There are a lot of sheep in Wales and not all of them have four legs.

Wales is not known for  protest.

Farmers at the Senedd and 20 mph online poll.

There may be a busload to Westminster now and again, but nothing serious.

Blaenau Gwent, one of Wales, indeed the UK's most deprived areas. Poverty, unemployment and low wages, lack of basic services and yet the biggest public protest was because of wheely bins. The imposition of wheely bins. Even that protest was lost.

Wales, a significant recipient of EU financial aid [  multi millions ], voted in the majority to end that aid through its support for Brexit. A decision that undoubtedly made their lives more difficult.

Brexit, shown to be a cause of loss of productivity, jobs and a hit to the UK [ and Wales ] economy.

Take control of our borders was the rhetoric.

Take back £350 million a week and return it to the NHS.

None of these have happened, nor were they going to.

It was a false rhetoric.

However it’s not an isolated case. Wales falling for false rhetoric. False promises. 

The 20 mph campaign.

 Wales has almost 200,000 children in poverty, lower than average wages and public services not fit for purpose, yet there is no public outcry, no protests at the Senedd, nor online petition demanding change. The Welsh public chosen anti-government protest was to demand a 20 mph policy decision be rescinded.  No matter that it was a policy that saved lives, lowered serious injuries and saved the motorist money by lower insurance premiums and motor repairs. Sign this online [ you don’t have to get up from your chair ] petition and you can give an unpopular government a kicking. A gift to the Tory opposition who took to social media with enthusiasm to promote the campaign. Tories who had originally supported the measure, that is until they saw an opportunity. Indeed one of the foremost campaigners is a Tory councillor from Sunderland, who at the same time was campaigning for the introduction of such a policy in his own constituency.

So how does such a policy that has a negative effect on so few people attract such a campaign, a petition of almost half a million of the population.

Particularly when 300,000 of the Welsh public have no cars, 600,000 regularly use bus passes and 550,000 of the population are children.

It will ruin Welsh business was the slogan.

The headline ran into tens of billions.

The official estimate was £1.9 billion over 30 years.

That’s £63 million a year.

The recent increase in business rates cost Welsh businesses £91 million for the year, but that was greeted with merely a huff and a puff. No campaign. No online petition.

It is also strange, that now the policy has reverted to local authorities undertaking local consultation, there seems to be a significantly diminished appetite for reverting road speed upwards.

Local democracy seems at odds with such a seemingly significant national campaign, with overall a relatively modest change. In some authorities no changes are contemplated, in others, local residents even call for the lowering of the limit on more roads.

Immigration.

In the by-election in Caerphily, migration is a major issue. This despite the fact that less than 3% of the borough’s population are immigrants.

People are confused. They experience everyday problems, energy costs, lack of housing, hospital waiting times, austerity, so someone is to blame.

The perception, deliberately fostered, is that immigration is to blame.

Boats crossing the Channel bring ‘ illegal ‘ immigrants ‘ breaching our borders ‘ ‘ overwhelming our small island ‘. The immigrants ‘ take our jobs ‘ ‘ depress the wages ‘ are a burden on public services ‘ and are given priority over housing.

This is the popular narrative. This turns the public against immigrants and gives political advantage to political parties that promise to deal with it.

Except that very little of this has any basis in fact.

Boats crossing the Channel with people seeking asylum is nothing new. The first recorded crossing for that purpose was over fifty years ago.

It has grown in recent years due to the increase in global conflict and collapsing economies. Also the increasing desperation is accompanied by the absence of other means of entry.

Although boat crossings account for only a small proportion of immigration, it gets the most attention both from the media and politically.

However the idea that they pose a threat to the borders or that ‘ they are overwhelming our small island ‘ is ludicrous, but still it is promoted.

Each immigrant from boat crossings is detained, so they pose no breach of border threat and as over 80% of the UK landmass is undeveloped dispels the myth of ‘ overwhelming ‘.

