Politics
Johnson’s reshuffle throws up jokers
IT WAS all about ‘The Saj’.
The shock departure of the former Chancellor from the government only a few weeks before his first Budget surprised media commentators and MPs alike.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer’s ‘did-he-fall/was-he-pushed’ resignation aside, the reshuffle was a return to the traditional way of Cabinet reshuffling Cabinet members. Out with the competent and argumentative and in with a collection of flunkies and stooges who owe everything to their loyalty to Brexit and Boris Johnson.
Julian Smith became Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in July last year. In his brief tenure in that role, he managed to re-establish the Northern Ireland Assembly and a cross-party power-sharing executive after three years of constitutional limbo during its suspension. That is the sort of signal achievement which usually leads to promotion. However, Mr Smith was an advocate of a ‘softer’ Brexit than proposed by Number Ten. He had gone so far to comment, in October last year, a no-deal Brexit would be “a very, very bad idea for Northern Ireland”.
Competent and with a record of achievement in his brief Cabinet tenure, he had to go.
His replacement is former Conservative Party Chair, Brandon Lewis. Ironically, one of the Conservative MPs who broke pairing arrangements at Mr Smith’s direction when the latter was Chief Whip.
The reaction to Julian Smith’s departure was a series of aghast tributes by all sides in Northern Ireland and Mr Lewis’ appointment greeted by the sort of ‘dangerous indifference’, Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar suggested was behind his predecessor’s sacking.
Mr Lewis is as loyal as a loyal thing. You tell him what to be loyal to and he’ll be loyal to it. Rather like a cushion, he bears the impression of the last backside to sit on him. He will lead the nodding dog tendency in Cabinet meetings.
The only tension in the Cabinet with him in it will be whether he or Health Secretary Matt Hancock gets the first Boris Bonio after meetings.
There weren’t only high profile departures, though. Liz Truss remains in place as Secretary of State for International Trade. No. Don’t laugh. Ms Truss’ presence at the Cabinet table is a sign of hope and a beacon to others. Her continued tenure in government is evidence that no matter how dimwitted, mediocre or out-of-their-depth a person is, this is a government of opportunity for all. Her presence shows senior backbenchers with talent, intelligence, and ability that their gifts are no substitute for those qualities’ total absence. To new Conservative MPs with room temperature IQs, her example shows that they, too, can aspire to Cabinet status.
The same might be said for Matt Hancock. The Health Secretary, who’s behaviour in the election campaign marked him out as a man to watch – preferably while he sat in a padded cell rocking to himself and murmuring the words ‘forty new hospitals’ over and over – is the only person in the country to take what the Prime Minister says at face value. The incredibly credulous Hancock has chained himself to the wheel of misfortune and will spin every disaster into a triumph with puppy-like devotion. Like a whipped dog will try to make friends with its tormentor, Matt’s loyalty is endless.
The departure of Andrea Leadsom demonstrates that even Boris Johnson thinks a joke can be taken too far. Floundering in every position she ever occupied, it is difficult to conceive that she could have been the leader of her party, and subsequently PM, barely three years ago, Ms Leadsom’s legendarily argumentative nature ushered her to the Cabinet door.
Her replacement at the Department of Business, Energy, Investment and Skills (BEIS) is Ashok Sharma. Mr Sharma’s appointment is interesting. He might be dangerously half as clever as Boris Johnson thinks he is, which means he could run rings round the PM. His ability was rewarded in a particularly cunning way. Accepting a role turned down by a former PM and a former Foreign Secretary, Mr Sharma will coordinate and chair the government’s preparations for the next round of climate change talks, due to take place in Glasgow later this year.
If the conference achieves anything, highly unlikely as the US, China and India will stall any possible progress, the praise will be the government’s and therefore Boris Johnson’s. Like the Sun King, Boris is not only a state but the state. If it all goes the well-known shape of a pear, Mr Sharma gets to take the fall. Rewarding ability with a poisoned chalice: that’s the way of government these days.
