Category Archives: Paul Murphy

Well said, Cheryl

Also at Welsh Questions, Cheryl Gillan paid a very heartfelt tribute to the former Welsh Secretary, the sentiments of which, I am sure, were shared by Members on both sides of the House:

Mrs. Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con): As this could be the last time that I am at the Dispatch Box under your auspices, Mr. Speaker, may I take this opportunity to thank you for your courtesy towards me and my Front-Bench team and for your service to this House, and to wish you well?

In welcoming the return of the new Secretary of State, I also wish to express my admiration for his predecessor. I have enjoyed working with the right hon. Member for Torfaen (Mr. Murphy), a decent and straightforward man. We will miss his common sense and dedication to Wales. I wonder what sort of Prime Minister we have, who can so easily dispense with his services.

Thank you, Paul

I was truly sorry to see Paul Murphy leave the cabinet. 

Paul is a thoroughly decent man who was assiduous in his role as Welsh secretary.  He took a particular interest in the work of the Welsh Grand Committee, which met with increased frequency during his tenure of office.

Given the traumas likely to be experienced by the new cabinet in the immediate future, Paul is well off out of it.

In denial

The Welsh Grand Committee convened today to debate the implications of the Budget for Wales.  

To give credit to Paul Murphy, who has restored the committee to its rightful role of debating Welsh issues in a Westminster context, the debate was timely, coinciding as it did with the second reading of the Finance Bill on the floor of the House. 

Labour Members were in complete denial that the economic crisis is anything whatever to do with the Government’s mismanagement of the nation’s affairs over the last twelve years.  Paul Murphy used the word “global” within thirty seconds of rising to open the debate.  There was repeated reference to the need to “grow the economy out of recession”, as if that can be achieved painlessly, without borrowing to the extent of reducing the country to penury. 

Coincidentally, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research reported today on the options available to the Government to restore the country’s finances to health.  These are: 

  1. requiring everyone, both men and women, to work  to the age of 70; or
  2. raising the basic rate of income tax by 15p in the pound; or
  3. cutting Government spending by a tenth, with an obvious impact upon frontline services and, needless to say, a corresponding Barnettised cut in the budget of the Welsh Assembly Government.

I suppose it might be possible to come up with a combination of the three, but the overall effect would be just as unpalatable.

When I observed, in winding up, that, like every Labour administration before them, this Government had succeeded in destroying the national finances and bringing the country to the brink of bankruptcy, the Members on the opposite benches seemed rather peeved.

 I personally thought it was fair comment.

Too late to moan

The Labour strapline for the budget was “you cannot cut your way out of recession”.  Gordon Brown used the phrase at PMQs and Alistair Darling repeated it in the budget statement, as did a succession of Labour talking heads on TV and radio all afternoon.

Paul Murphy also, perhaps unwisely, decided to  deploy the formula, quoted in today’s  Daily Post:

“It is only right that at this time the Government tightens its belt alongside families and businesses, but we cannot cut our way out of recession, as many of our opponents would propose, particularly on spending on frontline services.”

The Welsh Assembly, however, has received a revenue budget reduction of £216 million, only partially compensated for by a Barnettised increase of £46 million, and a capital budget reduction of £200 million.

 That’s not a cut?

 Plaid Cymru are, peculiarly, bleating badly about this.  But they chose their Assembly coalition partners, so it’s a bit rich to moan now.  When the Labour ship goes down, they must expect to go down with it.

Keeping it in the family

wales-office1

A beautiful spring day, so I decide to take a lunchtime walk along Whitehall, which is presently undergoing major roadworks. 

Passing the Wales Office, I am delighted to see that its occupant is receiving proper recognition from the highway contractor.

