have the power to recover costs for "urgent works".

• Places a duty on local authorities to maintain statutory historic environment record for their area. This record must include every :
• listed building, scheduled monument and conservation area
• battlefields of historical interest
• historic parks and gardens
• UNESCO world heritage site
• any other site of historical interest
• details of how the historical and archaeological development of the area has contributed to its present character
• details and findings of archaeological investigations
• States that the record itself must be publicly available free of charge, but gives local authorities the power to issue charges to recover the costs of certain services (like compiling a report based on information contained in the record).
• Establishes an Advisory Panel for Welsh Historic Environment to provide expertise and strategic advice relating to the historic environment, such as : identifying sites of national significance, interpreting research and public engagement. The panel will prepare a three-year work programme, submitted to the Welsh Ministers for approval.

Costs

As is becoming something of a trope on here, I'll stick to the Welsh Government's preferred options.

The total cost of the Bill's provisions between 2016-17 and 2020-21 is ~£780,000– working out at roughly £156,000 per year. Some £50,000 per year of that covers the costs of the advisory panel, and a further £80,000 per year covers the costs of statutory historical environment records (plus a one-off £4,000 bill to produce guidance) – so about 84% of the Bill's costs over the next five years are down to those two elements alone.

The only other significant cost is £48,400 between 2016-2018 to create the official register of historical gardens etc. The simplified procedures for scheduled monument consents will actually save a nominal sum of money.

"Protect"? Or "Makes life easier (for developers)"?

The reason landowners who destroyed part of Offa's Dyke in 2013 escaped prosecution was that they "didn't know it was there". That will no longer be a defence under the Bill. (Pic : Wales Online)

The next bit is going to be incredibly anoracky/anorackish, but it was good that the Bill was laid in front of the Assembly last Friday (May 1^st, presumably due to the bank holiday) which will hopefully give AMs and their staff enough time to go through it in order to make informed contributions to debates. Usually, Bills are laid on the Monday, or even as the respective Minister is making the announcement, which doesn't give AMs enough time to react.

On the content of the Bill itself, it'll certainly make it harder for people who damage monuments (deliberately or unwittingly) to escape prosecution - the damage caused to Offa's Dyke in 2013 being a case in point.

However, I suspect conservation groups may be concerned that other provisions will make life a bit easier for developers and landowners, but more difficult for those who want to protect presently unscheduled monuments and unlisted buildings – in particular provisions relating to relaxation of rules on certificates of immunity.

Then there's the advisory panel. A few years ago, the Welsh Government floated the idea of merging the two public bodies responsible for the historical environment – Cadw and the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments in Wales (RCAHMW). Cadw broadly acts as the"gatekeeper"– literally maintaining and managing historic properties - while the RCAHMW is the "record keeper", maintaining the paperwork.

The idea was shelved in January 2014 because of opposition from academics and conservation groups, as well as worries about the independence of the body as both would merge "into"the Welsh Government.

Personally-speaking, it was a good idea – the fewer public bodies competing on the same ground the better – though concerns about independence and centralisation are perfectly valid considering the Welsh Government's track record. An advisory panel would presumably be made up of the same people involved with Cadw and RCAHMW anyway, so I suppose it's a compromise between a full merger and maintaining two separate bodies. As far as I know a merger has been postponed rather than completely taken off the table.

Creating local authority historical records sounds like a good idea on paper, but I suspect the Welsh Government are underestimating the task  associated with compiling what could be a large amount of information. Most of it will already exist of course and will just need bringing together (examples at this website).

It's good that battlefields and historical/ornamental gardens are now formally acknowledged as sites worthy of protection or registration. I doubt there's much that can be made from battlefields, but protecting gardens, cemeteries and alike is good news as their value is perhaps underestimated.

How are Bridgend's town and community councils complying with new guidance on maintaining an online presence? (Pic : BBC Wales)

On May 1st, new regulations and statutory guidance (pdf) came into force as a result of the Local Democracy Act 2013. It means town and community councils are obligated to publish things such as members' interests, meeting minutes and other assorted information on a"regularly updated"website.

It's unclear if there are any deadlines for community and town councils to enact any of this, though around £10,000 of Welsh Government funding has been made available via Bridgend County Borough Council. I thought it would be worth going through each of Bridgend's 20 town and community councils to see what the situation's like and where they could make improvements.

Grade A – Excellent

• Coity Higher Community Council– Well-designed and inviting website. Good social media presence. Working RSS feed for news, but they should consider including things like meeting minutes in the RSS feed. Minutes are detailed, but not overburdening, and include declared interests.
• Laleston Community Council– Functional website. Minutes and agendas are very detailed and published promptly. Good member profiles with separately published interests. Needs a working RSS news feed and social media presence.
• Porthcawl Town Council– Arguably the single best website. Minutes and agendas (full council and committee) are detailed and published within days of a meeting. Councillor profiles have separate register of members' interests. It's well-integrated with other local websites like the Porthcawl Chamber of Trade. Has a social media presence and its own blog with a working RSS news feed.

• Bridgend Town Council– The website's dull but functional and information is fairly easy to find. Minutes of whole council meetings are very detailed but the same can't be said of other committees. There doesn't seem to be any register of interests, though they note interests declared in meetings. Could do with a detailed, working newsfeed. Carnegie House has a social media presence, the council itself doesn't.
• Cefn Cribwr Community Council - In a correction to my original post (highlighted by the strike-through below), I've been informed by the Clerk to the council that they do, indeed, have a website. Unfortunately it doesn't appear to show up on search engines (hopefully, including a link here will help). Anyway, the website is functional, minutes are detailed and appear to be posted promptly, while the council also publishes its accounts.There's a useful contact page for community councillors too.
• Cornelly Community Council– A decent website, but a little outdated. Minutes are detailed and published relatively quickly – including members' interests – however, sub-committee minutes haven't been updated in a while. Agendas of meetings are useful. Needs a working news feed and social media presence.
• Garw Valley Community Council - Well-designed website. Has got everything set up to publish minutes, agendas etc. but they've failed to update it regularly. When minutes are published they're very detailed. Publishes separate members' interest details and clerk's reports to the council (one of the few councils to do so). Lacks is a working RSS news feed and strong social media presence.
• Merthyr Mawr Community Council– Considering it's one of the smaller community councils, their website's surprisingly good. Minutes are concise and don't bombard you with information (though it hasn't been updated recently). Contact details are clear. Lacks a news feed and social media presence. The only community council that provides a Welsh version of their website.

• Brackla Community Council– The website's OK, but hasn't been updated in a while. The contact page is useful, though information about councillors themselves could be more prominent. No mention of members' interests. The community centre has a Facebook page, but the council doesn't. The council doesn't seem to have a Twitter feed either.
• Coychurch Lower Community Council– Website's not bad, but there's no contact details for councillors. Information is fairly easy to find and they're one of the few community councils that publishes their accounts. Minutes are available and are concise. No social media presence, no working news feed.
• Llangynwyd Middle Community Council– Website is nice to look at but a bit outdated, and minutes etc. are not prominent enough. The minutes themselves are quite detailed and well-presented but seems to take a while to be uploaded after a meeting. No news feed. Has a Facebook page (of sorts) but no significant social media presence.
• Pencoed Town Council– The website itself isn't bad, and it says it's going to be updated "in the coming months". Minutes are detailed and include declared interests but don't appear to be updated very regularly. Indirect social media presence via local Facebook pages, but also has involvement with the Pencoed Hyphen hyperlocal newspaper.
• Pyle Community Council– Website is reasonable enough with some useful community information. However, minutes haven't been updated/posted in 2015 – though minutes themselves are quite detailed. No working newsfeed but does, at least, have a Facebook page (of sorts).
• St Brides Minor Community Council– Website is reasonable enough if outdated. It seems none of the councillors are contactable by e-mail. Minutes and agendas are detailed but published directly on the webpage, not as a separate document which makes it difficult to find specific details. As a plus, they publish detailed annual accounts. No news feed. No separate members' interests. No social media presence.

• Coychurch Higher Community Council– Website is bare bones to the point of uselessness. Minutes are published but it's a slightly confusing layout. Agendas are useful but it seems to take a while for minutes to be published after a meeting. Doesn't appear to have a social media presence.
• Maesteg Town Council– Considering the size and importance of the council their website's a disappointment. Minutes haven't been updated since 2013 and there's little in the way of news. They do, at least, have an indirect social media presence via local pages.
• Ogmore Valley Community Council – Uses a Facebook page instead of a traditional website. It's fine as a newsfeed, but it makes it difficult to find detailed information quickly.
• Ynysawdre Community Council– Website is very basic. Member profiles aren't particularly detailed and some don't provide contact details. However, minutes themselves aredetailed. No social media presence, no news feed.

