The real story behind Labour, Plaid and the ‘stitch-up’ in Wales

Sadly, due to the contempt much of the public has for the main political parties and their politicians, at the moment, any negative rhetoric about them, by the right, is believed. It's why the 'lying' act, which I believe is still going through the Senedd, is now so important. Accountability for the words spoken by politicians will enable how the Senedd works, compared to Westminster, to continue. Currently, the divisive politics of Trump and Farage is on the rise - it has to be stopped.

This needs to be said loudly and repeatedly. In the absence of any real policies and nothing positive to contribute, this is precisely the propoganda Reform and the Tories will attempt to use.

On reading the headline to this article I was ready to go against against it as yet more nonsense but having read through the piece I have to say I couldn't agree more with the author. If there is any stitch up taking place I would say it's with the incumbent Labour party at both ends of the M4. The one thing for supporting the creation of the then Assembly now Senedd to me was that it would be different to Westminster & it's adversity & yah boo way of doing things as pointed out in the article. We may not agree with all the policy decisions our politicians enable in Cymru and, Labour's faux pa recently with the Gethin saga aside it does look like "democracy when it grows up" compared with the out dated version in london.

If we want the electorate to stop behaving like entitled children we need to stop treating them like children. Ask them to help solve the big problems rather than pretend they don't exist. A referendum asking them to choose between net zero migration or raising the retirement age to 75 would be a start.

Y Neidar. Malltod mwyaf gwleidyddiaeth Cymru, yn arbennig melltith y mudiad cenedlaethol, ddywedodd rhywun uchel iawn yn y Blaid Lafur Brydeinig wrtha’i rhywdro - yw fod y cyfan fel rhyw fath o neidar fawr hir lithrig, slimy, di-dor. Britnats Llafur un pen, soft Britnats Llafur fwy tua’r canol, ac yn fano yn cyd gyfarfod yn hwylus a chyfeillgar iawn hefo’r soft Welshnats, ond dim gwir Welshnats gwir eisiau annibynniaeth yn y gynffon o gwbl. Pawb i fyny penolau eu gilydd, ac ddim yn dda ar gyfer democratiaeth. Dyna ddweudodd y dyn... ;-)

So called 'Welsh Labour' has now governed Wales uninterrupted for 26 years. But the Welsh Parliament's legitimacy in the eyes of the public still continues to be in the balance. Voter turnout is consistently low. But why is this? This is essentially because of Welsh's Labour utter failure, refusal, to take part in the nation building opportunity which devolution afforded. Because of Welsh Labour's refusenik negativity the project has still not really got off the ground at all. And why is this you might ask? Essentially because Welsh Labour is still shot through with a debilitating, paralysing, psychologically enslaving, deeply ingrained, British nationalism. Indeed the Welsh Labourites are perhaps the greatest grovelers of all. Deliberately denied any in-depth knowledge of their own history at school most of them are now thoroughly Britishized - the sad products of a people oppressed for many centuries, suppressed, mentally colonized - hence now supine, servile, and irredeemably sycophantic.

Its often said by voters. "Why don't parties work together if they agree rather than forever be in conflict with one another". I tend to agree. And yes, parties should work together if they do agree. And when they don't. Hopefully come to a consensus through mediation. Action speaks louder than words. See, apathy spreads when the electorate see conflict between parties who play party political games rather than working for the betterment of the country and its people i.e you or I. An example occurred of rivals working positively together when Plaid Cymru (Ieuan Wyn Jones) & Welsh Labour (FM Rhodri Morgan) formed a coalition and created the "One Wales" agreement in 2007 that laid the foundation for the successful 2011 legislative Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament referendum and later rise in members from 60 to 96 passed in 2020 that will come into effect next May 2026 Senedd Cymru election. There was no stitch-up as often stated by the right-wing , but two parties working together for the benefit of Wales. This cannot be said of the Welsh Conservatives or those anti-devolution parties who since the inception of devolution in 1997 and first sitting in 1999 continually undermined, tried and failed, to abolish our democratically elected Senedd institution. The irony is, Welsh devolution gave the Conservative party an undeserved voice again in Wales after the 1997 General Election Tory wipeout in Wales. And ever since like a stuck record have continually been in "Welsh Not" mode attacking everything rather than being productive. This is the very reason why Darren Millar's Welsh Conservative party will face another wipeout in 2026.