Welsh Questions

Welsh Questions today were dominated by the rapidly downturning Welsh economic outlook, which transcends in importance almost every other issue.  Islwyn’s Don Touhig took the opportunity to have a pop at Sir Emyr Jones-Parry’s constitutional convention

Mr. Touhig: When families across Wales are concerned about their future does my right hon. Friend think that anybody gives a fig about the All Wales Convention? It is wasting £1 million of taxpayers’ money, calling shambolic meetings, showing videos that give a distorted picture of Wales and pandering to those who think that the big issue of the day is independence. Would it not be better spending its time talking to the Corus workers?

The Secretary of State, Paul Murphy, appeared to have more than a smidgeon of sympathy with Mr Touhig’s point:

Mr. Murphy: I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his robust comments on the work of the convention. I think that the convention is doing a proper job in trying to find out what the people of Wales would think about extra powers for the Assembly. I agree with him that it is more important to concentrate these days on the effects of the economic downturn on the people of Wales than on constitutional issues, but I do not undervalue the work of the convention. 

Paul Murphy’s forthrightness is one of his many fine qualities, and a reason for the respect he commands from colleagues on both sides of the House.  I asked a question about the actions of certain Labour MEPs, who voted last month to abolish Britain’s opt-out from the Working Time Directive.  Paul’s answer was succinct and unequivocal: 

 Mr. David Jones (Clwyd, West) (Con): Given the increasing numbers of job losses in south Wales, which of course include the 1,000 jobs lost at Corus this week, does the Secretary of State acknowledge the fundamental importance of maintaining flexibility in the labour market? Can he therefore confirm that the Government will continue to fight to maintain the British opt-out from the working time directive, notwithstanding the decision of Labour MEPs to support its abolition last month?

Mr. Murphy: Yes, I think that there should be as much flexibility as possible. That has helped us in the past, and I hope that it will do so in the future as well.

Wales in Westminster

I have enormous respect for Paul Murphy, not least because, since his reappointment as Secretary of State, he has ensured that the Welsh Grand Committee meets on a regular basis to debate national issues from a Welsh perspective.

There are some (such as the BBC’s David Cornock, to whom, in his absence on paternity leave, this blog sends season’s greetings) who query whether, in the wake of the establishment of the Welsh Assembly, there is any need for a Welsh Grand Committee at all. I believe that they are profoundly wrong. Many areas of policy affecting Wales, inevitably, are retained at Westminster and it is very important that they should be examined from a Welsh perspective.

One such area is macroeconomic policy. Yesterday’s session of the Grand Committee was convened to debate the Pre Budget Report in a Welsh context. There will be another session in January, when the Queen’s Speech will be debated. Given the rapidly worsening economic climate, it is likely that that will be more work, not less, for the Grand Committee in the months ahead.

The tone of yesterday’s debate was, as might be expected, sober, with little festive gaiety creeping in. The dreadful unemployment figures, published yesterday morning, had underlined the extent of the damage that the downturn is inflicting on the Welsh economy.

At one point, however, the proceedings were interrupted by a strange cackling from Vale of Clwyd’s Chris Ruane (of whom I have blogged previously) who was gazing intently at his mobile phone, convulsed in merriment. When he looked up to find several Members staring at him, Ruane announced that someone had just sent him a funny text message.

Last Questions

Harriet Harman deputised for Gordon Brown at PMQs today, in the absence of the Prime Minister in Iraq.

The last Questions of the year were a relatively muted affair, with the dark cloud of the economy weighing heavily over the House. Even William Hague, who stood in for David Cameron, seemed quieter than usual, but that may possibly have been because the Labour deputy leader was at rather less than top form, fluffing her answers and sometimes seeming to search for her words.

The one seasonal note of the session was struck by William, in a question about Government spending announcements:

Mr. Hague: Will the right hon. and learned Lady confirm that, of the £158 million announced today to help unemployed people, £58 million has been taken from another programme that is already supposed to help train people? The other £100 million is exactly what she announced two months ago, the last time that she and I did Prime Minister’s questions. That money has been announced before, which means that this is a reannouncement of a reannouncement—at Christmas time we are not meant to get only repeats, but that is all that we are getting from the Government today.

