Politics

Carwyn in crisis after Millar’s statement

Published

8 years ago

December 21, 2017

Carwyn Jones: Left Chamber before Darren Millar's statement

A WAR of words has broken out between First Minister Carwyn Jones and former Cabinet member Leighton Andrews about allegations that a report into bullying was made by Mr Andrews to the First Minister as long ago as 2014 and that one of the AMs he reported as being a target of adverse briefing was the late Alyn & Deeside AM Carl Sargeant.

Mr Sargeant died in November this year after being dismissed from his Cabinet post.

He was sacked from his post on the basis of allegations about his behaviour that were never put to him.

The First Minister finds himself exposed on the issue, after making a series of pious announcements about how the Welsh Assembly would not cover up allegations of bullying and inappropriate behaviour following a series of allegations about the conduct of senior figures at Westminster.

That position has been progressively unpicked by Mr Andrews in a number of tweets, blog posts and very few media interviews.

And in the Welsh Assembly on Tuesday (Dec 12), Mr Jones’ position was left even more exposed by a dramatic personal statement by Conservative AM Darren Millar.

Mr Millar revealed that when he asked the First Minister questions about bullying in the Welsh Government in 2014, he did so at Mr Sargeant’s request and timed the questions to coincide with Mr Sargeant telling him that a formal complaint of bullying had been made against a special advisor (SPAD) to the Welsh Government.

Mr Jones was not in the Senedd to hear Mr Millar’s statement, having left after fielding First Minister’s questions.

TWO ISSUES UNRAVELLED

The issue of the First Minister’s treatment of Carl Sargeant and the latter’s death have become intertwined with a second issue, namely whether or not the First Minister misled the Assembly when he said – three years ago – no allegations of bullying had been made to him about the conduct of either special advisers or specialist advisers.

This article sets out the way in which both issues wind around themselves and why Carwyn Jones finds himself in jeopardy.

There are currently three investigations ongoing that affect the First Minister directly and indirectly. A further investigation – into allegations made against Carl Sargeant – has been discontinued.

The first investigation is into the way Mr Jones investigated allegations against Mr Sargeant; the second is into whether he misled AMs; the final one is the investigation by HM Coroner into Carl Sargeant’s death. Any one of the outcomes of those investigations have the potential to end Mr Jones’ career in ignominy.

While each of those investigations are hazardous to the First Minister’s political health, if Mr Jones is found to have breached the Ministerial Code of Conduct, there is no way for him to ride out the ensuing storm.

WHAT IS THE MINISTERIAL CODE?

‘Ministers are expected to behave according to the highest standards of constitutional and personal conduct in the performance of their duties’.

The ministerial Code, issued by the First Minister, provides guidance to ministers on how they should act and arrange their affairs in order to uphold these standards. In particular, they are expected to observe the 7 principles of public life and the principles of ministerial conduct. The code applies to Cabinet Secretaries, Ministers and the Counsel General.

WHAT DOES THE CODE SAY?

‘It is of paramount importance that Ministers give accurate and truthful information to the Assembly, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity. Ministers who knowingly mislead the Assembly will be expected to offer their resignation to the First Minister.

‘In particular, the First Minister may also refer matters concerning himself to an Independent Adviser’.

WHY IS CARWYN JONES IN DIFFICULTIES?

In November 2014, Darren Millar AM submitted a Written Assembly Question to the First Minister asking: ‘Has the First Minister ever received any reports or been made aware of any allegations of bullying by special and/or specialist advisers at any time in the past three years and, if so, when and what action, if any, was taken?’

Mr Jones’ answer could not have been more unequivocal: ‘No allegations have been made’.

WHAT IS CARWYN JONES ALLEGED TO HAVE DONE?

Mr Jones’ version of events has been challenged by his former Cabinet colleague Leighton Andrews.

Leighton Andrews says: ‘I made a complaint to the First Minister about one aspect of [deliberate personal undermining of Carl Sargeant], of which I had direct evidence, in the autumn of 2014. An informal investigation was undertaken. I then asked for it to be made formal. I was told it would be. I was never shown the outcome. There was no due process’.