On the whole, I agree with your opinion piece Owen, it is thoughtful and insightful. However, on one aspect, I - and many others - categorically disagree with you; even as Labour supporters. The statement "a manifesto endorsed by the electorate when it awarded Labour the keys to government again" is a falsehood, given how the electoral system in Wales operates and how votes are cast. Here's why: Voters elect individual members to the Senedd, not manifestos or parties as a collective.There was, is, and will not be under the current system of governance, any direct "awarding of government."Manifestos, as political parties love to bark when it suits them, are not binding mandates. In the Senedd elections, our people do not directly vote for a party to form a government or endorse a specific manifesto. Instead, they elect individual Members of the Senedd (MSs). This means that while party affiliation is important, voters may choose candidates for a range of reasons unrelated to full manifesto endorsement—such as personal reputation, local issues, or tactical voting. Often, the manifesto itself has never reached, let alone been read by, the citizen in question. The phrase "awarded Labour the keys to government" implies that the electorate directly gave Labour a mandate to govern. But under our current system, no party is guaranteed to form a government just by winning the most seats; coalitions or minority governments may be necessary; and the Senedd as a whole decides who forms the government, typically by appointing a First Minister who can command majority support. So, even if Labour emerged as the largest party, that is not the same as the electorate collectively endorsing Labour's manifesto or choosing them as a whole to govern. Even if many people voted for Labour MSs, this does not equate to a wholesale endorsement of their manifesto. Some might agree with some of the policies outlined in the manifest, but not all. Others may have voted for Labour to prevent another party from winning, and some may vote based on the candidate, not the party. Even those who vote based purely on the name of the party might not have had eyes on the manifesto. Thus, claiming a manifesto was "endorsed by the electorate" oversimplifies the complexity of voter intentions. Finally, your closing statement "We deserve a political culture that respects complexity, values cooperation, and doesn't see compromise as capitulation" supports critique of your earlier claim because it recognises the true nature of Welsh democracy. Our democracy is a system that is nuanced, collaborative, and not based on simplistic majoritarianism. Motivations are complex too; people may vote for candidates, parties, or policies selectively, not as a blanket endorsement of a manifesto - part or whole. To pretend that an election result is a clear-cut endorsement of one party's non-legally binding programme oversimplifies democratic reality, plays to the tune of critics and conspiracy theorists, undermines trust, and ultimately, demonstrates why many people were - and still are - upset by some of the policies Labour are pushing through, while the MSs remain tone deaf to the tune their voters are singing. Claiming a manifesto is “endorsed” and must be followed rigidly treats any deviation as a betrayal, which is contrary to the truely Welsh democratic culture that welcomes flexibility and negotiation.

"But perhaps more importantly, the Senedd uses proportional representation. The Additional Member System ensures that the number of seats each party wins reflects their share of the vote. As a result, it’s extremely rare for one party to win an outright majority – and that’s no accident." Unfortunately we don't have AMS any more, poor as the Welsh version of AMS was, we have something much much worse. Something that was dreamt up by Mark Drakeford and Adam Price on their own in a private meeting, and then imposed on the Senedd by wielding their "supermajority". But let's not imagine that "Labour and Plaid Cymru are in cahoots in some backroom conspiracy", perish the thought, anyone who believes that obviously comes from a "corner of the right". If you are gullible enough to fall for this, I have a bridge in London that I could sell you cheap.

And this approach has not achieved one thing for the people of Wales in 25 years of devolution. Nothing. That chancers like Reform are on the rise says it all. Labour and PC have no-one to blame but their inept selves. They have achieved nothing.

Precisely.

Implying that labour and plaid are in cahoots is quite comical. I doubt they have such ambition or the competency.