50,000 New Welsh Jobs. What a Stupid Idea!

In a speech in Cardiff yesterday Ieuan Wyn Jones outlined plans to raise money that could be used to fund 50,000 new jobs in Wales over the next 4 years. Given the high levels of unemployment in Wales and the need to reinvigorate the Welsh economy, one would have thought that such a scheme would be welcomed by all. The only grounds that I can think of for opposing plans for such a massive and much needed jobs boost would be if opponents could come up with a better scheme for creating even more jobs.

Unfortunately all the other three parties' responses to the plans were of the typically childish, name calling, negative type which we have come to expect from those quarters.

Liberal Democrat AM Jenny Randerson said: This is a typical Plaid Cymru pie in the sky policy.

Nick Bourn, the Leader of the Conservatives thinks that the plan is irrelevant.

And Labour's Owen Smith MP dismisses the plan with the rather odd comment if a deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

All of which sound to me like dismissing a policy just because another party thought of it first; dismissing the possibility of job creation and economic revival for petty party reasons.

If 50,000 new jobs and economic revival are seen as pie in the sky; irrelevant or too good to be true by the other parties – why on earth should anybody vote for them?

I would have hoped that Welsh Labour, the Welsh Conservatives and the Welsh Liberal Democrats had greater aspirations for Wales than to dismiss plans to increase employment and kick start our economy in negative sound bites!

Wales deserves better.


  1. Or just maybe its being dismissed because it is pie in the sky...

  2. Anonymous said...

    "Or just maybe its being dismissed because it is pie in the sky..."

    ^^ Sounds like the typical traitorous Unionist bullshit to me. They hung people like you in olden times you Welsh 'but want tobe English' prick.

  3. Oh dear Anon 2. Pretty things like pictures are hung; traitorous bastards are hanged! (Not that I am in favour of hanging those who disagree with my opinion - of course!)

    Anon 1, if new jobs and economic renewal are just pie in the sky we may as well give up and accept that our fate is at the bottom of the dunghill forever! Do you fancy standing for election on that strategy?

  4. Thanks, Misery.

    We are offering 50 thousand jobs - they are only offering negative sound bites - will be a brilliant message on the knocker!

    I suppose that your next post will be your usual bite back!

    After every post in which you praise Plaid, you usually make two in which you kick our party in the bollocks.

    Expect some miserable anti plaid stories on this blog soon!

  5. Surely, until these new jobs are clearly identified it is just that 'pie in the sky'

    So where are they going to be then? And will they actually be wealth producing jobs (manufacturing, exports etc) or the far more likely wealth consuming jobs (bureaucratic pen-pushers in local councils or government quangos.}

    Scotland is already at (if not over) the limit between those that create the wealth and those that merely consume it; Is that a road that Wales wishes to follow.

    What will happen if England eventually has enough and gives both Scotland and Wales the heave-ho? There would be a massive reduction in government employment as Social Services for England is relocated back to England, and maybe even the Bank of England would be going home!

    You can't fling out sound bites as if they were policies without intelligent people asking questions.

  6. "Scotland is already at (if not over) the limit between those that create the wealth and those that merely consume it; Is that a road that Wales wishes to follow."

    Scotland's GVA- the best measure of economic activity- has increased rapidly in the past few years (faster than most parts of the UK including Wales) without slashing the state sector. If Scotland had sovereignty over all of its resources and their revenues it would have a budget surplus in some years. But it's not a question of Wales following anyone else's road.

    "There would be a massive reduction in government employment as Social Services for England is relocated back to England, and maybe even the Bank of England would be going home!"

    Absurd. There is already a planned reduction in UK Government employment in both Wales and England (and Scotland and the north of Ireland also).

    Some obvious trolling going on here!

  7. Post a serious question and get accused of being a WU. Forgive me I mistook this for a place with an intelligent readership!

    So I'll try again - where are these 50 thousand jobs coming from then? And will they be wealth creating or wealth consuming? I trust that is clear enough for you to attempt to answer?

  8. How is one supposed to tell the difference between one 'Anonymous' and another?

    It is apparent from the stories that Plaid's suggestion is for a not-for-profit company, along the lines of the hugely successful Glas Cymru (and everyone said that wouldn't work when it was created) to provide capital infrastructure and servicing along the lines of PFI contracts in England, but without the obscene profit margins, and with the aim of providing public service written into the company articles.

  9. Sionnyn - if it truly is a not-for-profit company with public service written into the company articles then I expect it will be wealth consuming rather than wealth producing.

    As an old fashioned economist, I expect a successful company to create more wealth than it consumes. So in what way was Glas Cymru 'hugely successful'and if it had 'no profit' what government taxes did it pay to offset the expense of setting up the not-for-profit company in the first place. However I see you say it is only a 'suggestion' so we won't get too excited then shall we?

    You see 50,000 jobs sounds fantastic until you ask the hard questions. Questions which when asked turns you into someone who obviously 'hates Wales' or 'is a Labour Supporting WUM' - neither of which is true in my case.

  10. Both Sionyn and the latest Anon are incorrect in describing Glas Cymru as a not-for-profit company. Glas Cymru makes quite healthy profits. Most of Glas' profits are re invested into Water infrastructure, but some of its profits go towards paying dividends to investors in the company.

    Many current infrastructure projects in the UK are financed by the Private finance Initiative. Private companies pay to build roads, schools, hospitals etc and "rent / mortgage" them to local authorities and other government organisations, for mega profits.

    My understanding of Plaid's policy is that a single company will offer these PFI type projects funded by guaranteed bond payments to investors who will make a fair and safe profit from their investment. Like Glas, if you invest in its bonds you won't make mega bucks, but you will make a better return than sticking your nest egg under the bed or leaving it in your building society account.

    As one anon says above, I am no Plaid Cymru sycophant, I am more than willing to give Plaid a kick in the soft parts when its policies appear to be soft enough to kick, but I like this policy. If I was a member of the big three I would nab the policy and say it can't be done on a Welsh level it's an UK policy that we will follow through on an UK level.
    Rubbishing a perfectly valid policy just because it is Plaid led seems very churlish, and childish, to me!

  11. Anon. It is called the 'Build for Wales' fund. It is an infrastructure fund. Infrastructure facilitates the creation of wealth. Not-for-profit doesn't mean a body creates "no profits" it means the sole purpose of the body is not to create a profit.

    It's important to clarify the Plaid policy does not resemble PFI- the key elements that in theory make PFI attractive don't exist in the Plaid fund. I'm no sycophant either and if Plaid was planning to fund national infrastructure through PFIs i'd criticise it.

  12. Check out Syniadau's post on this if you are interested in the debate.

  13. Alwyn - are you sure that Glas Cymru distributes profits? It is a company limited by guarantee, and had no shareholders. So who gets a share of the profits?

    Of course it has to operate with a surplus (anon is being either obtuse or very stupid when he suggests otherwise) but I thought that ALL the surplus was carried over for further capital works.

  14. Glas Cymru raised 2 billion pounds by selling secured bonds, it has to pay a return to the bond holders.

  15. Glas Cymru also distributes a hare of its profits to the customer in the form of a discount on the bill. Its actually a pretty clever model.
    When I first heard about this policy, I didn't think it stood up to much, but now the details are coming out it looks to me like a possible runner. Plaid's other announcement of a setting up a similar not for dividend company to run the trains also appeals to me

  16. I agree that the Glas Cymru model works - for social infrastructure. It should work for trains - it might work for say the NHS - but one size will not fit all and we have to make sure that we dont over-sell the solution.