• Cefn Cribwr Community Council– No information or web presence at all other than a single page on Save Our School Buseswebsite.
  
• Llangynwyd Lower Community Council– No information or web presence at all other than a single page on Save Our School Buses website.
• Newcastle Higher Community Council– I would've expected better considering it covers sizable communities like Pen-y-fai and Aberkenfig. A holding page doesn't cut it in 2015.

• Consider whether their websites are user-friendly, and ensure key information can be found quickly. If you have to, use a free template like Wordpress – they can often be as good as professionally-designed websites. Laleston is perhaps the best example for smaller councils to follow, but the town councils and larger community councils like Brackla should try to follow Porthcawl's example.
• Publish a separate list of members' interests and publish full annual accounts.
• Set clear deadlines to publish minutes (i.e. the day after they're agreed as an accurate record by the council).
• Create newsfeeds with working RSS feeds - that's from a purely selfish perspective in order to add them to my blogroll. If you make a significant decision as a council, make sure it's publicised as much as possible.
• Use Facebook and Twitter to keep in direct contact with residents, but only use social media to complement, not replace, a full website.

Why are we looking at five more Tory years when we could've had this? (Pic : Wales Online)

In one final visit to the 2015 House of Commons election, it's worth looking in more detail at last Thursday's results in Wales - considering why it happened and what can be learned from it.

Conservatives

(Click to enlarge)

A Unionist dog whistle - You have to start with the Tories, simply because they provided the most interesting development in Wales. Those gains (whether in seats or votes) were in places you would've expected : the Costa Geriatrica in north Wales and wealthier parts of south Wales along the M4 corridor - what Balsom's Three Wales Model (here) dubs"British Wales". Gower would normally be considered an exception. This could be a direct result of Anglo-Welsh concerns about Scottish nationalism or even (subsequently) things like Trident and its impact on the UK's global standing. When you factor all these things in, their performance in Wales perhaps isn't as spectacular as it first appears; it's no different to Labour maxing-out their vote in the valleys and taking an extra seat or two.

Voters "stuck with the plan"– Large numbers of people are what you might call"temporarily embarrassed millionaires". The key Conservative campaigning messages were to"stick with the plan"and bank on Cameron's credible leadership. It's easy to assume – and I suspect most people reading this are left-wing – that because we oppose cuts to public spending everyone will. "Tax and spend" politics might be seen as bad things by those in middle earning private sector jobs who are too wealthy to see the benefits of redistribution, but too poor to really consider themselves part of the middle and upper classes. Most will be young professionals or young families. Many will be"Shy Tories"or voted for Tony Blair (what's now being dubbed "aspirational politics"). So it's no surprise that, as we're just about seeing an economic recovery, wealthier parts of Wales voted Conservative – they genuinely feel better off and want to maintain the status quo. Perhaps they have longer memories than Labour give them credit for.

Lines Between Life and Death – I'm sure the Vale of Clwyd gain will be almost entirely down to the possible downgrades at Glan Clwyd Hospital, which is reportedly incredibly unpopular in the area. Similarly, Powys – which relies quite heavily on cross-border health services – has turned blue on both sides of the border meaning there's the possibility of significant Anglo-Welsh lobbying to protect services in Shropshire. Labour have said nowt on either issue (even if it's devolved) and concentrated on pan-UK issues, flagging up London-specific policies like the"mansion tax" as though it was relevant in Wales or northern England. The Tories meanwhile ran an old-fashioned campaign focusing on local issues.

Labour

(Click to enlarge)

A crap and complacent campaign– Their manifesto managed to contain so many words yet say very little. It was a load of focus group seminar guff and nothing stuck. The little progress they made in their target seats (Cardiff Central aside) could tell us several things : their activist base is thinning out and they can't run the campaigns of yore, they've run out of ideas, they neither accept how bad the smell was when Gordon Brown left office or the Welsh Government's poor record as beliefless middle managers. Someone (it might've been the defunct Welsh Not blog) once described Carwyn Jones' leadership style as similar to that of a supermarket manager, and he exemplified that by calling for brand changes - that's what you do when you have a bad product. Failing to reject or spell out cuts made them too right-wing for the now radicalised and energised Scots, backing tax rises and increased borrowing made them too left-wing for English swing voters, while the whole time they were perhaps "too London" for Wales - sticking with policies your average Welsh Labour voter couldn't understand or relate to - the "mansion tax" being one of them.

They increased their share of the vote in the wrong places - On the whole, they did fairly poorly and not just in their target seats but even in parts of the South Wales Valleys. OK, Labour MPs have big majorities anyway, a blip here and there doesn't matter; but they took voters in Wales for granted and automatically assumed any anti-Tory vote belonged to them by right. Also, there's no point securing big percentage swings rises in places like Merthyr, Swansea West and Blaenau Gwent if they can't hang on Gower or take seats like Arfon and Aberconwy. They should consider this a final warning for what could happen in future elections. All those red constituencies on the third diagram are ripe for the taking by other parties in the Assembly elections - with the right candidate and the right message - due to lower turnouts. They should thank their lucky stars that Plaid are no SNP.

Ed Miliband's leadership– Truth is this election wasn't lost during the campaign but several years ago. There's a hidden test prospective Prime Ministers need to pass. I call it the Deep Impact test. Imagine a major disaster was about to befall the UK – like an asteroid smashing into London. A prospective Prime Minister will be able to give the final address and convince you everything will be alright. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair could do it. David Cameron could do it. Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon could. It's not a direct qualification for the job, but it's something you can't learn as a SpAd, from a PPE lecture or at a think tank seminar. You either have it or you don't. Ed Miliband doesn't and Labour better make damned sure whoever follows him does.

South Wales is the new "Celtic Heartland"– Labour's annihilation in Scotland is good news for troughers from the Valleys, as south Wales is the new Central Belt. It means greater prospects for Welsh Labour MPs at the top table of shadow government - if the incoming leadership want a token person with a funny accent from the regions. Owen Smith has already, inexplicably, kept his Shadow Welsh Secretary post. Every cloud....

A protest against the Welsh Government?– While Labour were keen to conflate Westminster issues with devolved issues in 2011, the exact opposite has happened this time - no doubt health has been a major issue on the doorstep, for example. The Welsh Government can throw around all the survey findings they want, but it doesn't do anything to stem a bubbling populist opinion that Labour are running Wales into the ground. It won't cost them many seats at present (though it explains Vale of Clwyd), but it makes them vulnerable. This might also explain the UKIP figures further down.

Plaid Cymru

(Click to enlarge)

A brightly-coloured campaign but a strategic failure– Plaid got boots on the ground in target seats, held rallies and Tweeted until their thumbs fell off – basically attempting to replicate the Ynys Môn by-election. However, they might've placed too much emphasis on the TV debates. While Leanne Wood did well and grew in confidence, at points you couldn't tell if this campaign was about raising Leanne's personal profile or sending MPs to Westminster. On strategic failures, take Cynon Valley and Caerphilly. In both seats, Plaid selected firefighters to stand. I don't know about you, but firefighters tend to work shifts, and might not be able to commit as much time to campaigning as UKIP's army of the independently wealthy and retirees; or have as many canvassers to call upon as sitting Labour MPs in local authorities chock full of Labour councillors. Perhaps some candidates in outlier seats, where you would expect Plaid to do well, needed more help from the centre and didn't get it (the same goes for Labour too in places like Gower). A slim victory on Ynys Môn would've papered over the cracks, and it's worth reviewing precisely how they run and manage campaigns at a local level.

Increased share of the vote in some 2016 target seats– On the whole, Plaid did OK and their mean increase in share of the vote per seat (just under 1%) was better than both the Conservatives (0.9%) and Labour (0.6%). There's a glimmer of hope for next year, in particular constituencies like Rhondda and Cardiff West - but they shouldn't get carried away. They flopped in Aberconwy and Llanelli (which should ring alarm bells, though Keith Davies is a different opponent to Nia Griffith) while their performances in other constituencies weren't as good as you would otherwise expect. They lost votes to UKIP too, and under normal circumstances these votes would've been Plaid's to pick up, which could've generated an SNP-style surge. It didn't happen because....