Theresa Villiers’ departure from DEFRA and her replacement with George Eustice received a cautious but warm welcome from farming unions and rural organisations. Ms Villiers’ naked enthusiasm for the benefits of free trade and blindness to the consequences of it for UK agriculture did little to instil farmer with any confidence in her to do what was best for the industry. From a farming background himself, Mr Eustice is far better placed to sell any betrayal to those farmers who, free of the EU as they wished, find their businesses going down the pan if/when imports of lower quality and lower price undercut them after December 31 this year.
The Department of Culture Media and Sport (Don’t Care Much, Seriously) has a new Secretary of State in Oliver Dowden. Mr Dowden replaces Nicky Morgan, a minister you couldn’t possibly describe as two-faced as she wouldn’t wear the one she does if she was.
Mr Dowden’s main ministerial achievement in a brief parliamentary career was his replacement by Jonny (‘Did I mention I was in the Army?’) Mercer as a junior flunky in the Cabinet Office. His task is to put into place the Government’s policy of neutering the BBC and trashing public service broadcasting. A PR man before entering parliament and – as a special advisor to David Cameron – a PR man for a PR man, Mr Dowden will have to sell the Government’s plans to dismember the BBC to the public and MPs.
The appointment that caused most comment and concern was Suella Braverman’s promotion to replace Geoffrey Cox QC as Attorney General. Brexiteers hailed Mr Cox’s independence of mind and judgement when he declined to rubber-stamp Theresa May’s proposals for an Irish Backstop as part of her doomed attempts to force a Withdrawal Agreement through Parliament. He also loudly – he doesn’t do quietly – laid into the High Court’s decision that Mr Johnson’s prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. However, Mr Cox is also a person with a deep and abiding respect for the rule of law and the need for courts to act as a check and balance on poorly-made and ill-considered legislation. The growth of Judicial Reviews of governments’ laws can be partly laid at the door of those who prepare legislative measures in haste and then repent at leisure as the Court’s painstakingly explain why they are unenforceable or unlawful. Whatever his flaws as a Government minister, Geoffrey Cox is a proper lawyer with a keen understanding that bad laws and incompetently-prepared legislation are properly subjected to scrutiny by the Courts.
Suella Braverman has no such scruples. An advocate of increasing political vetting of judicial appointments, she also has no evident skills as either an advocate for sound law and sound law-making.
The role of the Attorney General is to advise the government, as impartially as possible in the circumstances, on a range of legal issues arising from its planned legislative programme. Ms Braverman’s appointment is a sign that what Boris Johnson wants most from his law officers is a nodding-dog approach, a readiness to sign-off on any crackpot plan, and knifing the Courts for doing their job properly in a plural democracy in which an overmighty executive needs curbing.
The most rabid of Brexiteers and an appalling media performer whose backside she often confuses with her humerus, Suella Braveman cannot be relied upon to do what’s right but can be relied upon to do what Boris Johnson tells her is right. Otherwise, her main qualification for her new role seems to be the gift of forgetting that she studied at the Sorbonne under the Erasmus programme and had her post-graduate studies in Paris funded by the French embassy. In other words, precisely the sort of exposure to continental education and cultural enrichment this Government is dedicated to ending.
And finally, we come to the new Chancellor. Rishi Sunak’s rise to power is proof that enormous personal wealth, a background as a merchant banker and having a job working for his indescribably wealthy father-in-law. All that might be unfair to Mr Sunak; however, replacing state-educated Sajid Javid with a privileged alumnus of Winchester could be easily interpreted as an attempt to broaden the government’s appeal to distressed billionaires.
Mr Javid’s loaded remarks around the circumstances of his dismissal, ‘no self-respecting minister would continue to serve’ (if ordered to sack his entire team of ministerial advisors) suggests Mr Sunak’s self-respect is in inverse proportion to his self-regard. It is also a sign that Mr Johnson has restored the long-forgotten tradition of the Exchequer as a money chest at the beck-and-call of a prime-ministerial whim. Mr Sunak’s one advantage is that he can scarcely be sacked after the manner of his predecessor’s leaving. At least for as long as he does what he’s told.
