Cardiff council election: a preview

As voters go to the polls this week, Cardiff is likely to be a bellwether council in terms both of the Liberal Democrat collapse and the Labour resurgence.

In power for the last eight years – albeit initially in a minority administration before an electoral pact with Plaid Cymru four years ago – Wales’s biggest council has given the Lib Dems a platform to prove their local government credentials.

The party currently has 35 councillors out of a total of 75, and an electoral pact with Plaid’s six members saw Glaswegian Rodney Berman return as council leader for a second four-year term after the 2008 vote.

But there is a very real prospect the party’s representation will be cut dramatically after the votes have been counted, and the intrigue is likely to be whether or not Labour can gain overall control of the council rather than whether they will be the largest party.

The problem for the Lib Dems is perhaps their surprising success in the last two council elections in Cardiff. They hold a swathe of seats which would appear to be typically Labour, including Butetown (the Labour defeat in 2008 was described by Cardiff South and Penarth MP Alun Michael as “an aberration”), Grangetown, Caerau, Adamsdown and Llandaff North. Labour dominance in Splott was also challenged by the election of a Lib Dem to one of its three seats in 2008.

Those wards alone comprise seven Lib Dem defences, and it would not be a surprise to see Labour gain all of them. Elsewhere, the four Lib Dems in the Plasnewydd ward – including Berman – face an anxious bid for re-election.

It is not only Labour which looks set to profit from a decline in Lib Dem support. Despite recent problems for their London coalition partners, and depending on how the Lib Dem vote holds up, the Conservatives could also cash in on such a collapse.

Seats in the leafy northern suburbs are far more Conservative-inclined than anywhere else in the city – Cardiff North is the only one of the city’s four constituencies to have a Tory MP – and the party will be targeting Lib Dem seats in wards like Heath and Cyncoed. In Heath, Lib Dem Fenella Bowden was elected alongside two Tories in 2008, beating out the third Conservative by just 58 votes.

Bowden is standing again, but as one of three Heath and Birchgrove Independents; that move is likely to fatally damage Lib Dem hopes of holding the seat, although whether Bowden is returned or the seat moves into the Tory column is too close to call.

But those Conservative gains will probably not be enough to offset the damage Labour look set to inflict. The Tories are the official opposition in Cardiff City Hall, holding one more seat than Labour. But the party of First Minister Carwyn Jones has a far broader appeal across the city and will be able to make far deeper inroads next month than the Tories managed in 2008.

Labour would be disappointed not to take the Conservative seats of Rumney and Pentyrch – which the Conservatives held in an August 2008 by-election by just 12 votes. The Tories will be pessimistic about Rumney, where one of the two Tory incumbents, Duncan MacDonald, resigned the party whip in March and is now standing as an independent. In Pentyrch, Conservative Craig Williams is a popular councillor but faces a near-impossible against the likely tide of Labour gains.

The Conservatives would be disappointed to lose any of the six combined seats in the wards of Pontprennau & Old St Mellons and Llanishen, although offensive material posted online by a Labour candidate in Llanishen caused him to be suspended from the party and handed the four Tory incumbents a boost.

Most wards of Cardiff North should remain solidly Conservative. But one of the largest, Rhiwbina, is certain to re-elect popular independents and Tory defectees Adrian Robson and Deputy Lord Mayor Jayne Cowan. Fellow independent Eleanor Sanders, replacing incumbent Brian Jones, should also be elected.

Plaid, meanwhile, have never managed to gain much of a foothold in the city and their six members – seven were elected in 2008, but a by-election in the Riverside ward was lost to Labour last year – come from just three wards.

They will almost certainly hold the Creigiau and St Fagan’s seat of Lord Mayor Delme Bowen and should be safe in Fairwater, where leader Neil McEvoy holds one of the three seats.

There has been almost a complete absence of Welsh polling since Leanne Wood took over as Plaid leader, so the electoral consequences of her victory have yet to be tested. But while Plaid are likely to struggle to hold on to their remaining two councillors in Riverside, they are working hard to pick up seats elsewhere.

In Butetown, where Labour are considered the nominal favourites, Plaid’s Liz Musa has fought a strong campaign and, after receiving the endorsement of a former Labour councillor and community stalwart, could take the seat in what is expected to be a close three-way battle.

McEvoy has also targeted Ely, Grangetown, Llanrumney and Canton, but if Plaid beat Labour in any of those wards it would be a grim night for the reds.