While being processed for eligibility to remain, they are not allowed to work, so are not taking jobs and are not depressing wages for the same reason. They are not housed in conventional housing and therefore do not get preferential treatment in housing.

In hotels and the such that cause such furore. 

Attacking the immigrants, rather than those responsible for placing them there, seems an illogical action.

Although logic does seem to be in short supply.

So who are these migrants causing such problems to the UK economy and social fabric?

It must be the 14% of the UK population born outside the UK and legitimately resident.

They are the nurses, doctors, health support workers, social carer workers, taxi drivers, agricultural workers, those we rely on for restaurants and takeaways and the late opening corner shop.

Those who provide a service and pay their taxes.

Migrants depress the workers wages.

Except they don’t.

There have been numerous studies and there is no evidence that migrants are responsible for lower wages.

They take our jobs.

Migrants in fact create jobs.

Migrants work. They are net contributors to the economy, paying more in taxes than they receive in any benefit.

They spend into the economy creating demand. Demand creates jobs.

Migrants, although 14% of the UK population [ less than half that in Wales ]  are responsible for 37% of new business start ups creating more employment.

They get preferential treatment in housing allocation.

Migrants overwhelmingly live in private rented accommodation, over 60%

Approximately 30% have home ownership, a figure far lower than the local population, mainly due to difficulties with mortgages etc with visas and other restrictions.

Less than 10% live in social housing.

The only priority given to migrants with regard to housing is the same as the local population, with regard to domestic abuse and homelessness, with which local authorities have a duty.

They put pressure on the NHS.

Any addition to the population will put additional pressure without additional resources.

Migrants compensate for that by the fact that they pay their contribution to the provision of extra resources in taxes and also by the levy they pay with their visas for that purpose.

The health and social care sector would collapse without migrant workers who account for over 30%.

The rhetoric that immigrants are ‘ flooding ‘ to the UK is also a myth.

The UK lies in 17th place in Europe for migrants per head of population.

A little over 71% of refugees seek safety in neighbouring countries. Jordan, for example, has 1.3  million from Syria.

Nor is it the case that large and wealthy countries such as the UK, lead the way in providing havens for asylum seekers. 

UNHCR [ United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees ] reports that low and medium income countries host  71% of the world's refugees.

So with little of the scaremongering true, why are migrants still vilified?

It is mainly because the public fails to look beyond the headlines.

Headlines created by media and politicians, leading among those is Reform.

Reform, the latest with the rhetoric, the false promises and once again the Welsh public are falling for it. 

Reform.

Reform who promises to reverse the decline in the economy, cut waste, lower taxes and resolve the immigration ‘ problem ‘ the cause of all ills.

Reform, not your run of the mill conventional political party, but a limited company no less.

Run by a board as becoming for a company.

But not any old board but one handpicked by the Leader. Nigel Farage.

Three members picked by the Leader who together with the Leader and his ally and major financial donor Richard Trice make a majority of the board.

As an illusion of democracy, three further board members are elected by Reform’s paid up membership.

This from a selected short list vetted of course by the Leader.

Mustn’t get too carried away by democracy.

The Board.

Overwhelmingly male with just one  woman.

Chair

David Bull.

An ally of Nigel Farage and hand picked by him  as Chairman with the resignation of Zia Yusuf.

Previously a host on TVTalk.

A Brexiteer Conservative and various posts in the Brexit Party.

An opponent of net zero and champion of fossil fuels, particularly fracking.

Tasked with better communication to grass roots members.

An admirer of Donald Trump, even to wearing an ear bandage while presenting his show, in sympathy with Trump following the attempted assasination.

Ricard Trice.

Ally of Nigel Farage and major donor to Reform.

Runs Reform with the Leader and is one of the two registered officers of Reform Ltd. The other of course, Nigel Farage.

A businessman whose wealth is mainly from real estate

A supporter of Brexit organisations and a member of the Brexit Party prior to Reform.

