Labour candidates on lookout for alternative funding

So the GMB union is to cut its funding to the Labour party, bizarrely it appears because they disagree with giving their members a right to choose whether or not they actually want to join the Labour party rather than being affiliated automatically. 

Credit should go to Ed Miliband for this rare demonstration of common sense and fairness. Presumably the GMB are afraid that a substantial number will chose not to join and this will impact on their ability to dictate which Labour candidates should be selected and hence diminish their influence.

The move if carried through will be costly for the party as a whole, and will also mean individual elected Labour members will have to look elsewhere for funding – heaven forbid they may even have to fund their own campaigns!

Pontypridd AM Mick Antoniw for example could find himself at a few more fundraisers.  His record of interest at the Assembly states that he received £5000 from the GB for election expenses.  It also states he has received a little over £15000 in gifts and hospitality form the GMB and Unite unions.

I have in the past ranted on numerous occasions about the incestuous relationship between the Labour party and the unions.  It is undemocratic.  Unions should be there to represent the interests of their workforce and not to play politics and interfere in the democratic process.

 

 

Where Mick's loyalty lies.

Seems Mick Antoniw has decided that his wbesite does need a bit of updating now and again.  He has added a blog to it now.  One particular post was brought to my attention today in which he gives his astute thoughts on Plaid and the Lib Dems. 

Apparently we are

"not even the main opposition in Wales. If their support falls still further they could end up as a marginalised pressure group rump in the assembly."

I'd be cut to the core if I could for one second bring myself to care one iota about what this egotistical waste of space thinks.

It was the next line which caught my eye though

“My loyalty is to Labour and to the values of democratic socialism”

Sums it up doesn't it.  Not to the people he purports to represent but to the red flag.

He doesn't give two hoots about the Pontypridd constituency or the people there.  He saw it as a safe seat, bamboozled the people by pretending he lived there when in fact the rented house was a cover and he has now moved back to Newport.  He has what he wanted, an Assembly seat where he can sit with his Labour pals and pontificate,

Well done. 

Taking the Mick?

So Mick Antoniw the AM for Ponty has at last managed to get his website updated, well sort of.  He's added the title 'AM' to it, but can you spot the deliberate error?

The page headed 'about Pontypridd' shows his extensive knowledge of the constituency and the hard work he has put in over recent months.

Or maybe not.

Never trust a politician? Hmmmm

The Western Mail carried a piece today on Mick Antoniw the current AM for Pontypridd.

In it he is waxing lyrical about how his Ukrainian background helped shape his political views.  It ends with the comment

“Perhaps rather oddly having been elected as an AM in May, it’s also taught me never to trust politicians. There has been so much abuse of power and it is vitally important that people and institutions are held to account.”

Fine words there Mick – one has to wonder why he is a member of the Labour party then.  It also begs the question of where he stands in relation to much of what is going on with his colleagues at RCT Council.  What does he think of Russell’s blatant ripping off of the public purse?  Where does he stand regarding their attitude to scrutiny which is hardly democratic?

Surely he must cringe at the lack of accountability demonstrated in RCT.

But then this is a man who shamelessly ripped off miners along with the rest of his firm and then desperately wrote letters to all local Labour members denying it.  The man whose colleagues threatened to sue us for putting out leaflets telling people of his firm’s misdeeds.

The man whose firm of solicitors was employed on behalf of RCT Council employees to sort out claims against the Council?  (The Labour run Council failed to settle claims for its workforce and employed a Labour leaning firm of solicitors to represent its own employees against the Council.  That firm then donated money to the Labour election campaign, benefitting Antoniw.)

The man who is now Chair of the Assembly Standards Committee would you believe?

Not quite the truth is it Mick?

A headline on Wales Online today states

“Hundreds of new community support officers to be recruited throughout Wales.”

This is of course welcome.  However, the following press release which comes from Pontypridd AM Mick Antoniw – or Slick Antoniw as we like to affectionately refer to him!  - starts off with a statement that  “HUNDREDS of new ‘street bobbies’ may be on duty in Wales by Christmas.”