The anti-austerity vanguard didn't show up (except for viewers in Scotland) – Plaid's key message was opposition to both public spending cuts and a speedy reduction of the UK's budget deficit. So where were all these hard-up voters demanding change? "False consciousness" isn't an excuse as the Welsh electorate isn't half as radical as Plaid think they are and Plaid have been given more publicity than at any point in their history. For whatever reason, the electorate didn't buy what Plaid were selling; take a look at this sample. They did in Scotland though, and I suspect it's because Nicola Sturgeon is backed by a competent and aspirational SNP government while Plaid (and the Greens) appear self-righteous. A bit organic quinoa. A bit cultural criticism postgraduate. A bit Guardian and Owen Jones. A bit Machu Picchu gap year. A bit crachach. A bit "sustainability". A bit too keffiyeh and vegan skinny soy latte. A party of Apples when the world runs on PCs. In short, they should ask for the SNP's help on how to present policies, and desperately need to inject a bit of working class toughness and directness into their campaigns; before the feminist wing of Plaid get a fit of the vapours, Nicola Sturgeon has proven you can do the latter without being"macho".

The "Big Demand" becomes "Big Whinge"- Plaid Cymru campaigns are normally framed around "The Big Demand". Pre-1997 it was devolution. Subsequently it was a law-making Assembly, to be included in TV debates and the likes of the infamous "maximum wage". This time it was funding equity (per-head) with Scotland – which came out of nowhere and didn't have any firm grounding in fact. Why should Wales receive an extra £1.2billion a year?"Because Scotland" would fail a GCSE economics exam and it sounds like the begging bowl politics that turn even people like me off Plaid. They had more moral and economic justification for a proportional share of spending on things like Crossrail and HS2 (Will HS2 benefit Wales?), and I don't see why they didn't focus on that instead. The comments from Syniadau and Gerald Holtham (first comment) are solid and honest advice - the sort of advice Plaid Cymru's leadership need to listen to and not dismiss because it doesn't fit their narrative. They're getting basic stuff wrong in a way the SNP aren't, and I suspect it's down to how the party is organised, with an excessively powerful executive bubble prone to groupthink.

The hype train derailed – Self-confidence and self-belief is great, but if expectations aren't met you crash down to earth hard. It's worth repeating : this wasn't a bad result, but Plaid got a bit carried away and it masked their more realistic expectations (to hold three seats). There was little objective thinking or opinion on how their campaign was really going. If you believe Twitter, Facebook and sites like Daily Wales it was brilliant everywhere; I doubt I'm the only person who never buys into that "Hearing good things on the doorstep" poop (from all parties; canvassers are about as welcome as double glazing salespeople and Jehovah's Witnesses). This allowed supporters to whip themselves into such a frenzy they convinced each other they could win Llanelli and Ceredigion because they turn up to rallies, stick placards in their front gardens, retweet image macros to each other in social media echo chambers or are due success by riding the SNP's coat tails; there's an old idiom about empty vessels making the most noise. When those over-confident expectations aren't met, the demoralised grassroots will (quite rightly) start to ask questions.

Liberal Democrats

(Click to enlarge)

They held Ceredigion (and retain a base in a few other places) – One of the few good news stories for the Lib Dems last week at the expense of Plaid, and I suspect it's down to Mark Williams as a constituency representative than his party. Although even there their share of the vote collapsed, they retain a rump presence in their Mid Wales heartland and a sizable presence in Cardiff Central. Also, they still managed to get 2.3million votes across the UK, which proportionally would've resulted in around 50 MPs – 50 MPs being much more heartening than 8! So there's no need for Lib Dems to lose all hope, but they have to accept what happened and why.

Everything else that could go wrong did go wrong– Where to start? Their campaign was noticeably limp in Wales everywhere outside Cardiff Central and Ceredigion. It was right to focus on retaining rather than gaining seats, but some of the drops in votes are mind boggling. Everyone was expecting a backlash, but not even I was prepared for some of these figures. The irony is that, in my opinion, they had the strongest manifesto - not that it means anything to the electorate at large.

It might take 3/4 electoral cycles to recover – The groundwork Lib Dem activists need to do to rebuild their voter base is monumental, but I suspect they will recover (to a point) – it'll just take time. The days of the Lib Dems taking 20% of the vote in the valleys are over though and I suspect, after what looks set to be a dreadful 2016 election, they'll have to start with the basics : more councillors and canvassers. The start of that process has to be humility in front of the electorate. Stop the"If the Lib Dems were still in government...." No more silly bar graphs. No more"Only the Lib Dems can...."

Remember the human cost– OK, I had a giggle with the logo because Lib Dems have savoured the smell of their own farts as if it's the bouquet of a fine wine for the last five years (See also : Proctalgia Fugax 1964-2014) - and history will probably be kinder to them come 2020. Despite that, we need to recognise the personal and emotional cost. For example, their Bridgend candidate, Cllr. Anita Davies, is a genuinely inspirational woman who didn't deserve to be publicly humiliated for the sake of party pride. They lost up to 30 deposits in the land of David Lloyd George and shouldn't have put up so many paper candidates this time around, instead accepting the catastrophe that was coming.

UKIP

(Click to enlarge)

They're taking votes from everyone– They've gone from losing every deposit to third place (in terms of vote share) in the space of five years. It'll probably be hard to determine precisely where the bulk of UKIP votes came from, but it's clear they came from every direction with the sharpest increases in Labour heartlands. As I said in a comment last week, I suspect it has at least three main components:

1. Protest voters who used to vote Lib Dem or Plaid but now vote UKIP - because they're the party that's shaken things up the most and who "the establishment" are most worried about. In many cases, the rise in UKIP votes correlates with the decline in Lib Dem votes. It makes you wonder if many of the people voting Lib Dem in the past genuinely believe in their policies; or, whether they want to vote out of civic duty but didn't know who to vote for - the Lib Dems, and now UKIP, being an established "None of the Above" party.
2. Committed anti-immigration voters, who probably would've voted BNP in the past, or have been convinced it's a serious threat.
3. True believers (anti-EU libertarians and social conservatives) who've been there since the start.

They're not exclusively "Little Englanders"– When you look at the map, UKIP's vote hasn't increased sharply in places you would've expected it to (i.e. where English people migrate to), like Aberconwy and Pembrokeshire. Wrexham (where's there's a large Polish community) and Flintshire aside, their vote was strongest across the Valleys, in particular the Gwent valleys, where people have a high degree of Welsh identity and low degrees of both English and British identity. This wasn't about Britishness or Welshness at all, but....

UKIP voters arelikely to be"the left behind" - There are two other indicators which correlate with UKIP getting a high share of the vote – people with no qualifications and low percentages of people holding degree-level qualifications. Essentially, UKIP voters are, or could be, people who've been left behind by Labour for generations, who don't have a clue what "austerity" means, don't read the Morning Star or are highly unlikely to be in unionised workplaces, have been hit hard by globalisation, but who want a convenient explanation for their problems that they understand - like immigrants from the EU taking their jobs. UKIP's cravat wearing cads and bounders have, figuratively speaking, got turkeys to vote for Christmas. These voters are people who would suffer most under UKIP's brand of right-wing libertarianism and securing their vote is an act of political genius, boiling down to their straight-talking, pub philosopher style - it's something other parties can learn from, not dismiss or turn their noses up at.

Their divisiveness means they're still some way away from being competitive– Considering how disorganised their campaign in Wales was, it's a surprise they did as well as they did. In PR terms they're a walking disaster, but I suspect many Kippers don't care and take any attack as the "establishment parties" rounding on them. They actually do better when attacked, and a bit more focus should've been on their wacky policies not their wacky candidates. I don't want to get anyone's hopes up, and it doesn't make a difference, but compared to last year's European elections their vote is down (though turnout was much lower last year). I suspect this is the absolute maximum UKIP can expect to achieve in terms of vote share, and Kippers aren't known for turning out in Assembly elections. Next year that will change and the other parties need to prepare now.

Greens

(Click to enlarge)

They've come some distance in a short space of time– The Green performed modestly even when compared to 2010, but there's clear and distinctive progress made, with a record number of candidates and a record share of the vote. In terms of next year's Assembly elections, it's looking good for them in Mid & West Wales and South Wales West – but they'll still have to double their vote to absolutely ensure a list seat.

