Advertisement
BBC BLOGS - Betsan's Blog
« Previous | Main | Next »

IWJ on IBW

Betsan Powys | 17:50 UK time, Tuesday, 13 October 2009

Watch this space? The full story is now here.

Briefing highlights.

The Permanent Secretary Gillian Morgan describing the current crop of policies governing International Business Wales expense claims as "this mish-mash of policies," "cobbled together" and "not fit for purpose". That's pretty clear then, as was the pledge that they're about to be reworked, the first of many "re" words used this morning.

Of the 11% of claims where the policies governing them are perfectly clear - but the reasons for claiming are not e.g. football kits, school text books, substantial bar and bar hire bills, she was "cautiously optimistic" that this part of the system - in other words probably one of the most risky parts of the system - showed no sign of systematic abuse.

It's also worth noting that, given this started with claims about "first class life styles" and IBW officials turning left on planes when the rules said they ought to have turned right, some of the first class tickets claimed and made public a few months ago turned out to be perfectly legitimate. Names were named back then. We can't name the names now exonerated because we don't know who they are. When all becomes clear, we should.

"This is not a sick part of the system" said the Permanent Secretary. Yes, there are questions to be answered but she "has seen worse reports in other organisations". She had, incidentally, been through the evidence at first hand: "I was a very bored bunny for two days".

Would this have been picked up if it hadn't been for the Lib Dems and "that apology" the First Minister was forced to make? Yes, it would she insisted. Work had been underway since earlier in the year to sort out the system and these problems would have been picked up.

What would not have happened, you might be tempted to suggest, is that the detailed evidence would have been made public, put before journalists and put before you in the way that it has been today.

The Economic Development Minister and Deputy First Minister didn't look like a bored bunny. Ieuan Wyn Jones didn't look like a particularly happy bunny either when the figures in the tables handed out turned out to be wrong. They were wrong at the second attempt too. A problem with printers he could have done without on a day the accuracy and record keeping of others was under attack.

On the implications of the benchmarking report questioning IBW's performance? I noted four "re-" words: he talked of the need to "refocus", "reshape", "realign" and totally "rethink" the future of economic policy in Wales.

Had it taken him two years in the job and a growing amount of criticism of his department to come to that conclusion? Granted he's had other things to deal with recently - like steering Wales through the recession for a start - but this report is pretty damning and it's come out on his watch.

He took the rap - but only kind of. "Look, I could have accepted the report and said, there we are. I haven't. It crystallized a great deal that I'd felt already ... I'm accepting that things in the past need to change. That's a strength".

He was sitting next to a woman whose I.D lanyard had the words "Safe and Sound" printed on it. I'm not sure all of those offiicials crammed into Mr Jones' office felt that way by the end of the briefing.

Comments

or register to comment.

  • 1. At 7:30pm on 13 Oct 2009, Noah_sembly wrote:

    In his time as "Economic Developement Minister" "Deputy First Minister", and "Mumbles Whelk stall-holder", Ieuan Wyn-Jones has done absolutely nothing for Wales that couldn't have been done by the meerkat on the front of this week's Radio Times..

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 7:53pm on 13 Oct 2009, Stonemason wrote:


    If the International Business Wales is "not fit for purpose" can it be "re"dacted entirely, is I.W.J. ready for "re"placement, are the Assembly Members suitable for "re"election or are they ready for "re"jection.

    Just my "re"flections on today's post by Betsan.




    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 8:18pm on 13 Oct 2009, Jack_Wilkinson wrote:

    In fairness the empire builders have cut back somewhat, in 2008 they shut down offices in Toronto, Huston, Chicago, San Francisco, Taiwan and Singapore. The New York IBW office in the prestigious Chrysler building, has a small staff of 11 to handle North America. It's sad really, a lot of fine careers down the pan, and a blow to national pride, we can no longer claim that the Sun never sets on Welsh territory.

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 8:38pm on 13 Oct 2009, West-Wales wrote:

    Be interesting to compare the pre Devolution WDA costs and delivery, to the post devolution WDA & the successor the IWB.

    Since 1997 Welsh industry and private sector jobs have been in decline.

    Abroad, International businesses who had held the Welsh Workforce and opportunities in Wales in high regard, now seem hardly aware of our presence.

    There seems to be a lack of joined up thinking here - OK the investment in the IWB is not delivering the goods, Wales is slipping badly and the new global financial position means WAG will be unable to hide loss of private sector employment by increasing the public sector.