A small joke, but enough to cause David Miliband to crease his vaguely simian features into a grin and jovially dig his front bench neighbour, Paul Murphy, in the ribs.

Darling’s icy conversation

Today’s Mail on Sunday carries a transcript of a telephone conversation between Alistair Darling and Iceland’s finance minister, Arni Mathiesen, on 7 October, the day it became clear that the Icelandic bank, Landsbanki, was about to fail, potentially taking with it some £4.5 billion deposited by British customers in its UK offshoot, Icesave.

The transcript’s publication will come as a huge embarrassment to the Government, since it reveals that Darling had spoken personally to the Icelandic trade minister, some months or weeks previously, about “the London banking position” of Landsbanki and had been told that “there was nothing to worry about”.

However, a concerned Darling is recorded telling Mathiesen:

“I know you were not at the meeting and weren’t part of it. We doubted what we were being told then and I am afraid we were right.”

On 8 October, Darling appeared on the Today programme and announced that the Government would guarantee the funds of all UK depositors in Icesave. Much to the indignation of the Icelandic government, anti-terrorism legislation was used to freeze the bank’s UK assets.

It quickly became apparent, however, that only retail depositors were to be protected by the Government guarantee. Local authorities, universities and other public institutions with funds in Icesave remained at risk.

On the afternoon of 8 October, Darling made an emergency statement to the House of Commons, during the course of which he was quizzed by MPs about the position of local authorities. His reply was not encouraging:

“The hon. Gentleman (Vincent Cable) asked about the Icelandic banks, and the hon. Member for Tatton (Mr. Osborne), who speaks for the Conservatives, also raised the question of councils. What we can do is make sure that we look after the retail depositors—the ordinary men and women who put in their money, and might not have fully appreciated that Icesave is a branch of a foreign bank and not incorporated in the UK. I understand the position of local authorities, but they are in a slightly different situation, in that they are a more informed investor.”

The “informed investor” tag stung local authorities, suggesting, as it did, that they had been reckless with council taxpayers’ money.

The importance of the Mail’s transcript of Darling’s conversation with Mathiesen is that it makes it clear that the Treasury had doubts about the assurances given by the Icelandic government several weeks before Landsbanki failed. Notwithstanding, it appears to have taken no action to secure the position of British depositors until after Landsbanki had failed.

A Treasury source quoted by the Mail seeks to justify Darling’s apparent inaction:

“It was not necessarily the case that the Icelandic banks were going to go under at that stage but if Alistair had gone public on this earlier, it would have led to a collapse of the banks.”

That may be the case, but the fact is that local authorities were still investing taxpayers’ money in Icelandic banks long after Darling’s doubts arose.

Plaid Cymru-controlled Caerphilly deposited £15 million with two Icelandic institutions, Heritable and Landsbanki, between 11 July and 15 September. The council’s leader, Lindsay Whittle, was heavily criticised by a Labour councillor, Ray Davies, for making the investments when other councils had been withdrawing deposits from Icelandic banks.

In response, Mr Whittle protested, rather lamely:

“People have been in touch suggesting it is my fault that the council’s money is at risk. I think that is totally unfair. The first I knew that we had money invested in Icelandic banks was on Wednesday morning when the chief executive came into my office to tell me.”

Local Labour politicians, however, seized upon Mr Whittle’s apparent ineptitude with glee. As recently as last Wednesday, in Welsh Questions, the Islwyn MP, Don Touhig, raised the issue with Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy:

Mr. Don Touhig (Islwyn) (Lab/Co-op): Iceland is the 10th most prosperous economy in the world and Wales should follow its example—that was the advice given by nationalist Assembly Member Helen Mary Jones earlier this year. Unfortunately, the nationalists who run my council listened to her and put £15 million into Icelandic banks. Now unsure whether they are going to get the money back, they have to raid balances for £11 million to deliver Labour’s promise on equal pay. What advice has my right hon. Friend got for my constituents in those circumstances?

Mr. Murphy: My advice is that they should vote Labour.