The minor parties are not likely to see any success, and UKIP will be unable to capitalise on recent poll boosts as they are only fielding two candidates across the city.

Wards to watch:

Butetown (1 member): Lib Dem incumbent. This diversified ward is traditionally a Labour seat but a strong Plaid campaign could swing it for the nationalists.

Grangetown (3): Three Lib Dem incumbents. Labour will be hopeful of retaking this ward, but there is likely to be a strong Plaid showing here. A party split would not be a surprise.

Heath (3): Two Tory, one Lib Dem (now independent) incumbent. Whether the vote for Councillor Fenella Bowden was for the party or personal will decide whether the Tories can hold their seats, gain Bowden’s or perhaps even lose their two incumbents.

Llandaff (2): Two Lib Dem incumbents. The “city within a city” is a tight three-way between the major UK parties. Labour could come from third, or a split left vote could allow the Tories through if their vote holds up.

Pontprennau & Old St. Mellons (2): Two Tory incumbents. Labour are breathing down the Conservatives’ necks. Dianne Rees should be safe; the second Tory seat is very much up for grabs.

Riverside (3): Two Plaid, one Labour incumbent. Labour’s 2011 by-election gain here might indicate this should be two more Labour gains, but new Plaid leader Leanne Wood will be hopeful of boosting her party’s appeal.

The final five minutes of Wales’s third Six Nations Grand Slam in just eight seasons were marked by as fervent a sporting atmosphere as you will witness.

Wales played out the last few moments of the game competently and patiently, making sure possession was secured without attempting to embark on anything spectacular as Hymns and Arias reverberated around the Millennium Stadium.

Cardiff's Millennium Stadium in party mood as Wales celebrate winning the 2012 Six Nations Grand Slam

Trailing by seven points, France could have denied their hosts the Slam – although not their 25th championship – with a converted try, but Wales dug deep to frustrate a French side which had been largely rudderless from the opening kickoff.

Wales hardly offered much in attack, but barely had to, just about weathering any occasional outbreaks of French fight (helped by a bizarre decision late on by the usually imperious Imanol Harinordoquy not to pass out wide when a try was surely on.

But as throughout this Six Nations, Wales’s defence carried them to victory. The back row of Toby Faletau captain Sam Warburton – who again left the field at the interval, this time with a shoulder problem – and particularly man of the match (and possibly the tournament) Dan Lydiate were again immense.

Lydiate’s tackle on Wesley Fofana, when the Welshman, in his preferred style, went super-low in order to prevent the attacker gaining any momentum, led to Leigh Halfpenny’s 52-metre penalty.

The flanker was slow to get up, exhausted after another huge effort. That he was given the match accolade was no surprise, his workrate summing up the commitment made by the whole squad.

Under Shaun Edwards’s expert tutelage, Wales conceded just three tries and 58 points all tournament, the lowest points total against in the Six Nations since England in 2003.

And while the back row was tackling everything which moved, the scrums were steady and Wales’s lineout was not quite as bad as it has recently been.

The Welsh side emerges on to the Millennium Stadium pitch before their 16-9 win over France. Photo: Flickr, sum of marc

Meanwhile, the Welsh backline was exciting, physical and clinical. The side scored 10 tries in their five matches, but all 10 came from backs (three for Alex Cuthbert, two each for Jonathan Davies and Leigh Halfpenny, and one for George North, Jamie Roberts and Scott Williams).

It was the first time since England’s Five Nations success in 1996 – albeit when they only scored three tries in their four games – when a team has won the championship without a forward scoring a single point.

Not that the forwards weren’t an integral part of a victorious Welsh side this time around – indeed, every member of the squad played a vital role in Warren Gatland’s second Slam as Wales coach.
And with the youth throughout the side – particularly among the backs – all the signs are positive for the Principality.

Wales hoping for controversy-free win

The last time Wales met France, a red card for Wales’s inspirational captain Sam Warburton defined the team’s brave but ultimately unfruitful World Cup run.

Tomorrow’s referee, Craig Joubert, also courted controversy when his officiating of the final attracted criticism from the defeated French side as well as many neutrals.

And there will be a degree of apprehension before tomorrow’s game because of the significant role played by the officials so far in this year’s event.

Wales’s opening weekend win in Dublin – pipping the Irish 23-21 thanks to a last-gasp Leigh Halfpenny penalty – was overshadowed by two so-called “tip-tackling” incidents.