    IWJ is hoping to encourage intellectual and research partnerships between our Universities and international business - good idea - except our Universities have been underfunded for 10 years. They are now not high on the World scale of excellence.

    Business with money to invest in this sort of venture, have far better intellectual greenhouses, with a higher probability useful results, than those wilting in post devolution Wales.




    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 9:19pm on 13 Oct 2009, Stonemason wrote:


    Ieuan Wyn Jones, a safe pair of hands say some, a reliable good listener I hear, a pragmatist some have observed ......

    ..... though, not a businessman we understand, not equipped for risk, not the entrepreneur .....

    ..... why then his appointment as "Economic Development Minister", it must be politics where it doesn't have to make sense....

    ..... except as part of a coalition, political mush.

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 9:56pm on 13 Oct 2009, FiDafydd wrote:

    Re 5

    Come on Stonemason, you're talking nonsense - Tory nonsense - and you know it. So, tell me, how many toff Tory doctors have your lot made Secretaries os State for Health? It must be a case of...British political mush then.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 9:58pm on 13 Oct 2009, lordBeddGelert wrote:

    Welcome to reality..

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 10:13pm on 13 Oct 2009, TomosJohn wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 9. At 07:04am on 14 Oct 2009, Stonemason wrote:


    #6

    I am sorry FiDafydd, but you should keep to the point, and shifting the emphasis away from the WAG is nothing more than diversionary tactics.

    "A Change of Personnel", blog, has put the finger directly on the issue when she writes:

    ..... if International Business Wales has been under performing for the last 5 years and not reaching it targets, why has nobody in the Welsh Assembly Government, the Opposition parties, the Civil Service or the media picked this up or acted on it. Why did it take Auditors to highlight what the politicians and civil servants should have been aware of before today’s report was published. The lack of proper scrutiny in Welsh politics is one reason that it has so little credibility; stories like this about the lack of scrutiny and accountability are all too common.


    It is what the Unionists have been writing about for months and months, why do we have to put up with poor Welsh government ?


    Post or reactive moderation for all except off topic comments please!.


    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 09:03am on 14 Oct 2009, mapex55 wrote:

    11.....


    Coming clean is a matter of perspective, Jack, there are many who, from 'old' Labour stock, fought hard and long to unify the various populations of the UK, often having to weather the storms of antagonistic employers, and well fed capital, so that a fairer society would come about.

    Never perfect by any means, they at least recognised the folly of following the types of policies certain persons would have Labour follow, so preferred to take a long term stance, politically speaking.

    This may have well meant dealing with the devil, and bending to his pressures from time to time

    However, there has always been, on both sides of the political spectrum, those who would rush headlong into actions that would invariably bring disaster, the last thirty odd years have demonstrated that.

    In both cases we have been never so near to fascism, or overbearing socialism, but only by adherence to Parliamentary process have we retained a safety margin.

    The potential for a Tory government, whenever Labour is in power, is a braking effect placed upon the rabid left wingers who would bring on that disaster, conversely the same applies to whenever the Tories are in. It takes a few nuts, on either wing, to present policies that appear very attractive to their easily led followers, both in and out of Parliament, and being the 'isolated' island that we are, we could rapidly fall into a camp none of the rational amongst us would like to be part of.

    This is why I take issue with both camps, especially whenever I hear the tripe coming from so called Labour supporters, they invariably call over the opposition, not from a standpoint of political contest, but out of a thinly disguised sense of envy and jealousy, for what can only be described as unjustified wealth and privilege.

    Some call for the abolition of the monarchy, I can go with that for purely political reasons, but I would never justify my call for a Republic based on what it costs us to maintain such an institution, only on the absolute non essentiality of it.

    Likewise all the cracks about Cameron and his wealth, I oppose because I cannot justify policies that favour the already over privileged, against those with nothing to sustain them in lean times. His personality and wealth do not enter into my argument.

    But you are no more, or less, likely to convince the population of your political loyalties, than FiFi is of his.

    Both of you castigate one another for what?... your indubitably common rhetoric, tinted blue or red according to your affiliations.

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 09:43am on 14 Oct 2009, Stonemason wrote:


    Well said map ..... Great Britain is going to need the Labour Party in Wales as a constant reminder that moderation beats extremism, much as paper beats the rock.