Yet this is not backed up by the rest of the story, all of which I am guessing was penned by a member of his staff.   In it he refers to a letter from Carl Sargeant, Minister for Local Government in response to a question as to when the officers will be in place.

In a letter, Mr Sargeant told him: “We are currently in discussions with Welsh police forces about the implementation of the PCSO commitment.

“But I expect the roll out of the additional PCSOs to begin in April 2012.

“I am also hopeful that a small number may be in place in some force areas by Christmas 2011, but this will depend on the recruitment procedures of the four Welsh police forces

Now how on earth does this equate to ‘hundreds’ on the streets by Christmas?  Although to be fair he doesn’t say which Christmas.

Still, facts have never been a strong point with the Labour party around here.  It is a shame though that the press reports them as such. 

Make the effort Mick

You'd think the new Ponty Assembly Member would put a little bit of effort into his website wouldn't you?

I mean he has staff and all sorts now who could surely help him put together something half decent.  Instead a google search will take you to the same rather poor effort that he had in place prior to the election last May.

It describes him as the candidate for Pontypridd, features photos of him and his family which makes them look like the Beverley Hill Billies, and still has such classic lines as:

"We must develop skills that I will defend achievements such as free bus passes, free prescriptions and work to achieve progress in education and health for all. We have many challenges but we have to succeed and I believe, working together we can."

Make the effort Mick

Circle of Labour Life

As regular readers of my ramblings and rantings (if indeed there are any) know one of the things that really riles me is the Labour party’s tie in with the Unions. 

So I was not the least bit surprised to read in today’s Western Mail that

“The Government has given £2m of public money to Labour- donating trade unions since 2008, it was revealed in a written answer to the Tories from Finance Minister Jane Hutt.

They have come under two main initiatives, the Wales Development Fund for Unions, which is aimed at developing policy-making processes, and the Wales Union Learning Fund, which develops learning……..

In total, the Welsh Government has given £2.4m to 15 trade unions over the past three years, including £225,000 to the union Community, which earlier this year bolstered Labour’s Assembly election campaign by making donations to marginal constituencies.”

Now as I have said I am not against Unions – workers rights should be protected and they have a right to representation against their employers.  What does bother me is the blatant political involvement.

This has been particularly obvious in the case of current Pontypridd AM Mick Antoniw.

He was / is (?) a Director of Thompsons solicitors.  Their part in the miners’ compensation scandal was well documented prior to the Assembly election.  Although despite the evidence being very clear he did his best to deny any involvement.  He even went as far as to threaten to sue when I included the story in our leaflets – an empty threat, you cannot sue someone for stating what is true and what can be proven,

The facts were that Thompsons solicitors were reported in several notable legal publications as having been severely reprimanded for their handling of miners’ compensation claims by their regulatory body. Money was reportedly taken from the amount of compensation miners received to pay the Unions an ‘administration fee.’ Thompson’s solicitors donated money to the Labour Party, and directly or indirectly to Antoniw’s campaign

But there is more.  When Rhondda Cynon Taff started their Equal Pay negotiations they ran into a bit of trouble when some employees refused to take the settlement offered.   An email from the Chief Executive to  Welsh Liberal Democrat Cllr Mike Powell in July 2010 revealed that 

“The current position in respect of the settlement of Equal Pay claims is as follows:-

 3,859 claims have been settled, at a total cost of £13,104,216.

 222 claims remain outstanding.  These claims have been lodged at Employment Tribunal.”

Who was acting for the employees?  None other than Thompson’s solicitors. So the Labour run Council failed to settle claims for its workforce and employed a Labour leaning firm of solicitors to represent its own employees against the Council.  That firm then donated money to the Labour election campaign, benefitting Antoniw.

You couldn’t make it up

Will you take an intervention Mr Antoniw??

