Bethan Jenkins AC/AM Blog

I was listening to the radio in between meetings today. At one stage I actually pinched myself to see if I was actually still in 2010 when I heard Tony Blair’s voice telling me how great the Labour party is, and how one cannot compare Labour’s rise in 1997 to the Cameron agenda now.

Who decided it would be a good idea to wheel Tony Blair out on the campaign trail? As far as I am concerned he can only do them damage, so thank you Labour!

At the moment, I would agree that you can’t really compare Labour under Tony Blair to Cameron’s Conservatives. Cameron hasn’t yet had the mandate to enter an illegal war in Iraq, to stir up trouble in the Middle East, or introduce the market in to Higher Education. That’s not to say that he won’t continue those policies initiated by New Labour. Why would he choose not to, when their policies are so close to his own? After all, wasn’t that the raison d’etre of ‘New’ Labour, to try to appeal to the very voters who would usually vote Conservative? Of course it was. Hence the emphasis on the individual, on the presidential style of politics, on the development of the City ( and look where that got us folks!)

The Financial Times had this today to say about Tony Blair’s appearance on the campaign trail -‘Likewise Mr Blair’s appearance on the political frontline nearly three years after Mr Brown’s allies effectively forced him out of office speaks volumes about the party’s clannish loyalty when under pressure’. Everybody knows that Brown and Blair do not see eye to eye. Surely the electorate can see through this superficial stunt?  The Sun newspaper states that Blair has been ‘unleashed’ ahead of the polls. So if he is THAT good an operator, why was he ever pushed to one side in the first place? Sky News is reporting that putting Blair up for interviews is ‘the lesser of two evils’. If he wasn’t there, people would only make it an issue, they claim.

The one thing I do agree with Blair ( first for everything) is that the Tories won’t offer change, and to use it as a slogan is laughable. For a party that was in power for so long before New Labour (who failed to offer positive change then) I am unconvinced that they could do so in Government this time around.

A new, smily and shiny leader won’t do it. Their economic policies are weak, their policies full stop are light on detail.  I sincerely hope that Plaid win more MPs in this election, and that we can be a strong force on a Westminster level, as we have been with our three current MPs over the years- with Adam Price’s work in the Tony Blair impeachement campaign for example, and Hywel Williams’s work on child poverty under Elfyn Llwyd’s leadership. This is our opportunity to show how we are relevant, that we can offer alternative, Wales centred policies.

In a few minutes I’m going over to take part in a panel debate with the South Wales Forum of the European Youth Parliament. Other AMs will be on the panel too, at least that’s what the usual format is.

Now, I love speaking to young people about politics. I hope I can enthuse them to a certain degree to get involved in politics though I’m not stupid enough to think that any one individual can turnaround a mass of young people who currently do not vote, and who feel alienated from political processes through no fault of their own.

But to be devil’s advocate, these panel sessions alone won’t inspire people to get out there and change the World. I go in to schools and Universities, of course, but again, these are usually panel discussions, and it is hard to sustain communication with the school children or the students following said event unless a few conscientious people email me for help, or come and do work experience with me.

Essentially what I’m hinting at is that politics needs to be embedded in to everything we do with young people. Yes, they do studyelements of politics during PSE lessons and in the Welsh Bacc, but on an anecdotal level, this isn’t always prioritised or well structured, and teachers, through no fault of their own are often not trained sufficiently to teach such subjects during the PSE time allocation.

 Yes, AMs go in to schools and people study politics at  A level, but we still haven’t arrived in being able to encourage people to a) vote or to b) get involved themselves. What will it take, I hear you ask? Well, as I’ve harped on about for a while, I think we need to set up a new Youth Parliament for Wales that will feed directly in to the workings of the National Assembly for Wales.

When I mentioned this idea at a recent event( which is supported by numerous organisations by the by), Kirsty Williams dismissed this idea as more process.

But I beg to differ. Funky Dragon is a youth organisation, but it is a charity, and informs the Welsh Government and its work. Reperesentatives from Funky Dragon tell me that it is difficult for them to get involved in politics in other ways, other than to inform Government policies and strategies due to their charity sector status.

 I don’t for a minute wish to undermine this work, but what I will say is that the Assembly’s Commission should seriously consider setting up a Youth Parliament for Wales that can meet on a regular basis, that can take part in Assembly businesses in a constructive and meaningful way, without fearing that they will be too political or whether they will annoy Government Ministers.

With the newish Youth Chamber in the old Assembly chamber now up and running, with schools and youth forums using it on a regular basis, now is the time to start thinking about how a Youth Parliament could work in practise. If there’s anyone out there who wants to help with this, and I know you are out there, then please get in touch. At the end of the day, these young people are the future leaders, and if they don’t vote and become passionate about politics now, what’s to say they ever will?