A Plaid-Green alliance wouldn't have made much of a difference– There was much discussion on this in the run up to the start of the campaign, but even if Plaid and the Greens stood a joint candidate in Ceredigion, the Lib Dems would've won. The Greens in Wales are still in their relative infancy as a serious political force. It's going to be a long time until co-operation between the two parties will benefit either party simply because the Green share of the vote is negligible and so they don't bring much to the table in terms of leverege (for now). Two places where Green-Plaid cooperation might've worked are Swansea West and Cardiff Central - making the difference between single digit and double digit results. Meh.

That'll be £16,000 please– All but three Green candidates in Wales lost their deposits, which is marginally more than the Lib Dems. They might've over-expanded their ambitions too quickly and it was a ridiculous decision to stand this many candidates so soon. A careful selection of targets might've helped (probably sticking to university seats - they did relatively well in them) and the £16,000 their candidates chucked away could've been better spent preparing for next year. Far from an exponential surge, their official response to the result was like saying there's a tsunami on the way but a 5cm wave subsequently breaking up the beach - technically correct, but barely enough to get your feet wet. In fact, their votes match what they normally achieve on the Assembly lists (30-35,000 votes) so you can contend that the Greens haven't made much hard progress in Wales, and simply picked up natural and habitual Green votes in a Westminster election for once (as opposed to them going to the Lib Dems or Plaid).

The decision to close an "empty"moderate learning disability class at Pencoed Primary school has been"called-in" by a Bridgend Council committee. (Pic : Wales Online)

• Insufficient evidence on the effect on standards and no evidence provided on the effect it would have on children's needs.
• No evaluation of the impact a class closure would have on affected pupils, or other schools.
• An inadequate response to consultee questions - in particular the school inspectorate, Estyn.

It's been confirmed that Bridgend County will host the 2017 Urdd Eisteddfod. (Pic : Daily Post)

(Pic : Coastal Oil & Gas Ltd)

Bridgend's voters were faced with a unique choice on May 7th. Maybe, in future, other Welsh voters will have the option too. (Pic : via Facebook)

I doubt many people reading this will have heard of The Pirate Party.

"Pirate politics"– the umbrella term used for such parties – is often hard to place on the traditional political spectrum. While the left-wing is mainly focused on inequalities and the right-wing on tradition, pirate politics is based around information : how freely you can access it, who it belongs to and how and why it should be used.

It could be considered a form of techno-anarchism or simply a political child of the internet age - in the same way the 1960s counter-culture led to massive social reforms.

Pirate politics, as a concept, was born as a result of organised opposition to intellectual property laws  in Sweden. This stemmed from clampdowns on file-sharing websites like The Pirate Bay and – if you want to go further back - exemplified by the row between Napster and Metallica or, if you want to go even further back, creating and sharing home-made mix-tapes ("Home Taping Is Killing Music").

Far from being the hobby horse of serial copyright infringers (aka."pirates") - and while these still remain relatively fringe issues - more people are waking up to how the internet impacts their lives : privacy, government openness, "hactivism", direct democracy, cybercrime, net neutrality (Independence Minutiae : Wales & Net Neutrality), open data.

Established in 2009, the Pirate Party UK put up six candidates at the 2015 election and received, between them, 1,103 votes. You might scoff at that, but the Pirates have edged stronger in each election they fight.

Their 2015 manifesto (pdf) included policies such as : ending unpaid internships, ending discrimination against young people in the welfare system, the introduction of a land value tax, labelling electronic goods with the average time it take for them to break, legalising euthanasia (Life, Ethics & Independence II : Euthanasia) and free public Wi-Fi.

In Wales, Pirates support devolution of the criminal justice system, energy and welfare, as well as widening access to Welsh language lessons and Welsh-medium education.

As you would expect, not everyone is happy with goals such as complete freedom of speech or free sharing of information. This includes governments, especially when you consider how embarrassing the revelations from Wikileaks and NSA whistleblower, Edward Snowden, have been for the United States. Meanwhile, the founder of the original Swedish Pirate Party, Rick Falkvinge, once advocated that freedom of speech should take a higher priority over a crackdown on online child pornography– a stance backed by the Swedish equivalent of the National Union of Journalists.

Iceland already has 3 Pirate MPs, but could Iceland be a few years away from having a Pirate Party-led government? (Pic : visir.is)

Although it'll be some time until Pirates are an established minority party like the Greens, in other countries Pirates have enjoyed marked success :

• Germany currently has 43 Pirate members of federal state parliaments (Landtag), consistently winning 7-8% of the vote in some Landtag elections.
• Germany elected a Pirate MEP in 2014; Sweden elected 2 Pirate MEPs in 2009.
• The Czech Republic has a Pirate member of the Senate/upper chamber, economist Libor Michálek (joint nomination with other parties).
• Elected local councillors in Austria, Catalonia, Croatia, France, The Netherlands and Switzerland.

The most exciting recent development in the Pirate Party's history are in Iceland. In 2013, Iceland elected 3 Pirate MPs and secured 5% of the national vote (Icelandic MPs are elected by proportional representation).

With Iceland having undergone a period of economic and political upheaval since the Great Recession, and while the population have clamoured for reforms to Icelandic democracy - including a new constitution - the Pirates have found a niche focusing on privacy, civil rights and government transparency. This culminated in a failed move to grant Edward Snowden Icelandic citizenship.

Recent polling has suggested support for the Pirates in Iceland is now at 24% - the highest polling figures for any Pirate Party anywhere in the world. If these figures remain at the same level into the next Icelandic general election, due in 2017, the Pirates would be the single largest party in the Althing, with around 24 of the legislature's 63 seats. It begs the question whether Iceland could have the first Pirate-led government.

With Pirates yet to make a serious impact in Welsh or UK politics, their electoral aims are more modest - winning a council seat would be a start. However, it would be premature to write them off, as events in Iceland show the global movement could be on the cusp of a significant breakthrough.

I've been given an opportunity to question the spokesperson for Pirate Party Wales (website), and recent Bridgend Parliamentary Candidate, David Elston (@ThyPirateDave) - some answers have been edited for brevity.

Pirate Party candidate for Bridgend at the 2015 UK election - and spokesperson for Pirate Party Wales - David Elston. (Pic : Wales Online)

1. Newer and smaller parties are often dismissed by rivals as "single issue parties". Beyond your core issues, what do the Pirate Party offer?

"I completely agree on your statement regarding smaller parties. For some parties that's precisely their aim. There is a Vapers in Power Party, which focuses on E-Cigs and Vaping laws while we also have a NOTA party, which simply offers people a "None of the Above" option on the ballot.

The Pirate Party are not content being a focus group for just a handful of policies; instead we have crowd-sourced policies on Culture, Economy, Education, Environment, Society, Health, Justice... and many other areas.

For example, the Pirate Party is best known for our campaigns for Free Speech, protection of privacy and Copyright & Patent Law reform. However, outside of that, crowd-sourcing leads to other national policies; for example, we would abolish tuition fees as we believe education should be a life-long right. We want to re-nationalise Royal Mail to ensure all of the UK has access to postal services and we seek a national halt on fracking - especially in Wales where we produce an energy surplus."

"Copyright law stifles growth.

Firstly, I must be absolutely clear : reforming copyright doesn't mean everything ever invented automatically becomes free; it means copyright laws are rolled back to their original purpose. Copyright restrictions originally lasted 14 years while they now last 70. It allows corporations to horde rights and chokes creativity.

For example, big pharmaceutical companies can make a new and successful cancer treatment drug. This company could keep the drug recipe and not share it with anyone for 70 years because they profit more from their other, less-effective, drugs. Alternatively, they could charge astronomical costs for the new drug for up to 70 years, which devastates institutions like the NHS. We're already seeing the NHS swap between similar drugs to avoid patent costs - I've seen my asthma medication change - not due to effectiveness, but because “new” drugs are cheaper.

In short, in its extreme, drug patents are killing people. We want copyright reduced to 10 years, which still gives ample time for companies to make a healthy return on investment and allows creativity to flourish."

"We have to acknowledge that Superfast Cymru has failed us on so many fronts.

Firstly, new housing developments are still being set up with copper cables, not fibre optic connections. This provides a terrible standard of connection and it was reported in The Telegraph that it knocks 20% off the value of a home.

Secondly, even where new cables are being retrospectively rolled out, consumers are expected to increase their subscriptions just to be brought up to a European standard speed. We shouldn't have to pay more for what is the norm on the continent, it will only put the UK technologically further behind the rest of the EU.