Mick Antoniw the AM for Pontypridd unsurprisingly voted against reinstating Welsh Liberal Democrat AM Aled Roberts on 6^th July.  All for the best of reasons no doubt, because, just like Brutus, he is an honourable man.

Antoniw’s contribution to the debate is a matter of public record – thought I would add a couple of intervention points of my own!

                                                   

Mick Antoniw: This debate is not about our personal feelings for an individual who stood for election but has been unable to take up a seat because of the National Assembly for Wales (Disqualification) Order 2010: it goes well beyond that.

Yes, isn’t it true that the member for Pontypridd is basing his response more on pure political spite

It is about an important point of constitutional law that has serious implications for this new Assembly and legislature. It is also about the credibility and integrity of this body and the Welsh Government.

Are you sure that you are in a position to take such moral high ground? After all you were the Director of a firm that conned miners out of thousands of pounds worth of compensation, and were fined for such by your regulatory body, and then tried desperately to deny it to your own party members than anything else?

The first undisputed fact is that, under section 18 of the Government of Wales Act 2006, he was disqualified from standing as an Assembly Member, which I understand is not disputed even by the person himself.

Unlike your transgression which you strongly disputed despite the clear evidence to the contrary. Is it not the case that you even had a colleague threaten me with legal action for reporting the truth?

What we decide may be subject to legal challenge by way of judicial review by an interested party.

Despite legal advice you have been given that says that overturning the disqualification is perfectly legal and proper?  

In considering this motion, I have put aside all interests other than what is the right decision and what is right to preserve the integrity and credibility of the Assembly.

I refer the not so honourable gentleman to my earlier comment re integrity.

I have reluctantly ( you are kidding me) come to the conclusion that we should not exercise our discretion in this case, and I will be voting against the motion. (what a surprise)

It is clear that an individual candidate is responsible for ensuring that he is entitled to stand. (quite right, a modicum of sense at last.)

He may (MAY) consult with a variety of bodies—his political party, his agent, bodies such as the Electoral Commission, and, if necessary, his solicitor; but it also recommends consulting the legislation, or, if necessary, taking independent legal advice.

Why would any reasonable minded person doubt the advice coming from the body set up to regulate elections and give advice? The Electoral Commission staff are paid to give advice – they failed to give accurate advice.  Did you consult a solicitor Mr Antoniw?

Turning to the exercise of our discretion, I am clear in my mind that it is a discretion that should be exercised rarely and with caution, and that there have to be substantial reasons. I do not believe that circumstances in this case would justify the exercise of this discretion.

So being given totally out of date and inaccurate information is not a good enough reason?

Apart from the reasons that I have already mentioned, if we exercised our discretion in this way it would drive a coach and horses through the disqualification Order.

Why?  You have already been advised that it is perfectly legal to do so.  In fact the report says as near as damn it that is what you should do.

We will also have set a precedent.  (heaven forbid we should do that)

We are a new legislature and we must take the consequences of our decision seriously. We cannot set aside a Crown Order just because we might like to do so. (No but you can if the rules allow you to do so.)

Setting aside the Order in these circumstances would……have consequences for future elections and would undermine the clarity in procedure and law that is essential for our electoral process.

No Mick, what undermined the clarity in procedure was the incompetence of the Electoral Commission in failing to provide accurate information.)

Thanks Mick – very helpful, do your colleagues in RCT know?

There has been a bit of hassle over area development control committees in RCT lately.  Labour Councillors have got their knickers in a bit of a twist after Welsh Liberal Democrat Councillor Mike Powell voted against the establishment of a Cynon Valley area committee.  

Council leader Russell Roberts got all hot under the collar claiming ‘ the decision will stop local people from “having a voice” by not being allowed to get involved in the planning process.’ And accusing Cllr Powell of “reckless political opportunism”

Ponty’s AMs Mick Antoniw indulged in his own bit of political opportunism  and decided to  get involved by pestering poor Carl Sargeant with yet more questions . However, unless my reading of this is very wrong it does not seem to have got him the answer he was surely hoping for.  And it is a shame that the answer did not get to the RCT Legal Officer in time for him to prepare his report to Council for next week as he still seems to be getting in a quite unnecessary stir over the whole business.