THE Telegraph today has received leaked information suggesting that the Labour Government in Westminster is about to propose new changes to the House of Lords – to make it directly elected, possibly with 300 members, via a form of proportional representation, for new members to pay tax in the UK, and a US style ‘recall ballot’ that could disqualify a member for incompetence.

The spin on the Telegraph article, as you might expect, is that Labour are intending to use this announcement as a way of creating splits in the Conservative ranks, so that they can embarrass Cameron for backing privilege when he has purported to support the reform of the House of Lords in the past. The line would clearly be – look at the Tories, same old, nothing changes. Party of privilege and of the upper classes.

Nonetheless, I hardly think that Labour can take the moral high ground on this agenda. They have promised reform of the House of Lords for as long as I can remember. Tony Blair promised reform when he became PM, if I remember correctly. So too did Gordon Brown.

Yes, they have ended the tradition of hereditary peers, but it is still an undemocratic institution that they have done very little about until now, we are told. These proposals may have something to do with the fact that many members of the House of Lords have been embroiled in the expenses saga, I’m not sure.

However, commentators on the Andrew Marr show today said that reform of the House of Lords would not do much to sway the public in a General election. But with public confidence in politicians at an all time low, this may be the boost that some people need to get out and vote. Who knows?

All I will say is that if it is reformed, then better late than never, but if there is to be a truly democratic second chamber, and more talk of constitutional reform, then this cannot be done without considering the role of the royal family. The government can’t harp on about the House of Lords being undemocratic, while supporting an outdated monarchical system for the UK. Yes, I am sure that reform on this level is a step too far for many to consider, but if the government are going to do it, then please do it properly.

I am on the record previously as having opposed sending Plaid Cymru members to the House of Lords. I stand by that opinion. When Dafydd Wigley, Eurfyl ap Gwilym and Janet Davies were elected to put forward their names to Gordon Brown to be considered as Plaid peers, I sincerely believe that members thought we would get at least one in the House of Lords.

Let’s be frank – for a party that has judged the undemocratic nature of the House of Lords at every juncture, did we really expect Gordon Brown to make one of our own a lord? Who were we kidding? Yes, I understand the argument that our Plaid peers would have made a difference in terms of scrutinising legislation. I never doubted that for a minute. But I think our priority should be to create a stronger Wales, and build for a referendum on further powers before 2011 for the National Assembly. The individuals named above and many others in Welsh society have much to give in that respect, and their energies, in my humble opinion, are best served working here in Wales, for the people of Wales. If they still wanted to stand for an elected, democratic House of Lords, then that would be their own decision for the future.

I guess a discussion on a possible second chamber for Wales is for another day, but the crux of what I think is that if we want democratic institutions, and if we want them to flourish, then we can’t leave things out. Every option should be on the table, including considering the future of the monarchy.

I was so annoyed by all this media interest in Samantha Cameron (or ‘SamCam’ as she is being annoyingly termed) today, that it has motivated me to write a blog. Samantha Cameron is set to do an interview with Trevor Mcdonald tomorrow night about life with her husband, David Cameron. ( I’m sure some of you are keen to stop reading now at this very thought, but try and carry on)

Now, to start with, I’ve never seen Trevor Mcdonald do a type of interview to get any gossipy information out of people a la Piers Morgan, so that got the alarm bells ringing. I.e what’s it all about then?

But reading Zoe Williams’s comments in the Guardian today sparked another level of cynicism- what will this interview actually say about anything at all to do with their real lives, and does anyone really care? Sarah Brown and Michelle Obama have hinted at a few small failings of their husbands in previous interivews- making annoying remarks, disrupting Sunday dinner with blackberry’s flashing and what not, but Zoe Williams hits the nail on the head, saying-

‘ The formula became: don’t say he’s perfect. That sounds a bit Stepford Wife and will damage your credibility..But likewise, don’t say anything that might be meaningfully true..I think SamCam fell on this particular knife…(She doesn’t even call her husband straightforwardly messy! He’s messy while he’s cooking. Even when bad, ladies and gentlemen, he good)’

So yes, friends, it’s all a media parade. Let’s line up the wives and see if they will make our men look better and more electable. You can just see now, in party HQ’s The Thick of it Style, party strategists talking about how wives speaking ‘frankly’ about life at the top, or life with a future PM will do wonders for the public image.

And this during the week that marked International Women’s Day.  A day when all I did was talk about empowering women in their own right, or giving confidence to women to have their own aspirations, or encouraging women to stand for election themselves, so that they can make a difference.

Fast forward four days, and International Women’s Day might as well have not happened as far as the media is concerned. It’s a fight between Sarah Brown and SamCam, we are duly told. Who will big up their husband best?  We must know what they think, what they are wearing, what they do to cope, how they stand by their men so gracefully and supportive, and the rest.