We aren't opposed to the private sector, so we would not nationalise anything for the sake of nationalisation, but at a minimum we should seek to nationalise OpenReach. This is on the basis that we've already tried supporting and incentivising the company within the private sector and it hasn't worked.We would guarantee a basic Internet connection for all and provide public Wi-Fi spots so everyone can benefit from the Internet,allowing them to freely exchange thoughts and ideas and take part in the digital revolution."

"The digital world is like the physical world. There are some streets and cities which have safe areas, without anything of substantial risk to children and without any real criminal activity; some websites are absolutely fine while others not.

Much like police can't 100% guarantee you don't come to risk or harm, filters cannot replace the parental role of assisting their children on the Internet. Feeding information to the public that censoring the Internet at an ISP level as a “positive step” that is “necessary” to protect children is an absolute fallacy. Not only does it far from guarantee their safety, and should not be trusted to do so, it also fundamentally breaks the Internet. We're already seeing reports of harmless websites being caught in the ISP filter.


As for crime, filters don't stop criminal activity. The idea we can just flick a switch in a server room and that will end all online criminal activity is naïve at best. It's about as effective as closing down roads that have a high percentage of crime in them; the crime simply moves to another location or people find a way past the barriers.

Again, the best defence against cyber-crime is to educate the user. If you educate society and allow people to make their own choices, not by using ISP level blocks en-masse, people will willingly not expose themselves to risky material."

"The Internet was originally a tool but has become entwined with our physical world. I recently ordered a coffee which had a voucher clipped into the paper cup – the voucher specified that terms and conditions were on the website. To sign up to most providers or companies now, you have to use a website. Jobseekers essentially have to be online at home. Even homeless people carry smartphones and use Wi-Fi spots.

Rather than the question being how can the Internet improve democracy, the Internet is now essential to democracy.

The Pirate Party are utilising the Internet to bring about direct democracy. As mentioned earlier, we crowd-source policies from sites like Reddit and community forums, we advertise these on social media, then these policies are discussed within the communities before being compiled into a workable policy set. Finally, our membership vote on which policies to accept or reject.

We offer a new way of being involved in politics. If you have an idea, small and succinct or encompassing and complex, you can submit it in our crowd-source – it gives people something to point at as something they contributed to. Too many parties have some grand manifesto that doesn't reflect their membership, who don't see it as their policies. In the Pirate Party, I can tell you exactly what policies I suggested and how I voted on each other person's policy.

One of the things that makes us stand apart, including the incumbents in Westminster, is we make a positive case for the Internet. Most people love our Internet. We're constantly keeping in touch with friends, those who are lucky enough are browsing for the best deal on their next holiday, others are looking on Shelter's website with rent worries. We want our Internet to stay exactly how it is. Free from censorship, completely open and neutral.

If you want to protect the Internet, the Pirate Party is the one for you."

"Every election is an opportunity to raise awareness of the rights we are losing, such as human rights, the ability to express ourselves, privacy and more. We just fielded our first Welsh candidate - myself in Bridgend. We put up candidates in Scottish and European elections and we're always in local elections.

Next year we have both the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament elections again. Right now we're focusing on the internal NEC and Governor elections, getting our house in order before considering the best strategy. However, I fully expect at least one Welsh Assembly candidate.

So I say this to my Welsh friends, if you think different, then vote different, vote Pirate."

The monarchy nominally owns a large chunk of the UK's onshore and offshore assets, with profits pumped into the Treasury. How would independence impact this arrangement? (Pic : rolton.com)

What is the Crown Estate?

Created in 1961, the Crown Estate is a property portfolio run on behalf of the monarchy. The total value of the Crown Estate's assets in 2014 was £9.9billion, and it raised around £267million in profits which go directly to the UK Treasury.

The Crown Estate isn't personally owned by the monarch, but it consists of large portions of estates and lands held as crown property for generations.

Some of this land is incredibly lucrative, such as large tracts of the West End of London. Then there's the Windsor estate (which includes Ascot racecourse and Windsor Castle/Windsor Park), pretty much all of the UK's territorial sea bed and continental shelf, around 55% of the UK's foreshore and large tracts of land (in particular rural Scotland) where the crown has gaming and mineral rights.

In 2010, it was announced that the royal household would receive a Sovereign Support Grant linked to profits from the Crown Estate as a replacement for the old Civil List. The Sovereign Grant Act 2011 made this law, and ~15% of the Crown Estate's profits go to support the Queen's householdand the maintenance of royal estates –amounting to around £40millionin 2015-16.

The Crown Estate in Wales

The Crown Estate's big earner in Wales isn't renewable energy - it's retail. (Pic : alisonjackson.com)

A more detailed research paper on the Crown Estate, dating from 2011, is available from the National Assembly's Members Research Service (pdf).

Because the Crown Estate owns the UK's sea bed and continental shelf, it's a major player in the development of offshore energy schemes like wind farms. As landowner, it'll play a major role in the development of the Swansea Bay tidal lagoon (God Save the Queen, Jac) and, as Welsh not British highlighted last week, other tidal schemes like the "tidal kites" off Anglesey.

According to their 2014 report (pdf), Crown Estate property assets in Wales were worth £160.8million and generated a profit of £9.7million (up from £8.6million in 2013). Most of those profits (£5million) didn't come from renewable energy, but urban retail. Renewable energy only generated a £1.2million profit.

In fact, around half of the Crown Estate's assets in Wales are tied up in retail, the largest example given being Swansea's 346,000sqft Morfa Shopping Park next to the Liberty Stadium.

Other examples of the Crown Estate's work/assets in Wales include :

• Marine aggregates (dredging) in the Bristol Channel and Irish Sea.
• Offshore wind farms - some of these projects, like Rhiannon and the Atlantic Array have been scrapped.
• Smaller-scale tidal energy schemes in Anglesey and Pembrokeshire.
• Deganwy Marina.
• Estates at Plynlimon (Ceredigion) and Tintern (Monmouthshire), including Tintern Abbey.
• Conwy Nature Reserve.
• Licensing for gold and silver reserves remaining in Wales (Mines Royal).

The Crown Estate & Devolution

Because of Crown Estate rights over the sea bed, offshore renewables require close co-operation between the Estate and Welsh Government. Devolution has been taken off the table though. (Pic : The Crown Estate)

Some of the devolved areas impacted by the Crown Estate's activities include agriculture, fisheries, economic development, planning and aspects of energy/sustainable development.

The Crown Estate is currently non-devolved. Although it was included for devolution in Silk II, it was rejected and taken off the table as part of the St David's Day Agreement, and is unlikely to form part of a revised devolution settlement in any future Wales Act.

Because Scotland has a separate legal system, and different property laws, the Crown Estate is subject to legislation from the Scottish Parliament. The Board of Commissioners for the Crown Estate also has to appoint a commissioner with specific responsibility for Scotland. However, all revenues still go to the UK Treasury. Despite calls from the SNP Scottish Government for the Crown Estate to be fully devolved, it hasn't happened yet.

In 2011, the Welsh Government signed a memorandum of understanding with the Crown Estate (pdf) on matters of mutual interest such as marine and rural conservation, with meetings held between both bodies twice a year. The Crown Estate is also given specific recognition in Welsh legislation, such as the recent Environment Bill.

There's also an arcane ritual in the National Assembly under its Standing Orders where ministers have to announce if they have the consent of the Queen or Duke of Cornwall where legislation impacts their interests (as recently done with the Planning Act 2015 - clip).

As the Crown Estate has a sovereign right to prospect for, or issue licenses to prospect for, natural resources on the continental shelf, the current system has come under criticism from nationalists and non-nationalists alike – the former because the idea of the crown holding exclusive rights and generating profits in such a way is anachronistic or behaving as an "absentee landlord"; the latter because it impacts policy areas like renewable energy by providing extra hurdles.

The Crown Estate & Independence

Where would control over Crown Estate assets lie post-independence? The answer for offshore assets is obvious, onshore assets less so.

Upon independence the vast amount of the Crown Estate's offshore assets would transfer to the Welsh Government, even if Wales retained the monarchy –all independent nations have control over their own foreshore, seabed and continental shelf.

The figures speak for themselves though. There isn't a massive financial windfall awaiting Wales from the Crown Estate even if there were a renewable energy boom, and too many nationalists have gotten their hopes up there. The issue ultimately comes down to who controls the ground beneath your feet and whether any profits generated, however meagre, should be Wales' by right.