Halfpenny’s winning kick came after referee Wayne Barnes judged, perhaps harshly, Ireland’s Stephen Ferris to have lifted Ian Evans dangerously.

But Ferris’s sin-binning meant he received the exact same punishment as Welshman Bradley Davies, who committed a far more dangerous offence earlier in the half.

Davies was spared a red card – though not the wrath of the subsequent citing committee – on the wrongful advice of Barnes’s touch judge and fellow Englishman Dave Pearson.

Compatriot and former World Cup whistleman Fred Howard told The Cardiffian after the match he thought Davies deserved red: “Pearson was very wrong in recommending a yellow card for the first [Davies’s] offence,” he said.

Wales’s home win over Scotland was less shrouded in controversy, although Frenchman Romain Poite looked to have made an error in disallowing a Scottish score for an apparent knock-on.

But when Wales secured the Triple Crown thanks to a 19-12 triumph over England at Twickenham, it sparked a huge debate over whether David Strettle had touched down for what could have been an equalising try with the last play of the game.

Strettle later insisted he had grounded the ball despite the attentions of Wales’s George North, Jonathan Davies and Halfpenny. But television match official Iain Ramage decided the play was inconclusive, allowing Wales escaped with the win – and the Triple Crown trophy.

Wales will point to Alain Rolland’s dismissal of Warburton as proof Wales have not always benefited from controversial decisions.

But both sides will be hoping Mr Joubert plays a low-key role in the sides’ Six Nations finale and the game is not won or lost thanks to the interpretation of the man in the middle.

Panorama is king of the documentary

Dispatches: Olympic Tickets For Sale, Channel 4, February 13, 8pm-9pm

There cannot be many who feel the London Olympic ticketing plans have been a smooth ride.

Website crashes, controversy over the ballot system, dubious payment requirements – all contributed to an ongoing public relations nightmare for the London Organising Committee (LOCOG).

But the attempt by Dispatches to cash in on the problems by rehashing many arguments already in the public domain was underwhelming, illogical and often contradictory.

The crux of the programme was focused on hidden camera interviews with two jovial figures. These villains of the piece represented companies – namely Thomas Cook and Jet Set Sports – which offer Olympic ticket and accommodation packages at extortionate prices.

It is predators like them, the show’s presenter Antony Barnett insisted, who are responsible for the plight of British sports fans who have missed out on tickets – people like Denis, an elderly caravan-dweller who has attended every Games since 1960.

Barnett may have had a point; the transparency (or lack of) in Olympic ticketing is undeniably an issue.

But the way he presented his argument was flawed. He made a big issue of the shocking fact only 36 per cent of seats at the men’s 100m final are available to the public despite LOCOG revealing this before tickets first went on sale.

The programme suffered from the lack of a LOCOG voice being heard; the entire debate on access to London’s Olympic traffic lanes appeared to be boiled down to airing the grievances of a disgruntled cabbie.

Most bizarrely, Barnett visited a town in New Jersey to find the headquarters of Jet Set – to stumble upon a PO Box address.

If his intention was to highlight the murkiness of the Games’ ticketing policy, Barnett instead managed simply to leave viewers pondering what exactly he had discovered.

The next edition of Dispatches could do worse than investigate the many flaws of this hour of investigative journalism.


Panorama: Poor America, BBC One, February 13, 8.30pm-9pm

By contrast, Panorama highlights why it is the leading investigative programme in Britain.

Highlighting an issue so many people on both sides of the Atlantic are aware of, presenter Hilary Andersson revealed some shocking stories of the poverty of much of hidden, tent-city America.

According to US Census Bureau statistics, 1.5 million US children are homeless. Twenty million people – nearly seven per cent of the population – earn less than £7,000 a year, or £135 a week.

Such numbers might not mean much, but this is where Andersson’s brilliant if typically poignant investigation brings the statistics to life.

Andersson speaks to Steven, an eloquent eight-year-old from Nevada, just about manages to keep his composure as he describes how his mother will have to give his sibling up for adoption when he or she is born as his family cannot afford to feed another mouth. Meanwhile, classmate Leslie whispers how her family has had to eat rats.

The depression of the 1920s and 1930s was eased by the radical social policies of President Roosevelt. The current resident of the White House is, admittedly, hamstrung by stubborn and usually Republican state administrations, but cannot ignore the fact such deprivation has increased under his presidency.