Mr Jones has maintained that no allegations were made, sparking a war of words between himself and Mr Andrews. At First Minister’s questions on December 5, Carwyn Jones came perilously close to calling his former colleague a liar. Mr Andrews responded by publishing a more detailed account of events and invited the First Minister to repeat what he had said in the Senedd without the benefit of Parliamentary Privilege to protect him from legal action.

Mr Jones has, so far, declined Mr Andrews’ invitation.

Now, fuel has been thrown onto the smoking embers under the First Minister.

In a devastating Personal Statement in the Senedd thisTuesday, the Conservative AM Darren Millar revealed that not only had he been asked by the late Carl Sargeant to ask the November 2014 question, but also that Mr Sargeant asked him to delay asking the question until AFTER an allegation of bullying was made to the First Minister against a named SPAD. By way of corroboration, Mr Millar revealed that he had discussed the matter during October and November 2014 with the Conservative Chief Whip, Paul Davies. Mr Millar also said that other AMs were aware of what was going on.

CARWYN’S DILEMMA

The First Minister’s answer can only be read compatibly with the accounts given by Mr Millar and Mr Andrews if he can claim either that he did not understand the question at the time, or that the question was phrased so as to make his answer entirely truthful without it being in anyway accurate. Mr Jones has suggested that what he calls his ‘lawyerly way’ might have led him into answering the question the way he did, but he has rather undone that suggestion by his subsequent comments attacking others’ accounts.

If the answer cannot be read compatibly with the accounts of his fellow AMs – and it is a significant verbal stretch to perceive how it might be, no matter how ‘lawyerly’ Mr Jones’ way is – then the choices left are stark.

For Mr Jones’ response in November 2014 to hold water he will have to successfully advance the proposition that several other AMs are themselves lying or are/were mistaken. The odds are not in Mr Jones’ favour on that one.

And the alternative position for Mr Jones – that he did not treat complaints as being made formally or that complaints that were made to him were not made in the correct form or format – lays him open to a charge of dealing with Mr Millar’s questions in less than good faith. Moreover, if Mr Jones did not take the allegations seriously because he regarded it as part and parcel of the normal rough and tumble of politics, it runs an absolute coach and horses through the pious approach he took before Mr Sargeant’s death.

Neither proposition, no matter how finessed, lets Carwyn Jones off the hook. The former would instantly end his career as First Minister; the latter would wound him so severely that he would - almost certainly – be persuaded to step down in favour of an alternative leader. In short, and in either of those circumstances, Mr Jones was either a knave or a fool.

WHO KNEW WHAT AND WHEN?

And there is another wrinkle of suspicion that bears consideration: if Mr Sargeant did complain about an over-mighty SPAD, it is open to question whether or not his card was marked. A self-perpetuating club of insiders would not take kindly to having their gilded cages rattled; links are undeniably strong between the national Welsh media and some ministerial special advisers.

That possibility is given some credence by what former Cabinet member Leighton Andrews wrote on his blog.

The Herald contacted Mr Andrews regarding his blog’s content and the First Minister’s remarks regarding bullying. He gave us permission to quote directly from his blog.

‘From discussions with many well-connected individuals over the last few weeks I have been able to piece together the following:

A Labour AM told the Labour Assembly Group meeting on November 9 that he had been texted by someone he regarded as a reliable source that Carl was to lose his job, before the reshuffle was announced
A leading Welsh journalist received a text in advance of the reshuffle’s announcement that Carl was to be sacked
A Welsh Labour MP told another Welsh Labour MP that Carl was to lose his job, before the reshuffle was announced’

Mr Andrews asks the question ‘who leaked?’ The ancillary questions to that are ‘who would benefit from such a leak?’ and ‘what would be such a leak’s purpose?’

A QUESTION OF TIMING

Mr Andrews’ sequence of events is of vital importance.