No no no!  If we want to inspire women, then these are not the images or the discussions we need. Yes, talk about the wives because they are campaigning on a certain issue, or they are making their own mark in the World, but not because they  happen to be married to some high powered men. What happened to independent women making it for themselves? What happened to women walking in to a room, and being quizzed on their presence because they are there, not because they are attached to someone else?

As you can imagine, this agenda angers me somewhat. But let’s turn the argument on its head for a minute, shall we? If Gordon Brown or David Cameron can’t be bothered to tell people themselves that they are messy, or if they have an unnatural relationship with their Blackberry’s, then why do the women in their lives feel it necessary to share that with the World? I don’t want to know. If Brown and Cameron or anyone else thought this information was so important to them actually getting elected, why not mention it themselves?

Or, more crucially, if the wives are THAT much of an electoral asset, shouldn’t they just stand themselves, and talk about the issues that matter most to them?

Who knows? I’m just off to scour the latest edition of Vogue to find out what Carla Bruni is wearing this month;-)

I just wanted to flag up a new campaign which was launched recently called ‘Who gets the tip?, which you might find of interest. The campaign’s aim being that businesses such as restaurants/pubs/cafes or other places where you tip, are more transparent with their staff and customers on how those tips are divided up.

If there’s no tipping policy displayed the campaign want consumers to start asking ‘Who gets the tip?’

This campaign can be followed on their  Facebook group and by following them on Twitter. They also have plenty of materials that might be of interest,  including research on tipping attitudes, a history of tipping timeline, quotes from celebrity chefs etc..

Interestingly, the research highlights some interesting comparisons between the nations:

the Welsh are most likely to leave a tip (91% compared to the overall figure of 79%), and are much swayed by service given;
the English are least likely to leave a tip in all types of establishments, apart from takeaways and deliveries, but are the most likely to ask the question ‘Who Gets the Tip?’ (22%);
the Scots are the most likely to tip all the time (45% compared to the overall figure of 30%), but are the least likely to have seen any information displayed about tipping policies (78%);

and the Northern Irish are the most likely to tip in cafes and restaurants (96% compared to the overall figure of 91%), but are the least likely to ask the question ‘Who Gets the Tip?’ (12%).

I SPOKE at three very inspiring International Women’s Day events yesterday. The first was for Chwarae Teg in Bridgend with co-speakers Charlotte Williams, Tessa Sanderson, Denise and Janet Hay, and Hayley Parsons from Go Compare.com. I spoke at a Bevan Foundation event in Merthyr Tydfil on a panel with other women in public life, and in Cwmafan as part of the YWCA’s celebrations.

Of course, all of these women are brilliant at what they do. I was in awe at their words, their successes, their drive and I was privileged to have been asked to speak at the events, and to seek to inspire others to be political and to push themselves forward in politics.

Nonetheless, driving back from the last event, I thought I’d reserve some personal thoughts for this blog, and why perhaps we still have a long way to go. Yes, International Women’s Day is important, but what’s more vital is that women feel supported and enthused every day of the year.

Being in politics at an early age and being a woman at that has been quite a roller coaster journey for me. Being elected by party members to stand as an AM was something to celebrate,  but it made life quite difficult as it was all change, and the spotlight  from the press and political commentators alike was on new candidates, new faces.

Many young women can offer something different to a different audience- an audience that are starting to get inspired. Slowly but surely, we are realising that young women can make a difference, and stand for election.

Looking back, standing for election was a challenging time, but I truly think that my confidence has grown since then. I still think that political parties need to recognise that young people, especially women are an asset to them. We can encourage people to join that would never have even blinked at a politician in the street, let alone talked to one. I hear on the grapevine that some other parties look to Plaid, and feel they should be emulating us in encouraging young politicians to become an AM. Yes, that is good, but when we join, when we become active, there must be an assurance that there are networks of people there to support us. It’s not like we are sparkly toys to put on show.

This is not to say that this is what happens all the time to all young female politicians, yet sometimes I truly believe that grassroots organisations, lobby groups and women outside politics can see our benefits a little bit more than party machines.

I often feel that because I am passionate and idealistic, it is seen as a flaw- I hear them think ‘ well, she’ll grow out of it’. However, today’s speeches and words of wisdom made me realise that this is often about the status quo trying to fit young politicians into neat boxes which are just not our shape or size. Energising young women to become politicians is not about creating a cardboard cut out, a yes person, a smiley face for TV. It’s about offering something new, unique, creative that wasn’t there before. Scratch the surface and young women have a lot to offer- when you don’t scratch the surface, they start to wonder how they can make a difference.

Women politicians need to look at themselves, and realise their self worth. We should, for example, encourage representatives of all political parties to come together more often, share ideas and feelings, so that we can realise that we are not alone and that we all have the same hurdles and problems as other women in society.

So yes, today was a great day to celebrate women. But we should mark it to raise awareness of what is not so perfect in our world, too. And yes – change it for the better!