More downsides of devolution

More trouble in the Celtic fringes raises questions about the success of devolution

The best of times in Cardiff Bay have very quickly turned into the worst of times. Just a few months ago many were celebrating the elevation of Vaughan Getting as the new leader of the Welsh Senedd, and how as the first black leader of any European country this showed how much progress could be made under the UK's devolved arrangements. See an earlier post here. but this week, things have turned sour for Getting.

Watch the video clip below.

Questions based on the video

1. What led to the dramatic turnaround in Vaughan Gething's confidence vote?

2. How did Vaughan Gething respond to questions about a £200,000 donation to his leadership campaign?

3. Why was there controversy surrounding deleted messages and the sacking of one of Vaughan Gething's ministers?

4. What impact did the absence of two Labour members have on the outcome of the no-confidence vote?

5. How did Vaughan Gething react to losing the no-confidence vote by 29 votes to 27?

6. What stance did the UK government Welsh Secretary take regarding Vaughan Gething's position after the vote?

7. What are the potential implications for Vaughan Gething's government following this no-confidence vote?

Correct answers:

1. The loss of the confidence vote came as a surprise after Vaughan Gething expressed confidence in winning.

2. Vaughan Gething faced questions about a £200,000 donation from a company owner convicted of environmental offenses.

3. Controversy arose due to allegations of accepting questionable donations, involvement in deleting messages, and the dismissal of a minister.

4. The absence of two critical Labour members who were known critics of Vaughan Gething contributed to his loss in the vote.

5. Despite losing the no-confidence vote, Vaughan Gething stated that he would continue to carry out his duties as First Minister.

6. The UK government Welsh Secretary suggested that Vaughan Gething's position is now untenable and called for his resignation.

7. There may be further challenges ahead for Vaughan Gething's government, including the possibility of a full confidence vote or increased scrutiny during the general election campaign.

So while Getting may not have broken any rules, these latest events have caused further headaches for Labour Party HQ as Welsh Labour have been flirting with a series of policies that have been badly received by the electorate in that area, such as a 20mph speed limit, changes to the school year, and council tax reform. But it is the smell of corruption surrounding the funding of Gething's election campaign that fits a pattern of sleaze associated with the new devolved arenas.

Devolution has not resulted, as proponents had hoped, in a new form of politics, free from the tales of corruption which are so often associated with Westminster life. For instance, in Scotland, if we go back to the early history of events in Holyrood, the MSP Tommy Sheridan was the centre of a very high-profile court case against the News of the World where lurid sex allegations surfaced. Sheridan won his libel case, but he faced perjury claims soon after. Hopes that new assemblies would be sleaze free zones were also optimistic. A series of revelations about false expense claims led to a number of party leaders resigning, and then there is the tale of the imprisonment of one MSP who got so drunk at a political awards night at a hotel he set fire to a set of curtains. Meanwhile, back in Cardiff Bay, there were calls for the Welsh First Minister, Carwyn Jones, to resign after the death of Carl Sargeant.

Therefore, while devolution may have brought government closer to the people, it seems that it brought sleaze and incompetence closer to the people as well. Talking of incompetence we should also add to the mix how Humza Yousef's stint as First Minister of Scotland unravelled. As John Crace in the Guardian put it, this shows Westminster does not have the monopoly on chaos and ineptitude.

Questions for class discussion

1. How do you think personal scandals can affect a politician's ability to lead effectively?
2. Do you believe that politicians should be held to higher ethical standards than the general public?
3. How important is it for political leaders to maintain the trust and confidence of their constituents?
4. What role do you think the media plays in shaping public perception of political figures?
5. In your opinion, what qualities make a good leader in politics?