Mr Sargeant was dismissed as a Cabinet Secretary on November 3 and died on November 7. Two days after that event members of the Labour Assembly Group were told by one of their number that their deceased former colleague’s dismissal was leaked to them before Carl Sargeant was dismissed. Mr Andrews’ allegations that news of Mr Sargeant’s dismissal was currency among Labour MPs beforehand and a journalist was informed would be the toxic icing on a cake.

The reason for that is straightforward: at the time he was dismissed and at the time of his death Mr Sargeant had not been given the details of the allegations made against him by anonymous third parties whose versions of events he was given no opportunity to rebut. The leaking of his dismissal suggests that the case against Mr Sargeant had been judged by the First Minister and a decision made that would take no account of his innocence, guilt, or ability to answer the charges. If, has been alleged, the First Minister had previously dismissed one of the complaints relied upon to sack his ‘dear friend’, questions arise about the First Minister’s competence in deciding the allegations. Most tellingly, it is one of Mr Jones’ SPADs who carried out inquiries for the First Minister into the allegations against Mr Sargeant.

The number of people who would and should have known about both the investigation into Mr Sargeant and the decision to dismiss him would have been passingly small. Mr Jones himself and perhaps a handful of other people. Political circles being notorious hubs for gossip, it would take only one leak for ripples to spread.

There is no doubt that if the First Minister does not know who leaked he is being peculiarly incurious.

At the end of Mr Millar’s statement on Tuesday, a number of prominent Labour members exchanged looks that suggested that their consciences might well now be pricking them into reflecting on what they knew.

Mr Jones’ position has not looked more precarious than it does now and, while some AMs have accused others of seeking to settle political scores, it seems that Mr Millar’s intervention might well prove the one that does for the First Minister.

News

Game of Thrones star urges voters to back anti-DARC parties

Published

5 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Tom Sinclair

ACTOR Jerome Flynn has urged voters in Wales to back parties opposed to the proposed DARC radar scheme at Cawdor Barracks, saying the issue could be decided by the next Welsh Government.

The Pembrokeshire-based Game of Thrones star, also known for Soldier Soldier and Robson & Jerome, made the appeal in a video released by PARC Against DARC on Tuesday (May 5), just two days before polling day in the Senedd election.

Radar row enters election campaign

Flynn urged voters in Ceredigion Penfro and across Wales to support Plaid Cymru or the Green Party, saying both parties had pledged to oppose the project.

The Ministry of Defence has submitted a planning application to Pembrokeshire County Council for 27 radar antennas and associated infrastructure at Cawdor Barracks, near Brawdy.

The scheme forms part of the Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability programme, linked to the AUKUS defence partnership between the UK, US and Australia.

The MOD says DARC would help detect, identify and track objects in Earth orbit, supporting military and civilian satellite security.

Opponents claim the radar would industrialise part of the Pembrokeshire countryside, damage the setting of the national park, and increase the area’s military significance.

Flynn says project ‘not a done deal’

In the video, Flynn described the election as “probably the most crucial vote we’ve made in 25 years”.

He claimed the next Senedd could play a decisive role in the future of the project, saying: “I’m here to say, it’s not a done deal because Plaid Cymru and the Greens have both made party-led decisions to say no to Westminster.

“We’re not having such a thing on our beloved coast.”

Flynn also described St Davids as “the spiritual home of Wales” and criticised what he called “the most unspeakably abominable planning application” on the edge of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park.

Campaign steps up pressure

PARC Against DARC said it welcomed Flynn’s intervention and said it had distributed 22,000 leaflets around Pembrokeshire in recent weeks.

The campaign group said First Minister Eluned Morgan’s recent comments on the scheme did not go far enough.

A spokesperson said: “While Eluned Morgan has come out in the final hour to call for DARC to be halted, we fear this does not go nearly far enough.

“Plaid Cymru and the Green Party have both made it their national party policy to oppose and stop DARC, so we have no doubt of the authenticity of their commitment.”

The group is also urging residents to submit objections to Pembrokeshire County Council before the current publicity period ends on May 20.

