NORTHERN IRELAND 1 WALES 0

Legislation that should allow Corporation Tax powers to be devolved to Stormont has been published. Corporation tax is levied on the profits made by companies. The current rate paid by businesses in Northern Ireland is 21%, which compares unfavourably with the 12.5% rate in the Republic of Ireland. The Northern Ireland Executive wants to be able to match the tax rate in the Republic. The new powers won't come into effect until 2017.

It is vital that our country has the tools to build a fair and sustainable economy and it is important that power is fairly balanced across the UK, with Wales having parity with the other constituent parts. The Silk Commission recommended that Corporation Tax should be devolved to Wales in the event of it being devolved to other parts of the UK.

The Westminster Con Dem coalition government plans to pass the law before May's general election. All the political parties in Wales agreed to this principle and Plaid Cymru has long argued the case for this important lever to be made available to the Welsh Government. The party, formally known as New Labour, has said that it will not oppose the passage of the Bill. 

THE LEADERSHIP DEBATES

In many ways it is simply a matter of fairness - Plaid Cymru, the SNP and the Green Party should be included in these debates. Any TV debates have to be a full and accurate reflection of the choices facing voters throughout the whole UK in May. Plaid, alongside the SNP and the Green Party, represents a progressive anti-austerity alliance which, which in the event of a TV stitch up could end up voiceless in the TV debates. The Prime Minister's motives in relation to his call for the Greens to be included so that his opponents come under fire from the left might be best described as deeply cynical at best. The Conservatives would probably prefer not to have any debate at all as the format of the last leaders debate probably cost them victory at the last UK Westminster General election. Personally I have little doubt that the party formerly known as New Labour would privately agree although for different ‘Ed’ related reasons. The media has a responsibility to ensure that the voters are fully aware that there is an alternative to the Westminster austerity agenda and in the interests of democracy the compelling case for leadership debates needs to continue to be made.

JE SUIS CHARLIE

AFP Photo Department 'JeSuisCharlie tribute to Charlie Hedbo at AFP News room (Paris)

French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo was today (January 7 2015) attacked by at least three masked gunmen, leaving at least 10 journalists and two police officers dead and other critically injured. Previously the magazine has been subjected to death threats and was fire-bombed in 2011 following the publication of a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad. Today’s attack on Charlie Hebdo was a blatant attack on freedom of speech and a deliberate attempt to target the free press.

Today's attack was a horrific attempt to silence individuals working to promote increased transparency with their bold take on current political developments and social affairs. The attack shows the real need for society as a whole to stand united in support for the political right to free speech, and other civil liberties, and to publicly condemn this (and other) atrocious acts of violence, which serve as a destructive force to peace, stability and democracy. 

Freedom of speech and freedom of expression are two important components in any free and democratic society - they guarantee an open exchange of information, opinions and ideas. Whether people like what is printed or broadcast or not, the media plays a vital part in the exercise of these freedoms by independently and freely reporting, analyzing, evaluating, and critiquing all aspects of modern society.

UNRELIABLE AND UNTRUSTWORTHY

The news that the Westminster Government has up to another nine years to recover its costs on the Severn Bridge crossings after they return to public ownership in 2018 is not good news. This news was revealed the day before tolls went up on the Severn Bridge with car drivers now paying £6.50 up 10p while heavy goods vehicle and bus drivers having to pay £19.60, up 40p not to mention the rises for small goods vehicles and small buses. The current toll levels would enable costs to be recovered in between one or two years but at the moment Westminster is deliberately keeping its intentions in relation to the rate and length of the tolls after they revert to public ownership hidden. The Westminster Government needs to come clean on its plans for the tolls after 2018 and whether it intends to keep collecting the tolls beyond 2027.

STILL GETTING FLEECED!

The toll to cross the Severn Bridge and Second Severn Crossing into Wales will increase once again from the 1st January, with cars paying £6.50 - up from the current £6.40 - while small goods vehicles and small buses facing a 30p rise to £13.10, and heavy goods vehicles and buses having to pay £19.60, up from £19.20. 

Severn Bridge tolls since 1976

 This new increase makes the toll one of the most expensive per kilometre and hinders economic growth. Back in 1966, it cost you 12p to cross the bridge, which would be around £2 pound in today’s money – something that clearly suggests that the toll concession holders are fleecing us for as much as they can get before the franchise expires.