Heavily criticized for spreading misinformation on climate change on which he is a denier of human contribution.

He is also criticized  by such bodies as Migration Observatory, for misinformation on immigration with which he does believe in net zero, even if some of his methods  are questionable, such as an immigration department packed with believers in the UK leaving the European Convention on Human Rights, using the Royal Navy, although in an unclear role,and doing deals with the Taliban regarding the return of Afghan refugees.

Richard Tice is a vocal supporter of The NHS adopting a private health insurance model.

Paul Nuttal.

An appointee to the Board by Nigel Farage.

His past achievements were noted as a professional footballer with Tranmere Rovers. A PhD in history and served as a  board member of a charity.

He was previously a chair of UKIP.

The other claims however are inventions and have since been removed from his social media accounts. 

In spite of these dubious claims he is seen to be a valuable addition to the Board, holding the views that the very existence of the NHS stifles competition, constraining improvements. He is a global warming sceptic and has held the view that Jews themselves were responsible for the Holocaust, quoting David Irvine the Holocaust denier.Just for balance however, Paul Nuttall also holds anti Muslim views. 

Zia Yusaf

An ex chair of Reform, who resigned only to return two days later in a different role.

A wealthy businessman and major donor, ironically a Muslim and son of migrants, supporting an anti immigrant party.

Unsurprisingly he is a climate change sceptic, being associated with and speaking at meetings of Alliance for Responsible Citizenship, a radical right wing climate change denier organisation.

He is a supporter of increasing fossil fuel use and criticizes net zero energy policy.

He joins other children of immigrants such as Rishi Sunak, Prtti Patell and others as being hard line on immigrants.

Zia Yusaf was the architect of Reform policy to deport all immigrants, including children, that is until Nigel Farage judged that was a little bit extreme at this time.

Dame Andrea Jenkyn.

The only female member of the board..

She is a Conservative defector to Reform, aren’t they all and Brexitier.

She is the elected Mayor of Lincolnshire, despite two years earlier, while a Conservative, expressed herself as an opponent of elected mayors and opposed to giving them more powers.

She is a climate change denier, in favour of fracking and believes that net zero is an unnecessary cost to the economy,

She is a hardliner on immigration, arguing that all ‘ illegal ‘immigrants should be immediately deported, although it is unclear as to how or even which come under the definition of illegal

She argues to house immigrants in tents and to stop funding the teaching of English to immigrants. Which seems contrary to the Reform Party call for them to integrate in UK society.

Andrea Jenkyn is an avowed anti-trade union and believes workers rights are an unjustified impediment to business.

Board members elected by members.

Three members of the Reform board are elected by the members, albeit from a List from the Leaders.

However an opportunity for some fresh thinking even if in the minority.

Gawain Towler.

Previously press officer for UKIP, Brexit Party, Director of Communications Reform.

A media man once dismissed by Zia Yusaf the then Chair.  

A sceptic of devolution, supporter of Westminster centralised government.

Anti higher education in favour of concentrating on skills for work.

Would create 500 peers as essential to govern.

Anti immigration.

A denier of climate change.

Darren Grimes.

Previously a presenter on GB news and a Reform councilor, deputy leader of Durham council.

Since his election as a councilor there have been 21 complaints lodged against him.

He is subject to an investigation into producing fake videos regarding immigration.

He has been reported for making misleading comments on immigration related housing and crime issues.

He was investigated regarding sexual harassment against a male collegue although the complaint was not further pursued.

He was found to have lied regarding not holding surgeries, claiming that it was on police advice. A claim that the police denied.

He has been the subject of police investigation for racist comments, there were no charges as they were not concluded as reaching the criminal threshold.

He is a climate change denier and an opponent of net zero policies.

Dan Barker.

Former Conservative mayoral candidate for Greater Manchester.

A defector to Reform citing Reform’s net zero scrapping as one reason.

A supporter of the return to coal mines.