I'm not so sure about"onshore"assets (like estates). If Wales retained the monarch post-independence (A Welsh Monarchy), then you've got to presume things like estates would remain hereditary, or managed by the Crown Estate.

This still doesn't solve the problem of how the shortfall in royal household spending would be dealt with. Would Wales continue to send a 15% share of Welsh Crown Estate (or equivalent) profits to the "English"Treasury (~£1.5million based on 2014's figures)? Would Wales fund the monarch from general taxation?

If Wales became a republic (Republic of Wales/Gweriniaeth Cymru) then onshore assets would presumably transfer from the Crown Estate to the Welsh Government in its entirety.

Some commercial assets, like the Morfa Shopping Park, could then be sold off or retained as part of the Welsh Government's property portfolio. Other, less commercial, sites like commons and estates could be held in public trust or transferred to a Welsh equivalent of the National Trust.

In Scotland's Future (pdf), the SNP intended to use Crown Estate profits for the public benefit of coastal communities, in particular the Islands (Western Isles, Orkney, Shetland). Presumably, the Welsh Government of an independent Wales would want to do something similar, though it's worth repeating that the sums of money involved are unlikely to amount to much.

Following yet another low point in the public image of the National Assembly - but buoyed by Prof. Laura McAllister's coincidental rallying cry for a new generation of leaders (read The Great Welsh Confidence Trickhere) - it's time to be a bit more positive, even celebratory.

Back in January, The Western Mailran a poll to find the top 50 most influential Welsh politicians. In the end, the (incorrect) result was Aneurin Bevan topping the list ahead of former Liberal Prime Minister, David Lloyd-George.

One thing that stood out though was that very few post-devolution politicians, and women in particular, featured on the list. It's fair to say that's because many Assembly politicians - with one or two exceptions - haven't created a legacy for themselves yet, as political careers are often judged after a person leaves office. If you wanted to be unkind you could say they haven't done much in the first place.

As I said, I'm going to be positive. The Assembly's on half-term and not much else is happening, so I thought it would be fun (heh) to draft my own list of who I believe are the most influential Welsh politicians since devolution. I decided to set a few ground rules :

• They must have served at least two full terms of office since May 1999 (consecutive or not). It's hard to consider people who've served one-term to be"influential" though this precludes genuine candidates like Ron Davies, Dafydd Wigley and a few AMs from the list.
• They have to represent/have represented a Welsh constituency or region.
• "Influential"is defined as : making a lasting or notable impact on the administration of the National Assembly (or devolution itself), political leadership, party policy or Welsh public policy. For Westminster-based politicians that includes representing Welsh interests before the interests of their party.

After yesterday's 20-11 countdown, it's time to move on to who I consider to be the 10 most influential Welsh politicians since devolution began in 1999.

Here's a reminder of the rules:

• They must have served at least two full terms of office since May 1999 (consecutive or not).
• They have to represent/have represented a Welsh constituency or region.
• "Influential" is defined as making a lasting or notable impact on the administration of the National Assembly, devolution itself, leadership, party policy or Welsh public policy. For Westminster-based politicians that includes representing Welsh interests before their party's.

• The Electoral Reform Society warned that Wales faced a “turnout time bomb” amongst under-25s due to falling interest in elections. They recommended reforms to how politics is taught in schools, and urgent legislation to extend the voting franchise to 16 year olds in time for the 2016 National Assembly election. It was confirmed on May 14^ththat votes for 16 year olds couldn't be introduced in time for the election.
• The Welsh Government introduced the Historic Environment Bill on May 5^th, which sets out measures to improve the protection of monuments and listed buildings, create an advisory panel, as well as enable stronger prosecutions to be taken where monuments are damaged.
• The Welsh Conservatives called for an independent inquiry into the collapse of Pencoed-based IT company Ideoba, after claims a Welsh Government adviser said funding was pulled because the other director, former Plaid Cymru MP Adam Price, was standing in the 2016 National Assembly election. The Welsh Government said the claim was, “frankly ridiculous”.
• The Communities & Local Government Committee said proposed mergers between local authorities need to be“sustainable and enduring” in their Stage 1 report on the Local Government Bill. Committee Chair, Christine Chapman AM (Lab, Cynon Valley), warned that anything less could lead to another reorganisation. The Finance Committee also called for more clarity on the costings of local government mergers.
• Two Conservative Assembly Members – Antoinette Sandbach and Byron Davies – were elected as MPs in the 2015 UK election. Both resigned their Assembly seats. Byron Davies MP was replaced by Altaf Hussain AM (Con, South Wales West), while Antoinette Sandbach MP was replaced by Janet Howarth AM (Con, North Wales).
• The Finance Committee recommended increased powers for the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales, legislation giving the Ombudsman more power to investigate complaints independently and an expansion of their jurisdiction to include private healthcare. Committee Chair, Jocelyn Davies AM (Plaid, South Wales East), said,“should (public services) fall short of an individual’s expectations, they need to have the confidence in the Ombudsman to investigate.”
• A leaked report revealed staff in Betsi Cadwaladr Local Health Board believe out-of-hours GP services were“unsafe”, blaming recruitment problems. The First Ministers told AMs he was “determined to make sure it does improve”. Ann Jones AM (Lab, Vale of Clwyd) wrote to the First Minister demanding that the Chief Executive of the health board, Prof. Trevor Purt, be sacked.
• In a separate development, an independent investigation into the treatment of patients on a mental health ward at Glan Clwyd Hospital suggests their human rights may have been breached. Betsi Cadwaladr LHB apologised for “inexcusable and unacceptable” standards of care. Accusations include patients being left unattended, treatment being provided on the floor and improper use of restraints. Leader of the Opposition, Andrew Davies AM (Con, South Wales Central), demanded a full inquiry into the Welsh NHS.
• The Jobs Growth Wales scheme secured a three-year, £25million extension - backed by EU funding. Deputy Minister for Skills, Julie James AM (Lab, Swansea West), said it, “illustrates our ongoing commitment to supporting young people into employment”.
• Opposition AMs criticised the extension. Eluned Parrott AM (Lib Dem, South Wales Central) said Labour need to“stop wasting money on this ineffective scheme and invest in apprenticeships and training” after a review found 37% of the scheme's participants didn't need it to find work.
• Natural Resources Minister, Carl Sargeant (Lab, Alyn & Deeside), introduced the Environment Bill to the National Assembly on May 12^th. The Bill proposes to set a statutory target for an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, protects biodiversity, increases the powers of Natural Resources Wales and give Ministers the power to expand charges for carrier bags to include“bags for life”.
• Anglesey overtook Merthyr Tydfil as the local authority with the highest proportion of obese or overweight children according to the latest Public Health Wales figures. The overall rate remains higher in Wales (26%) than England (23%). Chief Medical Officer, Dr Ruth Hussey, said that while childhood obesity had “levelled off”, there was “still much work to do”.
• The National Assembly approved the Planning Bill on May 19^thby 39 votes to 10. The Planning Act will institute a national development plan and allow strategic plans to be developed across multiple councils. Amendments to the Bill will place a greater consideration on the impact housing developments have on the Welsh language.
• On a visit to Cardiff, US ambassador to the UK, Matthew Barzun, said the proposed TTIP US-EU free trade agreement was a “big deal....with high standards”. The Welsh Government estimates the deal would be worth £1.5billion to the Welsh economy, but Plaid Cymru in particular have expressed concerns over"back door privatisation" of the NHS.
• Communities and Tackling Poverty Minister, Lesley Griffiths (Lab, Wrexham), launched a public consultation on giving communities a right to bid for, own and run assets transferred from the public and private sectors. She said,“I believe in the power of our communities and I look forward to hearing people’s views on this important topic.”
• The Independent Remuneration Panel for the National Assembly finalised a decision to award AMs an 18% increase in their annual salary to £64,000. The decision has been highly-controversial, with all the main parties expressing reservations. The agreed proposals also include changes to AM pension arrangements and party group funding.
• The RAC Foundation claimed that limited powers over road safety has stalled progress on reducing the number of road deaths, with a 15% fall in Wales compared to 33% and 35% falls in Scotland and Northern Ireland respectively – where some powers are devolved. Scotland lowered the legal drink-driving limit in December 2014 and the Liberal Democrats called for Wales to have the power to do the same.
• Plaid Cymru called for a“full feasibility study” into basing Welsh regiments in Wales when not on active service. At the moment, they're based in English bases. They said troops were often away from wider support networks while defence spending in Wales had fallen consistently for 20 years.
• The Chair of the National Assembly's Environment Committee, Alun Ffred Jones AM (Plaid, Arfon), called for the Committee to have a role in the appointment of the Natural Resources Wales (NRW) Chair, after widespread concerns over NRW's independence. He said, “Allowing independent scrutiny of the preferred candidate....will offer public reassurance over the eventual appointment.....and, crucially, provide evidence of the candidate's independence of mind."
• At the State Opening of the new UK Parliament session on May 27^th, the Queen announced that the UK Government would introduce a Wales Bill granting Wales extra powers and a reserved powers model - as set out in the St David's Day Agreement - as well as legislation for a referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union, which was introduced on May 28th.
• Welsh Secretary, Stephen Crabb MP, said Wales is a “huge winner” from the EU and he would campaign for the UK to remain in the EU in a future referendum, which could be brought forward to 2016. It comes as Airbus and Deutsche Bank warned it would reconsider UK investments if the UK left the EU – though JCB said there was“nothing to fear” from an EU exit.
• The Welsh Liberal Democrats and SNP called for any EU referendum to be held separately from the 2016 National Assembly/Scottish Parliament elections. Meanwhile, UKIP's leader in Wales, Nathan Gill MEP, called for a same day vote in order to boost turnout and save money.
• A Finance Committee report into the future management of devolved taxes recommended a transitional period to provide stability and build up expertise in the proposed Welsh Revenue Authority. They also recommended that direct accountability and scrutiny be provided through an Assembly committee.