Back on January 1^st 2014, the cost of crossing into Wales by car increased to £6.40 - a rise of 20p - small goods vehicles pay £12.80 (a 40p increase) and HGVs £19.20 (a 60p increase). The Severn Bridge operators rolled out the same old tired excuses for their greed saying that the tolls were agreed by a parliamentary order and in line with the Retail Price Index (RPI), etc, etc.

When it comes to the Severn Bridge tolls, one often-ignored fact is that the tolls on the Humber Bridge are subsidized by Westminster. When last in office at Westminster, the party formerly known as New Labour chose to quietly (and regularly) subsidise the Humber Bridge tolls, yet made no move what so ever towards doing anything about dealing with the tax on jobs, businesses and commuters which are passed off as the Severn bridge tolls – and our local Labour elected representatives pretty much maintained their silence.  

This may explain why our local Labour MP’s do little save trotting out the same old news releases bemoaning the failure of the Government (when in opposition) to do anything about the tolls. The Humber Bridge subsidy has been continued by the Con Dem Coalition Government, who have driven the post Thatcherite ‘free market’ ideology into wholly new areas, yet show no inclination to curb the Humber Bridge state subsidy or offer to help Welsh commuters and businesses out with a simular subsidy.

At some point in 2018 ownership of the two Severn Bridges will revert back to the Westminster Government ‘s Department for Transport, once the take from the tolls reach passes the magic figure of £996 million pounds (that is at 1989 prices). The Labour in Wales Welsh government wants to take control of the tolls when the Severn Crossings return to public ownership and would look to reduce them although it believes abolishing them would leave too great a hole in the budget.

Plaid wants the transfer of powers (to Wales) so that tolls on the bridges can be reduced, something that could have a considerable impact on businesses and the economy. With control over the bridges devolved, Plaid would cut the tolls to £2 to cover maintenance costs. Maintenance costs are some £15 million per year, but motorists and vehicles using the crossings currently generate £72 million pounds per year. While the tolls would form a useful revenue stream for Welsh Governments, Plaid’s priority is to cut the tolls.

A consultants' report (for the Welsh Government) suggested that the abolition of bridge tolls could boost the economic output in Wales by £ 107 Million pounds. By the time the two Severn Bridges come back into public ownership in 2018, it has been estimated that this cash cow may have been milked to the tune of about £ 1.029 billion pounds. What adds regular insult to regular financial injury is the fact that the old (M48) Severn Bridge continues to be periodical closed at weekends for routine maintenance, which are funded by the Department for Transport, from the public purse.

Back in October 2010, Professor Peter Midmore's independent economic study of the Severn Bridge tolls recommended that the revenues from the tolls should stay in Wales, once the crossings revert to public hands. The study of 122 businesses commissioned by the Federation of Small Businesses revealed that the tolls had a negative impact on 30% of firms in South Wales, this compared with 18% in the Greater Bristol area.

The 2010 study found that transport; construction and tourism-related companies reliant on regular crossings suffered increased costs and reduced competitiveness. The study also found that Welsh businesses were unfairly penalised by the tolls and concluded that the money should be shared with the Assembly Government and used to improve Wales’ roads and public transport.

There appears to be a general political consensus that something must be done about reducing the Severn bridge tolls – which is nice – but not particularly helpful to motorists. The ominous silence from the Department for Transport on the eventual ownership of the bridge and the potential fate of the tolls is also not particularly helpful and should be a real cause for concern. 

What worries me is that the Department of Transport (and their Westminster based masters) could find the income from the Severn bridge tolls too useful to let go. The ownership of the Severn bridges should be transferred to the National Assembly in 2018, which means that a decision needs to be made now and preparations for the transfer begun  - what we in Wales don’t need is silence from the Department for Transport. 

Nadolig Llawen - Merry Christmas

AT HAGUE’S COMMAND?

The Conservatives sudden interest in "English votes for English laws” something conveniently happens to put the Labour Party in Westminster an awkward spot, in relation to the status of its Welsh and Scottish elected representatives, may be purely coincidental or it may not. Aside from mixing things up for the Labour Party, one of the main reasons why the Conservative Party has developed a keen interest in all things ‘English’ is because the UK Independence Party has emerged from the shadows calling loudly for the reform of the governance of England – something that has been independently confirmed by the most recent report of the Future of England Survey (FoES).