The cringe-worthy sight of Mr Johnson’s new Cabinet at its first meeting playing call and response with the class bully suggests that Boris Johnson now has a team he wants. More-or-less malleable office-holders who will do as they are told. Taking back control, it turns out, means an uncontrollable PM.
News
Welsh politicians call for pension fund divestment over Israel links
Cross-party Senedd members and councillors say Welsh public money must not be invested in firms linked to alleged war crimes and apartheid
POLITICIANS from across Wales have called for local government pension funds to stop investing in companies they say are complicit in Israel’s actions against Palestinians.
In a cross-party letter coordinated by Palestine Solidarity Campaign Cymru, Senedd members and councillors from Plaid Cymru, the Greens, Labour and the Liberal Democrats urged the Wales Pensions Partnership to end investments they describe as supporting “genocide and apartheid”.
The Wales Pensions Partnership manages Welsh local government pension funds worth an estimated £26 billion.
In their letter, the politicians said ensuring public investments “are not contributing to grave violations of international law must be an urgent priority”.
The intervention comes as the Wales Pensions Partnership develops an Exclusion Framework, which campaigners say is intended to prevent investments that conflict with climate, human rights and international law commitments.
However, those behind the letter argue that the framework risks falling short of what they describe as a clear democratic mandate from councils across Wales.
According to PSC Cymru, many councils have already passed motions calling for divestment from companies alleged to be complicit in war crimes, apartheid and other breaches of international law. The group says 11 councils in Wales — half of all councils in the country — have now backed such motions.
Research cited by the campaign claims that Local Government Pension Scheme funds in Wales have more than £1.1 billion invested in companies said to be linked to Israel’s actions against Palestinians.
As one example, the campaign says Rhondda Cynon Taf Pension Fund has invested more than £12 million in BAE Systems, which it describes as an arms manufacturer making parts for fighter jets used by Israel in Gaza.
The letter calls on the Wales Pensions Partnership to ensure its Exclusion Framework explicitly excludes all companies said to be enabling grave violations of international law by Israel, and to produce a clear, time-bound plan for divestment.
Bethan Sayed, co-chair of PSC Cymru, said: “Today’s letter sends an unmistakable message: Welsh politicians from across the political spectrum will not allow public money to fund genocide and apartheid.
“The Wales Pension Partnership manages £26 billion on behalf of Welsh workers and communities — not a single penny of it should be profiting from the massacre of Palestinian men, women and children.
“Six out of seven people in Wales support divestment. Eleven councils have passed motions. The democratic mandate could not be clearer. The WPP must act — and it must act now.”
PSC Cymru said the letter reflected growing pressure across Wales for public bodies to review investments linked to the conflict.
News
Local defence ties strengthened as Shadow Defence Secretary visits Castlemartin
James Cartlidge MP highlights strategic role of training area in national security and local economy
JAMES CARTLIDGE, the UK Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, has visited Castlemartin Training Area on Thursday (Apr 16) to meet personnel and discuss the site’s importance to both UK defence capability and the Pembrokeshire economy.
Castlemartin Training Area has a long-established role in the community, having been established in 1938 for tank training by the Royal Armoured Corps. The range was temporarily abandoned following the Second World War but reopened in 1951. From 1961 to 1996 it was also used by German Bundeswehr armoured units under NATO agreements. Today, it is regarded as one of the UK’s premier live-fire armoured training facilities, regularly used to prepare troops for operational deployment.
During the visit, the Shadow Defence Secretary was joined by Paul Davies and Samuel Kurtz, both former Pembrokeshire MSs and Conservative candidates for the Ceredigion Penfro constituency in the upcoming Senedd election on May 7. They highlighted the training area’s role in sustaining skilled local employment, supporting the wider supply chain, and underpinning the presence of the Armed Forces in West Wales.
Discussions also focused on the importance of maintaining strong defence capability amid global instability, alongside the contribution made by defence infrastructure to local communities and businesses across Pembrokeshire.
James Cartlidge MP, Conservative Shadow Defence Secretary, said: “Our Armed Forces rely on world-class training facilities like Castlemartin to ensure they are prepared for the challenges they face.