Results:

(Click to enlarge)

• Following the surprise Conservative victory, Prime Minister David Cameron promised to lead“one nation” - with extra powers for the devolved administrations – pledging to “make Britain greater still”. Stephen Crabb MP (Con, Preseli Pembs.) remained Welsh Secretary.
• Ed Miliband resigned immediately as Labour leader as a result of the election defeat, saying the party needs a chance to “rebuild”. Harriet Harman was appointed temporary leader until a successor is elected.
• First Minister Carwyn Jones said Labour needed to be “pro-business” in the fallout from the election, pointing to what his government have done in Wales. Meanwhile, former Welsh Government minister, Alun Davies AM (Lab, Blaenau Gwent), said Labour had“lost the argument” on the NHS, which contributed to their defeat after being used effectively by the Conservatives during their campaign, saying Labour need to “ensure that people do trust Welsh Labour with the Welsh NHS”.
• Former Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg MP, resigned as leader of the Liberal Democrats, triggering a leadership election. He paid tribute to his party, saying“we had the courage to step up at a time of crisis” whilst admitting the “crushing and unkind” loss of seats and colleagues.
• Nigel Farage MEP “resigned” as UKIP leader after failing to win South Thanet, saying he would take a break to consider whether to stand for the leadership again. On May 11^thhe reported his resignation was“rejected” by UKIP's executive board and subsequently“un-resigned”, prompting derision from other parties and various internal squabbles.
• Plaid Cymru leader, Leanne Wood AM (Plaid, South Wales Central), said results in the western valleys laid strong foundations for the 2016 National Assembly election despite failing to gain target seats like Ceredigion and Ynys Môn. However, she later admitted the results had been generally “disappointing”.

Forty years since the last time the question was put to the public, the UK is to be asked whether to remain a member of the EU. (Pic : The Telegraph)

Last Thursday, the UK Government introduced a Bill setting out the arrangements for the forthcoming referendum on the UK's membership of the European Union.

A summary of the details of the Bill (pdf) is as follows :

• The exact date of the referendum will be determined by regulations, but it must take place before 31^stDecember 2017. This means there's a chance the referendum could be held in 2016.
• The question on the ballot paper will be"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"
• People entitled to vote in UK parliamentary elections will be eligible to vote in the referendum (so the franchise won't be extended to 16-17 year olds, unlike the Scottish independence referendum).
• Gibraltarians will have a right to vote in the referendum as if it were a part of the UK.
• Only UK, Commonwealth and Irish residents who are registered to vote will be able to vote in the referendum.
• It appears as though the referendum results will be counted (at least partially) on an EU Parliament constituencies/regions basis, meaning Welsh results could be counted and declared separately.
• The Referendum Bill doesn't require the consent of the devolved administrations.

There are also numerous provisions relating to campaign finances, referendum broadcasts, loans, financial declarations etc. which are, to be honest, far too technical and boring for me to go into any great detail but will inevitably turn out to be important.

You put your left-wing in, your right-wing out....

Could Welsh voters be faced with four ballot papers and three different electoral systems next May? (Pic : BBC Wales)

The question is as clear and unambiguous as it can be : Vote yes if you want the UK to stay in the EU, vote no to leave. As proven by the Scottish referendum last year, the"affirmative choice"doesn't always have an advantage, though the status quo usually does. I would be surprised if the wording of the question changes as the Bill goes through Westminster.

The second major issue is"What renegotiated deal will David Cameron secure from the EU?"The diplomatic manoeuvring has already begun, with the Prime Minister touring European capitals to speak to heads of government - part gloating, part "I'm going to take my ball home". He has the mandate to do it though.

I'd imagine repatriation of powers over working practices (the working time directive, maternity & paternity pay etc.), welfare rights for EU citizens moving to the UK and immigration will be top of the list. Also, I suspect the Conservatives will want to curb the power of the EU Parliament's directives, with greater ability for national legislatures to say"non".

Will that be enough to satisfy "soft eurosceptics"– people who reluctantly support a renegotiated EU membership but could be swayed to vote no? If it is, the yes vote could win reasonably comfortably. The devil's in the detail though and if Cameron can't get a strong set of concessions, then maybe things will be closer run than they're currently projected to be.

The more serious issue is the disenfranchisement of EU citizens living in the UK. The only EU citizens who will be able to vote (if registered) are the Irish, Maltese and Cypriots – Ireland because of the Common Travel Area, Malta and Cyprus because they're Commonwealth members. So someone from Australia, Canada or New Zealand with the right paperwork will be able to vote on the UK's membership of the EU; someone from Germany, Poland, France or the Netherlands won't be able to.

An issue that's emerging in Wales - aside from the In-Out debate itself - is the referendum's timing : Will it take place at the same time as the 2016 National Assembly election? (More from Glyn Mathias at Click on Wales) I presume as soon as David Cameron can get a "deal"(which could even happen by the end of this year)the date will be set.

So far, the Lib Dems and Plaid Cymru have spoken out against a same-day referendum with Carwyn Jones joining them. UKIP are the only party who currently support a same-day referendum, though I suspect the Tories will support it too.

There's an argument that holding three polls on the same day (the Police & Crime Commissioner elections are due on the same day too) would save money and boost turnout for the Assembly and PCC elections – the referendum would easily get 50-60% on its own.

Likewise, you can counter-argue that the issues in the Assembly election (health, education, economic development) are too important to be drowned out by a referendum debate or the complete pointlessness of PCCs. The referendum will dominate political coverage across the UK as, aside from PCCs and Greater London, it'll be the only ballot paper issued in England.

It's worth remembering that the 2011 Assembly election was held at the same time as the Alternative Vote referendum and didn't cause any problems. It's insulting the intelligence of the electorate to think they can't handle four ballot papers. The problem is all of them will use a different system (PCCs are elected by supplementary vote, the Assembly uses both first past the post and the additional member system/D'Hondt method).

One of the reasons I might lean towards favouring a same-day poll is selfish. I pencilled in quitting blogging after the 2016 Assembly election, or at the very least taking an extended break. If an EU referendum takes place in late 2016 or 2017, I'll end up hanging around longer than I would otherwise like to, as it's a more significant constitutional question than the 2011 Assembly law-making powers one. I consider it a step down from an independence referendum, while UKIP and other pro-withdrawal campaigners probably will consider it an independence referendum.

Also, if it's held the same day, it'll (essentially) be down to AMs to make the argument for or against EU membership as they'll be the ones in the political spotlight. Turning EU membership into an election issue in 2016 will really lift the game in terms of the quality of debate required from the Welsh parties and their leaders, and we could finally see the National Assembly mature a little bit.