Now, however much they might want to pretend nobody in the privileged, civilised western world lives like this, viewers are also unable to ignore the huge, embarrassing gulf between the American rich and poor.
In helping expose these problems, this BBC tour de force exemplifies the heart-rending best pinnacle of the investigative documentary.

Ex-official: Former referee: Davies and Ferris both deserved red

This is an article I wrote for The Cardiffian and my other blog, An Early Bath.

Former international referee Fred Howard has joined those who argue Wales’s Bradley Davies should have been sent off for dangerous play against Ireland on Sunday.

Second row Davies was yellow-carded late on by referee Wayne Barnes after a tip-tackle on opposite number Donnacha Ryan.

He will find out tomorrow how long a suspension he will receive for the dangerous tackle during the 23-21 victory when he attends a disciplinary hearing in London.

Also in attendance will be Ireland’s Stephen Ferris, who was sin-binned late on for a lifting tackle on Ian Evans. The subsequent penalty, which was converted by Leigh Halfpenny, was enough to secure the win for Wales.

Howard, who earned the nickname “Fearless Fred” for the frequency with which he was willing to discipline players on the field, said both Davies and Ferris deserved red in the eyes of the law.

Coach Warren Gatland admitted after the game Davies was fortunate not to have seen red.

But Howard said Ferris deserved a similar punishment. “Because of the directives referees are under both technically should have been red cards,” said the man who took charge of eight Wales games in his international career, which spanned eight years between 1984 and 1992.

Among those encounters was Wales’s 1987 World Cup third-place play-off victory over Australia.

Howard believes fellow Englishman Dave Pearson, who told referee Wayne Barnes to send Davies to the sin bin, was at fault. “I think Dave Pearson was very wrong in recommending a yellow card for the first [Davies’s] offence,” he said.

Howard, who officiated a total of 20 test matches, believes referees need to be given more leeway when making decisions surrounding tip tackles and lifting an opponent off his feet.

“The second one [Ferris’s] would have been a very harsh red card,” he said.

Welsh captain Sam Warburton was sent off during last year’s World Cup for a similar tackle on France’s Vincent Clerc and was handed a three-week suspension as a result.

The debate which greeted Warburton’s dismissal has been reignited by the Dublin encounter, and Howard says a referee must be able to judge each individual circumstance on its merits.

“The referee has got to be given some discretion, as they have with punches,” he said.

“I think if referees have reached that level they should be competent in differentiating between serious foul play and the second one [Ferris’s tackle] which was more of an afterthought.”

He added: “I think most referees would want to be given that discretion. I never liked being backed into a corner.”

Republicans have to - but won't - nominate Governor Jon Huntsman

As Governor of the state of Utah, he received Soviet-like levels of support. He has served his country in diplomatic posts under four presidents. He has an economic plan endorsed by the Wall Street Journal.

His personal life appeals directly to the hearts of Middle America. He has seven children, of whom two are adopted and another two are in the US Naval Academy.

He is a fan of alternative rock, and played an impromptu version of Johnny B. Goode while appearing on the Late Show with David Letterman.

His style of choice is cowboy boots, denim jeans and a flak jacket embroidered with the Star Spangled Banner.

And yet Jon Huntsman struggles along towards the bottom of the race to be the Republican presidential nominee, with even the best national polls putting him at just four per cent.

For observers outside of the Republican Party, this comes across as something of a mystery, especially when considering the merits – or otherwise – of his opponents. Huntsman would appear to be vastly more presidential than Newt Gingrich, the philandering former Speaker of the House of Representatives.

He surely overshadows Ron Paul, the libertarian who has huge support from the online generation but who has failed to explain how racist and homophobic newsletters came to be printed in his name.

And that is before we even consider the remainder of the field: religious hardliner Rick Santorum, who is now polling second nationally; Rick Perry, who failed to remember during a televised debate which government departments he had vowed to cut (the Department of Energy, Rick. Come on, there were only three!); and Michele Bachmann, who told supporters God was going to bring her victory in Iowa – and who, after finishing sixth, has now pulled out of the race.

Alongside Huntsman, only Mitt Romney, the clear frontrunner in the Republican race but also, arguably, the least inspiring of all candidates, looks even vaguely statesmanlike. So why has Huntsman been unable to exploit a shambolic GOP field to take the fight to an embattled President Obama?

Perhaps an unfortunate paradox of the 11 month-long candidate selection process is the more level-headed candidates gain less attention. The media would much rather follow a sharp-tongued Gingrich, a gaffe-prone Perry or an ultraconservative Santorum than a sensible bloke.