Perhaps the Labour party should indulge in a little more joined up thinking.

Answers to the Written Assembly Questions for answer on 21 June 2011

Mick Antoniw (Pontypridd): Does the Minister have any plans to consider providing alternative means of establishing area planning committees, in order to avoid the current situation in Rhondda Cynon Taf, where a lone councillor has used S.17 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 to obstruct the Authority’s continuation of area planning committees. (WAQ57507)

Answer issued on 22 June 2011

The Minister for Local Government and Communities (Carl Sargeant): Section 17 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 provides that the need for a local authority to allocate seats on council committees in accord with the political balance of the authority can be disapplied if all members of the authority vote in favour of such a proposal. I assume you are referring to a situation whereby a single councillor has withdrawn their support.

However, the Local Government (Committees and Political Groups) Regulations 1990, which apply to local authorities in Wales, provide – at regulation 16A – that the duty to allocate seats in accord with political balance does not apply to area committees established to discharge functions of the authority.

Therefore, it should be possible for an area committee established to discharge planning functions to be unaffected by the provisions of section 17 of the 1989 Act.

Room for improvement Mick

Recently elected AM for Pontypridd Mick Antoniw has certainly got a bee in his bonnet about the Council Cabinet system as demonstrated in his question to the Local Government Minister Carl Sargeant on June 15th (below).

Sarge seemed a little peeved by the question. Perhaps Mick and / or his researcher should put a little more thought into future questions.

Mick Antoniw:What consideration has the Welsh Government given to the possibility of re-evaluating the systems of governance for local authorities in Wales. OAQ(4)0011(LGC)

Carl Sargeant: The political structure options available to local government in Wales were addressed in the Local Government (Wales) Measure 2011. The elected mayor and council manager option and the alternative arrangements—or the fourth option, as it was known—were removed, leaving a choice between leader and cabinet and elected mayor and cabinet.

Mick Antoniw: One problem is that there is a limited choice of governance for local authorities—just the mayoral system or the cabinet system—and there seems to be a growing concern about the way in which the cabinet system operates. Is it not appropriate to review how the cabinet system is working? There may be opportunities to give local government, possibly through Welsh legislation, the option of a broader choice of governance systems in future.

Carl Sargeant: I am aware of the concern of the Member for Pontypridd and the papers on this issue. I refer him to the Local Government (Wales) Measure 2011, for which we undertook a consultation on the programme. We did not receive any representations about changing from having a cabinet system to the systems to which the Member referred. However, if he would like to write to me with the detail, I would be happy to look at that.

Is he taking the Mick? (letter to the press)

Pontypridd’s newly elected AM Mick Antoniw is obviously keen to keep his close association with the unions going and to be seen to be supportive of their grievances.  Hence his ‘Statement of Opinion’ tabled at the Assembly which reads as follows:

“This Assembly puts on record its recognition of the hard and dedicated work of our public sector workers and recognises the anger felt by many at the serious attack on their living standards arising from measures being taken by the UK Government which will result in reduced terms and conditions of employment and pension provision…”

He will no doubt then be coming out and stating his unequivocal disgust at the way in which RCT Council employees have been treated by his own Labour party colleagues?  Defending the rights of those lower paid employees who will see their living standards fall not because of any actions of the UK Government but because of the Labour administration here.

You can’t have it both ways Mick – can’t have the power and not take the responsibility.  How many times has it got to be said?  The Labour party were in Government at Westminster for 13 years, they have been in power in Cardiff Bay since 1999 alone or in coalition.  They are running RCT Council. Yet whose fault is everything?  Of course, it is the fault of the Westminster coalition.

Take a look around Mick, talk to some of your union friends, see just how much anger there is locally about changes in terms and conditions on your own territory. Then ask yourself who caused it.

Karen Roberts