The survey’s findings don’t make comfortable reading for the Conservative part of the Con Dem coalition government. The study has noted a clear and growing dissatisfaction among English voters at the way the UK’s most populous nation is governed and a preference for an England-wide political institution to represent English interests. Although the current Conservative leaders preferred option of English Votes for English Laws (EVEL) has the most widespread support, it is short of a majority and, when voters in England are asked who best represents the interests of England, both Mr Cameron and the Conservative party are well behind Nigel Farage and UKIP.

Yet when it comes to finding an answer to the English Question, voters continue to place concerns over the governance of England well behind worries about the influence of the EU. However, there is a clear dissatisfaction with the current arrangements for governing England – with no more than a quarter preferring the status quo. The study noted that if somewhat more tentatively; the support for EVEL appears to be the preferred choice of voters – again short of a majority – and has gained popularity compared to the earlier FoES studies in 2013 and 2012.

Support for an English Parliament is of the same order of magnitude as support for the status quo whereas support for localism either in the form of regional assemblies or enhanced local government remains very low. While David Cameron’s suggested answer to the English question may be slightly ahead but there is growing evidence that neither he nor his party is trusted to deliver it. When asked “Which party best stands up for the interests of England?”, the Conservatives ironically came fourth (16%), behind UKIP (23%), ‘None of the Above’ (19%) and Labour (17%), although well ahead of the Lib Dems (4%). Much the same pattern is seen in terms of the party leaders.

Interestingly enough when asked which leader best stands up for English interests, Nigel Farage was voters’ first choice (22%) his nearest rival though isn’t even another party leader, it was the ‘None of the Above’ option which came in second place, with 21% of the survey’s 3,705 respondents in England dismissing all of the available political leaders. Mr Cameron is third on 15%, just ahead of Ed Miliband on 13%. The Deputy Prime Minister’s rating matched those of his party and, at 4%, slightly behind Boris Johnson on 9%.

The Con Dems in Westminster have now issued a Command Paper with a number of different options in relation to the problem of English votes for English laws an issue that which been quietly rumbling away in the background since the 1990’s. William Hague’s Command Paper included four main options:

• Simply excluding Scottish and Northern Irish MPs from any role in English and Welsh bills and limiting England-only bills to English MPs
• Basically allowing only English MPs, or English and Welsh MPs, to consider relevant bills during their committee and report stages, where amendments are tabled and agreed, before allowing all MPs to vote on the final bill
• Allowing only English MPs, or English and Welsh MPs, to consider relevant bills at committee stage and giving them a effective veto in a separate vote before their third reading
• There was even a Lib Dem plan for the establishment of a grand committee of English MPs, with the right to veto legislation applying only England, with its members based on the share of the vote.

These, to varying degrees subject to safeguards cold be said to be reasonable options and despite the bluster from Westminster and the Labour Party, potentially sensible and fair solution which could be worked out, given sufficient time and effort on the part of the Westminster based and focused political parties. The problem is that the on-going row over the issue could result in the real issue of the legislative imbalance between the different nations and regions within these islands continuing to remain unresolved.

Part of the problem can be put down to the overly complex nature of legislation, as bills that appear to relate to England only can include some well buried clauses that relate to Wales, some of which could have significant and potentially unforeseen consequences for our country. The way the budget works at the moment, means that if Welsh MPs are excluded from voting on English measures there could be a real negative impact on the Welsh budget. At a very basic level this would be both unfair and unjust.  

What’s needed is the implementation of a much more sensible and balanced devolution settlement whereby the four constituent parts of the British State have the same legislative and executive powers. Unless this happens then any drift (and drift may be a fair description) towards developing “English Votes for English Laws” would be pretty difficult to enforce and could result in the existence several different tiers of MPs.

The consistent failure over the last 15 years to address the imbalance between powers and funding in constituent parts of the UK along with cumulative nature of the fudged and bodged nature of the devolution settlement can no longer be ignored. The way things stand at the moment the Westminster based and focused political parties are treating Wales as a second-class nation and will they may pay for this at the ballot box next May, at least in Wales.