So Huntsman has been ignored by the nation’s media. This denial of the oxygen of publicity and what would be the resulting name recognition has in turn given the media an excuse not to focus on the rank outsider.

Huntsman did not even campaign in Iowa, which held its non-binding caucus last Tuesday, focusing instead almost exclusively on the small New England state of New Hampshire, which traditionally holds the ‘first in the nation’ primary vote.

New England is not fertile Republican territory. On just one occasion since 1988 has one of its six states voted for a GOP candidate for president, when New Hampshire chose George W. Bush in 2000.

Registered independent voters are permitted to vote in the Republican Party’s New Hampshire primary, meaning the winner of the contest tends to represent the moderate wing of the party. John McCain, whose politics are hardly revered on the right wing of the GOP, secured a win in the last two New Hampshire primaries.

This time, the Granite State looks almost certain to opt for Mitt Romney. The frontrunner has a number of advantages. He was formerly Governor of neighbouring Massachusetts, which he governed relatively liberally. He has also secured the endorsement of McCain.

Crucially, Romney also has momentum after winning on unnatural territory (like Huntsman, Romney is a Mormon) in the evangelical heartland of Iowa last week, albeit by the slimmest of margins.

Huntsman must hope for a strong second-place finish in New Hampshire if his grassroots campaign is not to be trampled by the establishment power and Wall Street backing Romney boasts. Huntsman has made over 150 public appearances in New Hampshire, but with the exception of former Pennsylvania Governor and Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, he has not received any high-profile endorsements from another political figure.

Huntsman did receive a boost last night (Thursday) when he received the backing of New England’s biggest newspaper, the Boston Globe, ahead of local boy Romney. That endorsement, as well as a pair of televised debates this weekend, and a media now focused on New Hampshire rather than Iowa, should help to nudge his numbers upwards.

The problem for the Utahan is he needs more than just a nudge. The Real Clear Politics poll average sees him sitting in fourth position in New Hampshire, albeit within the margin of error of both Newt Gingrich below him, and Rick Santorum, who has surged since his Iowa near-win, in third. Ron Paul is polling around one vote in five, with Romney well clear on 40 per cent.

Those numbers must be disheartening for Huntsman as he continues with his ‘handshake-by-handshake’ quest for attention. Before the campaign he would hardly have been familiar with such numbers. He was first elected Governor of Utah in 2004, and proved so popular that, four years later, when Republicans candidates struggled nationwide at the end of the Bush presidency, Huntsman romped to re-election by securing 78 per cent of the votes.

His record in Utah’s Governor’s Mansion is highly regarded, and he continues to boast his state headed the nation in job creation during his tenure while emphasising the marked contrast with Romney, whose Massachusetts ranked 47th. In the words of the Boston Globe:

With a strong record as governor of Utah and US ambassador to China, arguably the most important overseas diplomatic post, Huntsman’s credentials match those of anyone in the field. He would be the best candidate to seize this moment in GOP history, and the best-prepared to be president.

But Huntsman’s appeal to Democrats and independents is also what many in the Grand Old Party might take issue with. He accepts the concept of global warming, favours civil unions (though not same-sex marriage) and rejects creationism.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, he has downplayed that during recent weeks as he seeks to appeal to the conservative base. In the current economic climate, his proven record of fiscal conservatism, however, should be enough to appease the more pragmatic members of the right wing.

He has felt the need to take to promoting himself as the “consistent conservative” of the race, pointing to his tax-cutting, job-creating, growth-promoting record in Utah. With Romney and Paul battling out for much of the independent voting bloc, Huntsman has attempted to change tack – understandable, but surely too little, too late.

In a general election, it is not difficult to envisage him winning Rockefeller-esque support, as he did in Utah, from those who might be dubbed “Huntsman Democrats” by political scientists – but without GOP support, he will never be in a position to achieve that on a national level.

He has shown he is willing to be bipartisan, by accepting President Obama’s offer of the post of ambassador to China (Huntsman speaks fluent Mandarin). That appointment also clearly indicates the President respects his potential rival’s abilities as a diplomat. Meanwhile, Huntsman’s record at the helm in Utah has demonstrated he isn’t bad at the politics lark, either.

It is madness the most electable of all Republicans has been, by and large, ignored by the media, the public and his own party.

But if he falls short in New Hampshire and pulls out of the contest, America would be wise to start preparing for Huntsman 2016.