“It is clear this site plays a crucial role not only in UK national defence but also in supporting local jobs and the wider economy here in Pembrokeshire.”
Paul Davies said: “Castlemartin is an incredibly important asset for Pembrokeshire and for the UK as a whole.
“It supports skilled jobs locally and brings significant economic benefits to the area, as well as playing a key role in training our Armed Forces. We have a proud military history here, with many veterans living in the community.
“We also made clear during the visit that it was the Welsh Conservatives who fought to secure the extension of the 14th Signal Regiment at Cawdor Barracks, protecting jobs and ensuring a continued military presence in the county.”
Samuel Kurtz added: “We are proud of the role Pembrokeshire plays in supporting our Armed Forces. As a former MS with Castlemartin within my constituency, I have worked to build relationships and champion this important military site.
“Facilities like Castlemartin are vital. It is essential they continue to receive the support and investment needed to remain world-leading, and not be repurposed for any other use.”
The visit also underlined Conservative commitments to defence, including increasing defence spending, strengthening the Armed Forces, and ensuring the UK remains secure in an increasingly uncertain world.
It further provided an opportunity to highlight the importance of the defence industry supply chain and the range of businesses across the region that contribute to the sector.
Business
Narberth Kadinsky gallery to dental surgery refused
PLANS to convert a former art gallery to a dental surgery on the edge of a Pembrokeshire town have been refused.
In an application to Pembrokeshire County Council, Ahmed Abouserwel, through agent A.D Architectural Design Consultants LTD, sought permission for a change of use of the former Kadinsky gallery, Redstone Road, Narberth, to a dental surgery, along with associated works.
A supporting statement said: “The existing open plan gallery space will be transformed into the main dentist area, with a glazed internal lobby, leading directly into the open reception / waiting area. There will be five treatment rooms accessed directly off the reception, with a private archive room behind the reception desk.
“The rear lean-to projection will be extended to the north to accommodate a proposed decontamination room and to re-model the Staff area and W.C provision (number to remain as existing).”
It said the proposal would create 10 full and three part-time jobs.
An officer report recommending refusal said concerns were raised by the county Highways authority, who having assessed the application on safety, capacity and policy considerations, recommended the application be REFUSED on the grounds of insufficient evidence provided.
“The submitted design and access statement and block plan indicate on-site parking provision for 16 vehicles, located to the north and west of the building. The application form states that the site will employ 10 full-time staff and three part-time staff. However, the submission does not differentiate between practitioners and ancillary/support staff.”
It said, on planning guidance, health centres require three spaces per practitioner; and one space per three ancillary staff, adding: “As the applicant has not provided a breakdown of staff roles, the Highway Authority is unable to assess whether the proposed parking provision is adequate.”
It stressed: “Whist there is no in-principle objection to the redevelopment of this established site for a dental surgery, insufficient information has been provided to fully assess the proposal.”
It was refused on the grounds including it would lead “to the unjustified loss of an employment premises in a location which contributes to the local supply of employment land and buildings,” adding: “Insufficient evidence has been submitted to demonstrate that the building is no longer suitable or viable for continued employment use, nor that there is overriding community need to justify its loss.”
It was also refused on the grounds that “Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the development would operate without giving rise to unacceptable highway safety impacts or on street parking pressure”.
-
Business6 days agoA proper Pembroke local: Inside the warm welcome of The Old Cross Saws Inn
-
Business4 days agoMilford Haven dry dock pitched as home for giant £480m superyacht yard
-
Community6 days agoDoorstep warning issued after reports of suspicious callers in Pembrokeshire
-
Crime6 days agoRomino’s licence revoked after illegal workers found and fire risks exposed
-
Politics5 days agoWelsh Lib Dems promise childcare boost, social care reform in manifesto launch
-
News5 days agoHaverfordwest County AFC escapes winding-up order but ordered to pay costs
-
News6 days agoLabour split over Brawdy defence project as Eluned Morgan calls for project halt
-
Crime5 days agoWoman who called for help spared jail over blade offence