Welsh Government role

Campaigners say the next Welsh Government could intervene by “calling in” the planning application, meaning Welsh ministers would take responsibility for deciding it rather than leaving the final decision with Pembrokeshire County Council.

That possibility has made DARC a significant local election issue in Ceredigion Penfro, where Eluned Morgan is Labour’s lead candidate, Elin Jones leads the Plaid Cymru list, and Amy Nicholass heads the Green Party list.

Under the new Senedd voting system, voters will elect six Members of the Senedd for the constituency using a proportional list system.

PARC Against DARC said this meant there was “far less need for tactical voting” and argued that voters opposed to the radar could support either Plaid Cymru or the Greens.

Wider concerns

Campaigners have repeatedly claimed that the radar would make Pembrokeshire a potential military target and draw Wales further into US military strategy.

They also say the project raises environmental, health, democratic and security concerns.

Supporters of the scheme argue that space monitoring is becoming increasingly important as satellites are used for communications, navigation, defence and emergency infrastructure.

Flynn ended his video by saying: “Vote with your heart because we can make a difference here, we could put in a government that cares about our land, our people and our environment.”

Whatever the outcome of Thursday’s election, the intervention by one of Pembrokeshire’s best-known residents is likely to keep the DARC controversy high on the political agenda.

News

Landlords in Wales face new anti-discrimination laws

Published

6 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Tom Sinclair

New rules from June 1 will make it unlawful to refuse renters because they have children or receive benefits

LANDLORDS in Wales are being warned to prepare for new anti-discrimination laws which come into force at the beginning of June.

From Monday, June 1, it will be unlawful for landlords and letting agents to discriminate against prospective contract-holders because they have children or receive benefits.

The change follows the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, which mainly reforms renting law in England, but also extends key anti-discrimination protections into Wales.

The Welsh provisions will be incorporated into the Renting Homes framework and will apply to occupation contracts. Unlike the civil penalty regime used in England, breaches in Wales may amount to a criminal offence, with enforcement handled by local authorities and cases dealt with through the courts.

What landlords cannot do

From June 1, landlords and agents must not deter people from applying for a property because they have children or receive benefits.

They must also not refuse or restrict access to viewings, prevent prospective tenants from receiving information about a property, or exclude them from entering into an occupation contract on those grounds.

The measures are aimed at ending blanket “no children” or “no benefits” policies, which campaigners have long argued unfairly shut families and low-income households out of the private rented sector.

Landlords will still be allowed to carry out affordability checks and assess whether a property is suitable. For example, a landlord may still decide that a particular room or property is physically unsuitable for children, but the decision must be based on the property itself rather than a blanket ban.

Paperwork deadline

Under the new rules, landlords will need to issue either a new occupation contract or a statement of variation to reflect the changes.

The statement can be served up to fourteen days after the rules take effect, meaning landlords should act by June 14.

Leading North Wales estate and lettings agent Cavendish, which has offices in Mold and Ruthin, says it has been advising landlords ahead of the deadline.

Nicola Blake, Operations Director at Cavendish, said: “While much of the focus in recent months has been on the introduction of the Renters’ Rights Act in England, some of the changes are also impacting Wales.

“As of June 1, landlords in Wales will be subject to stringent anti-discrimination laws and failure to adhere to the new legislation could result in a criminal prosecution.”

She added: “This is a significant change for landlords in Wales, and we are helping our clients to be ready well ahead of the deadline, completing the required paperwork and ensuring they are fully compliant.”

Landlord seminar

Cavendish will hold a seminar later this year for landlords in Wales, covering legislative changes and advice on managing and improving property portfolios.

The event will take place on Monday, October 26, at Theatr Clwyd. Cavendish recently became a Gold Member of the Mold arts venue.

Cavendish was established in 1993 by Julian Adams, the firm’s chairman, and his then business partner Robert Ikin.

The company now employs more than thirty people across estate agency and lettings, with offices in Mold, Ruthin and Chester. It says it helps more than 600 homeowners move each year and manages around 650 properties.