(Pic : Wales Online)

Stationary camper vans and caravans are exempt, because nothing bad happens in camper vans.... (Pic : via tvcritic.org)

• Any driver or passenger aged over-18 who smokes, or fails to prevent someone smoking, in an enclosed private vehicle (convertibles and open-tops are presumably exempt) whilst there's someone aged under-18 in the same vehicle will be liable to a fixed penalty fine.
• The fine will be £50 - payable within 29 days. This falls to £30 if the fine is paid within 15 days.
• Failure to pay a fine could lead to a court-issued fine of up to £2,500.
• A single under-18 smoking in an enclosed private vehicle would be exempt.
• Stationary caravans and mobile homes are also exempt (when being lived in). Public transport, sea vessels and aircraft are subject to separate regulations and are usually strictly non-smoking.

Little Ward of Horrors. (Pic : BBC Wales)

Just so you've been warned, the following makes for depressing reading.

Within the last week, a catalogue of serious care failings were revealed in a damning report into the Tawel Fan mental health ward at Denbighshire's Glan Clwyd Hospital, which specialised in "care" for elderly patients with dementia. The ward closed in December 2013 as soon as the seriousness of the allegations became clear, and there are echos with what happened at the Princess of Wales and Neath Port Talbot Hospitals (Abertawe Bro Morgannwg : Trusted to Care?).

The Ockenden Report (pdf)

The report – authored by independent health adviser, Donna Ockenden - was compiled through interviews with families and staff. Some parts have been redacted to protect identities. One thing that stood out immediately were the different opinions on quality of care – 71% of staff expressed no concerns, while only 11% of families described themselves as satisfied or very satisfied with care standards.

Here's what else the review found :

• Lack of professional and dignified care– The ward was noisy, with staff "bellowing" at patients. One staff member is cited as swearing at both patients and other staff members. Doubly incontinent (bowel and bladder) patients weren't given daily showers, and were described as"smelly"– to the point some families had to clean patients with wet wipes. Patients were sometimes left undressed, or not dressed for cold weather. One patient's family were asked over the phone to consider "do not resuscitate"instructions. Some relatives were described by staff as serial complainers who "could always find something wrong".
• Lack of 1-to-1 care (for patient safety)– Some staff were, on occasion, providing one-to-one care for more than one patient, which is reported to have contributed to a patient falling. It seems staff didn't have an understanding of what "one-to-one" care meant. Some patients got into fights with each other and this was brushed off as "something they do"; other patients wandered corridors unsupervised.
• Lack of sufficient nursing levels– Sickness levels were extraordinarily high, leading to staffing shortages as "nobody wanted to be there". Senior managers weren't informed of staffing problems when they were supposed to. Various patients had lumps, bumps and bruises which weren't properly explained. One patient kept banging their head against a wall, resulting in bruising, while staff sat in their office or looked after other patients. It seems as though large numbers of patients were kept in a TV room while their bedrooms were locked just so short-handed staff could keep an eye on as many patients as possible.
• Lack of fundamentals of care – Some families were concerned whether their relatives were being properly fed and given fluids, and families weren't allowed to help during meal times. In some cases, long-term medications (i.e. eye drops for cataracts) weren't provided. Though staff described detailed activity sessions, relatives contradict this by saying they didn't see any evidence of organised activities at all – the ward's environment being described as "uneventful, mundane and lacking in stimulation". There's an example of a patient being left in a puddle of stale urine whilst suffering from a chest infection, and was eventually diagnosed with pneumonia. It's implied another patient was over-medicated to the point of being "a zombie....drugged-up and lethargic", while concerns over another patient's inability to swallow appear to have been brushed off.
• Poor safety briefings – The handover between staff shifts were poor. There's a recording of one such meeting where abusive language was used to describe patients and their relatives. One member of staff is recorded as saying they threatened a patient whilst cleaning away cups.
• Breaches of care duties and patients nursed on the floor – One temporary staff member said other members of staff were deliberately "winding up" sexually uninhibited patients for their own amusement. Another patient was left face-down on the floor - a relative from another family asked why they were left there, with staff saying they're "less of a nuisance there". Other patients crawled everywhere or were left on the floor for long periods of time – the floor sometimes covered in urine and faeces.
• Human rights breaches – Restraint was used regularly, with furniture sometimes used (i.e.  pushing patients up against a wall with a table) - the excuse being that it's to prevent falls or to get patients to settle down. Staff referred themselves to Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA) procedures to "cover their backs"(on the use of restraint) as they believed complaints were inevitable.
• Systemic failures – A lack of action by senior leadership on previous reports; a lack of systemic review across north Wales to address current and known risks; significant under-reporting of serious incidents; limited oversight of the leadership team on Tawel Fan ward; the culture on the ward amounted to "institutional abuse".

It's reported 8 nurses have been suspended, 4 nurses have been redeployed while 2 doctors have been working "under restrictions". It was also reported yesterday that 10 staff (3 doctors and 7 nurses) have been referred to their respective professional bodies.

The report recommends the ward isn't reopened until the findings of a mortality review are published, and also recommends the ward be renamed. Betsi Cadwaladr LHB should also offer a full apology to the families and patients of those involved, accompanied by a complete overhaul of the complaints system.

The Welsh Government's Response

The Health Minister apologised to families and patients on behalf of the Welsh Government at an urgent debate yesterday. (Pic : BBC Wales)

Health Minister, Mark Drakeford (Lab, Cardiff West), was due to issue a statement on Tawel Fan in the National Assembly on Tuesday but this was pulled. AMs subsequently voted on a Welsh Conservative motion to hold an urgent debate on Wednesday (3^rdJune), which was agreed unanimously with Welsh Government support.

The result was a very sombre, measured debate that was a credit to the Assembly, leaving a few AMs visibly on the verge of tears.

In his opening statement, the Health Minister apologised for"gross departures from basic standards of care". Most cases of abuse of dementia patients are outside the NHS, but this was located within the campus of a general hospital. Although the police inquiry has ended, that doesn't mean the process ends, though he wouldn't say anything that would prejudice disciplinary actions.

He said five actions had been taken at board level – such as ward closures, disciplinary procedures, new director appointments and an external review of mental health services for older people across north Wales. The Welsh Government extended unannounced spot-checks of mental health wards in north Wales focusing on continence care, use of anti-psychotics and restraints, culture of leadership and activities etc – all issues raised in the report. He believes these checks show poor care isn't a systemic problem and were isolated to Tawel Fan.

An urgent meeting will be held next week between Welsh Government, Healthcare Inspectorate Wales and the Wales Audit Office on the status of Betsi Cadwaladr LHB, where the option to place it into special measures will be on the table.

In order to keep the word count down, and avoid repetition, I've summarised what was said by AMs even more so than I usually do :

• Reactions to the findings : "Shocking", "inexcusable", "horrifying", "stomach-churning", "awful", "inhumane", "patients treated like animals", "requires no sensationalisation", "haunting", comparisons made with Mid Staffordshire, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg and Winterbourne Viewscandals.
• The Families : The complaints system failed families and patients. Relatives had every right to expect their loved ones to be safe. Families need closure, but there's a need to emphasise that it's not systematic abuse (for relatives of patients currently being treated on mental health wards). There were calls for ministers to meet the affected families.
• Staff & Managers : This was a, "Complete corruption of professional standards". Those responsible should never be allowed to care for patients again; managers should be sacked – not removed or paid off. Nobody should escape scrutiny, though front line staff shouldn't carry the can alone. There were calls for a"fit and proper person test" for NHS managers and/or a regulatory system similar to the General Medical Council. North Wales Police's decision not to prosecute was made before the publication of a mortality reviews and this report, which is unacceptable.
• Healthcare Inspectorate Wales (HIW) : Needs an overhaul, including unannounced inspections which don't require prior ministerial approval. Lay inspectors who offer "fresh eyes"and who are unfamiliar with ward culture should be introduced. Provisions within the Social Services & Wellbeing Act 2014 will help to avoid a repeat of Tawel Fan – but HIW hadn't learned lessons from previous scandals.
• The Welsh Government : Welsh Government have appointed someone to undertake another review in response to a previous review - this calls into question Welsh Government's drive for change. Government needs to "act now" and it has to be better than another report. The Community Health Council say Welsh Government are responsible for strategy, but AMs are told by Ministers these are matters for health boards – no accountability (Accountability vacuum causing problems for Welsh Labour?). There should be an independent appointments process for health board positions to avoid cronyism and ensure it's free of party politics (the Health Minister appoints board and some Community Health Council members).
• Betsi Cadwaladr Health Board (BC) : Numerous cross-party calls for BC to be put into special measures and/or an independent inquiry. Some AMs had no confidence in BC as they're incapable of learning lessons; one AM saying it was "the final nail in the coffin" for the health board.