All good Commons knockabout and all good, clean fun. However, the Darling telephone transcript casts Caerphilly’s investment decisions, and those of other public authorities, in a wholly different light.

Vince Cable has called for a Commons statement tomorrow. It will be interesting to see if Darling will, indeed, come to the dispatch box and, if so, to hear what he has to say – particularly on the question of just how “informed” local authorities were.

Bit tricky

Welsh Secretary, Paul Murphy – a man for whom I have considerable respect – has made an uncharacteristically leftie speech to the Labour party conference, in which he bangs on about “socialism” and “socialist values”.

Paul concedes that Labour has had its “difficulties and challenges” in Wales, but says that the “partnership” between Labour in Cardiff and Westminster means that “we achieve far more by working together than by pulling apart – as some of our opponents in Wales would want to do”.

Actually, Paul, the “partnership” is between Labour in Cardiff and those very “opponents”.

And that is the real “difficulty and challenge”, isn’t it?

Jones Pencerrig

Attended the Wales Office’s summer reception in Gwydyr House yesterday, my first since Paul Murphy’s resumption of the office of Secretary of State.

The wall above the fireplace looks rather bare, now that Peter Hain’s famous poster of Nelson Mandela has been taken down. Paul has replaced it with a Victorian view of Cardiff Bay which is, frankly, much too small to fill the available space.

Given that he has access to the Government collection, I’m a bit surprised that Paul hasn’t gone for something more interesting, particularly since he has found a very fine Augustus John painting of a cellist to hang a few feet away.

I suggest that he might try to find a work by Thomas Jones, Pencerrig, the 18th century Welsh artist, who produced some superb landscapes of Italy.

Gwydyr House is, after all, Wales’s shop window in London; it’s only right that it should display the very best of Welsh art.

Gentleman Paul

A courteous, gentlemanly performance from Paul Murphy in his first outing at Welsh Questions.

He is a man who listens carefully to the question and then gives a measured and remarkably frank response. After the partisan abrasiveness of Peter Hain, this is a welcome change.

Digital Inclusion

Paul Murphy is going to be a busy chap, if the following Commons answer by the Prime Minister yesterday is anything to go by:

The new Secretary of State for Wales has responsibilities in addition to his responsibilities for Wales. He is overseeing the British-Irish Council, he is responsible for the joint ministerial committees on devolution, he is the minister responsible for digital inclusion, and he is responsible for data security and information assurance. Those responsibilities are in addition to his responsibilities as Secretary of State for Wales .

Can’t help wondering which minister is responsible for digital extraction, which is what is desperately needed from this government.

Blank Canvas

The Wales Office clearly hasn’t got to grips with the change at the top.

Visiting its website today, I noticed that Paul Murphy’s picture still hasn’t been put up.

Poor Huw Irranca-Davies looks rather lonely.

Devo-realism

Speaking of Paul Murphy, he set out his position on devolution fairly clearly in the Welsh Grand Committee debate just over a month ago:

“I have been trying to work out whether or not I am a devo-sceptic and I have come to the conclusion that I am not. In 1978, I was a devo-opponent, and in 1997 I voted for devolution. My constituents agreed with me in 1978, but they did not agree with me in 1997, because they voted against a Welsh Assembly on both occasions. However, I would rather describe myself as a devo-realist, in the sense that what is here is here. I am not all that keen on a coalition in Cardiff, but we are where we are, and we have to work in the current political climate for the benefit of the people whom we represent, whether we are Members of Parliament, Assembly Members or members of local authorities.

“When I was Secretary of State for Wales, it was my job to ensure a smooth transition from the constitutional arrangements that we had before devolution to where we are today. However, devolution is not about divorce. It is about partnership between our Government in Parliament, the Assembly in government in Cardiff and our local authority colleagues in their respective council chambers. Above all else, devolution must be about improving the lives of the people whom we jointly represent, whether it involves the health service, schools or something else.”

It will be extremely interesting to see how Mr Murphy puts that “devo-realism” into practice during his second tenure as Secretary of State.