News

Academics warn voters need clear reporting ahead of historic Senedd election

Published

10 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Cardiff University experts say misinformation, coalition arithmetic, public finances and devolved powers are among the key issues facing Wales

CARDIFF UNIVERSITY academics have warned that clear reporting and proper scrutiny will be vital as Wales prepares for one of the most significant Senedd elections since devolution.

The intervention comes ahead of polling day on Thursday (May 7), when voters will elect a larger 96-member Senedd under a new voting system.

Professor Stephen Cushion, from Cardiff University’s School of Journalism, Media and Culture, said UK-wide or English-produced news remained the main source of political information for many people in Wales.

He warned that reporting on devolved issues such as health, education and law and order did not always explain clearly which government was responsible.

Professor Cushion said this could leave people confused about what applies to Wales, particularly when audiences increasingly see political headlines on social media without reading the full context.

Dr Maxwell Modell, a research associate at the same school, said some political news items presented parties arguing with each other without enough independent assessment of their claims.

He said broadcasters sometimes set out several party positions side by side, leaving viewers to make sense of them without journalistic scrutiny.

Dr Keighley Perkins said turnout could be higher than at any point since devolution began, given the possibility of political change.

She said coverage should focus less on perceived disengagement and more on the issues facing the next Welsh Government and scrutiny of party policy positions.

Misinformation warning

Dr Bethan Davies, based in Cardiff University’s Security, Crime and Intelligence Innovation Institute, warned that there was significant scope for misinformation and disinformation to spread during the campaign, particularly with the rise of AI-generated content.

She said inauthentic accounts sometimes used the logos of reliable news outlets on videos to make audiences believe they were genuine.

Professor Martin Innes, co-director of the same institute, said foreign interests seeking to influence or interfere in politics remained a persistent problem.

He said there should be clear ministerial and senior official accountability for combating foreign online political interference, with resources matching the scale of the challenge.

Economy and public finances

Professor Melanie Jones, of Cardiff Business School, said the future performance of the Welsh economy should be a key focus for the next Welsh Government.

She said improving living standards depended on addressing Wales’ productivity gap with the rest of the UK, which would require long-term commitment and investment in people and infrastructure.

Professor Robert Huggins, of the School of Geography and Planning, said Cardiff was developing as a hub for creative and high-tech industries, but regeneration was less obvious in the South Wales Valleys.

He said the next Welsh Government would have “much work to do” to improve prospects for people living in those areas.

Guto Ifan, from the Wales Fiscal Analysis programme, said difficult choices over spending and taxation were likely after the election.

He warned that if the UK Government sticks to its current spending plans, growing NHS spending alongside manifesto commitments on childcare, education, transport, social care and taxation would require significant cuts to some public services or tax rises.

He said manifestos were largely silent on how those trade-offs would be managed.

Welsh identity and coalition arithmetic

Professor Richard Wyn Jones, of the Wales Governance Centre, said Wales was becoming “less British”, with younger voters increasingly identifying as Welsh only or moving away from national identity altogether.

He said those who felt Welsh but not British tended to be more left wing and socially liberal than those who felt both Welsh and British, which he said was good news for Plaid Cymru.

Professor Laura McAllister said the expanded Senedd would need sharper scrutiny and the ability to challenge government if the increase in members was to be justified.

She said Wales also needed to avoid a “race to the bottom” in political behaviour if public trust was to be rebuilt.

Dr Jac Larner said the general polling trend showed the race to be the largest party remained between Plaid Cymru and Reform UK, with other parties competing for third place or below.

However, he said finishing first could matter less than it appeared.

He said whichever party led on seats would face coalition arithmetic, adding that Plaid Cymru had more credible potential partners in Labour and the Greens, while Reform had fewer options.

The Herald has carried detailed election coverage in recent weeks, including candidate interviews, graphics, explainers on the new voting system, and analysis of the Ceredigion Penfro contest.

Cardiff University said the experts were available for further comment throughout the campaign.