    FiDafydd read the voice of reason and weep.

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 12:02pm on 14 Oct 2009, FiDafydd wrote:

    Re 10 + 11

    Not weeping...just laughing out loud.

    For you Stoney to accuse me of going off-topic in no.6 so that you don't have to answer a valid debating point started me off. Are you saying that only an entrepreneur could handle the Deputy First Minister's portfolio successfully?

    But then mapexx with his completely nonsensical:

    "Likewise all the cracks about Cameron and his wealth, I oppose because I cannot justify policies that favour the already over privileged, against those with nothing to sustain them in lean times. His personality and wealth do not enter into my argument."

    - rather made my morning.



    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 12:30pm on 14 Oct 2009, mapex55 wrote:

    message 12...


    Which goes a dramitcally long way to prove the point I made, you chum are simply a jealous clown with nothing of interest or value to add.

    I would be more circumspect in your self appraisal, that green eyed monster looklinmg at you from your mirror is your own rather warped personality.

    Laugh that off!

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 2:24pm on 14 Oct 2009, FiDafydd wrote:

    Re 13

    Good holiday was it...?

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 4:42pm on 14 Oct 2009, REASONABLEVOICE wrote:

    This latest expenses scandal was on Ieun Wyn Jones' watch. You cannot have it both ways, by claiming the plaudits for the'good'(sic)things then not accepting responsibility when things go 'pear shaped', thats politics.

    The result of the audit was; that there was insufficient paperwork and "vague policy".

    As it happens, I believe whoever was in that position, the same result would have happened.

    Now, I have already said that I am against further powers for the Assembly, due to the fact that we have not yet mastered the ones we already have. This latest episode proves - to me anyway - that we have a long way to go yet.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 4:51pm on 14 Oct 2009, mapex55 wrote:

    message 15....

    Whilst going along with your message, at least to 90% anyway, the other ten percent I would refer you to a change of gear, not through to top, but back in reverse, to where we were pre 1997.

    Its all in the £ sign, and the debit amount this lot has cost the taxpayer is unsustainable, as well as unnecessary.

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 9:58pm on 15 Oct 2009, Jack_Wilkinson wrote:

    Mapex55,
    the rhetoric I speak, is not based on the left or right of British politics, it's about being an English speaking Brit. My gene-pool can ONLY be classed as British, my heritage is English speaking British. The Conservatives are like me, they're not like the social engineers of...Explicitly Welsh Patriotic Party/ Llafur/ Welsh Labour!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 11:09pm on 15 Oct 2009, FiDafydd wrote:

    Re 17

    I'm enjoying this, now they're at each others's throats... The paranoia just keeps on spreading like a great big British nat oil slick.

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 08:37am on 16 Oct 2009, mapex55 wrote:

    Message 17...


    jack, I understand where you are at, but opt to look to a different compass point, we have a base set of politcal 'druthers', as the Yanks say, which keeps us on whichever path we choose to follow.


    Message 18..


    That Fi Fi, is an absolutely childish summation of your capabilities in debating terms.

    There is no falling out between Jack and myself, just a slight difference in interpretation of our personal political objectives.

    One day, no doubt far later than sooner, you may possibly submit some sort of constructive response to the messages of others, but I hold out little hopes that your dissembling style will alter.

    You are like that small pice of grit that gets between one's toes, and cannot readily be removed. Highly irritating, and serving no useful purpose, other than to annoy.



























    IS NO FALLIN GH OUT BETWEEN jACK AND MYSELF, JUST A SLIGHT DIFFERENCE OF INTERPRETATION LOF OUR PERSONAL OBJECTIVES.

    sO GO TO ANOTHER CORNER OF THE SCHOOLYARD AND MIX IT WITH THE DISTAFF SIDE, WHICH IS ABOUT YOUR ARGUMENTATIVE LEVEL OPF CAPAVILITY.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 9:03pm on 16 Oct 2009, Jack_Wilkinson wrote:

    Re 19
    No probs mate, as long as we achieve the eradication of that money gobbling parasite on the bay, I'll go with the Conservative Mps, David Davies, Stephen Crabb and David Jones route.
    This devolution scheme, was all about creating an enormous explosion of jobs for certain types, and creating a whole new ruling caste.
    This Llafur party, who laughingly got into power on the vote of the English speaking working classes, what exactly have they done for their victims...... sorry, voters?

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

Explore the BBC

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.