He believes the housing crisis is caused by the influx of immigrants.

He is a supporter of the UK leaving the ECHR.

An advocate of the immediate return of immigrants, although unclear of how or which immigrants.

A climate change denier.

The Board has a range of views on public service ‘ reform ‘ particularly the NHS, with the views from an unspecified need to change to that of Richard Tice and Nigel Farage insurance based solution.

Reform’s financial supporters.

A little over 80% of Reform financial support comes from a handful of sponsors.

It is noticeable that for a party whose policies are so  ‘make Britain great ‘ orientated, so many of its sponsors would rather not live there or base their businesses there..

The top of the Reform sponsor list is one Christopher Harbonne.

Christopher Harbonne also known as Chakrit Sakuntrit in Thailand where he lives.

Of dual nationality he has business interests in aviation fuel oil and crypto.

He has previously backed the Tories, giving £1 million to Boris Johnston and to the Brexit Party, donating £13.7 million.

He is a major shareholder in QinetiQ, a leading defence firm.

He now financially supports Reform.

Jeremy Hoskins.

Makes his money from asset management.

Has donated £2.4 million to Reform.

His business is controlled from Jersey, with a subsidiary in the Cayman Islands.

Richard Tice.

A member of Reform’s board and leading light of the Reform Party.

Richard Tice is also a major financial backer of Reform 

Most of these donations through his company Leave Means Leave and Britain Means Business.

He also donates through a family business Tisun Ltd, which although recorded as inactive, still manages to give substantial sums to Reform.

Richard Tice,s partner lives in Dubai where Richard Tice goes every ‘ four to five weeks ‘.

Nicholas Candy. Reform Treasurer and Reform financial backer.

A property developer and previously Tory member.

He has a £10 million mansion having previously sold his Hyde Park penthouse for £175 million.

He together with his now estranged wife Holly Vallance are major donors to Reform.

While he, as treasurer, promises to attract multi millions in donations, Holly Valance, an Australian and ex Neighbours soap actress, is also active in fundraising for right wing causes. In addition to Reform , she was active in fundraising for Donald Trump.

Nicholas Candy claims close friendship with Tony Blair, Peter Mandelson and Boris Johnston.

He has previously stated that it is only 50/50 whether he remains  in UK politics or even the UK, citing his four favourite countries as Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. 

Hardly a resoundling endorsement of the UK.

David Lilley.

Mining and metals trader and CEO of an investment fund.

A major donor to  Reform.

David Lilley’s companies own 12000 hectares of land in Russia.

He is co-founder of Centre for Better Britain, a Reform related think tank.

Centre for Better Britain policies include cutting state services, opposing DEI [ diversity , equity and inclusion ], the reform of healthcare,weakening the influence of the judiciary and force through Trump-like law changes.

Fiona Cotteral.

Aristocrat and major Reform donor.

Fiona Cotteral lives in Thailand. 

She is the mother of George Cotteral [ Posh George ] a fund raiser and ally of Nigel Farage.

George Cotteral is a renowned gambler and convicted fraudster.

Although campaigning for Reform George Cotteral lives in Montenegro.

There are others including

.

Evan Management. Jersey based. Whose owners live in Monaco.

Crispin Odey. Banned and fined £1.8 million by the financial services watchdog.

Court case pending over sexual harassment claims against Odey, although such claims did not deter Reform from accepting his donation.

Fitriani Hay. Indonesian Racehorse owner. Married to James Hay who made his fortune as an executive of BP and ventures into construction, chemicals and real estate.

They live in Dubai.

J B Honore brokerage firm owned from Luxembourg.

Margaret Hepburn. Hepburn Bio Care. 

Lives in Monaco.

The list goes on.

At a Reform fundraising event in January others from the olden days of UKIP and Brexit Party were present eyeing up the lie of the land.

Past sponsors  of Tories, then UKIP, then Brexit Party such as Arron Banks, He of the Russian connection, his wife being Russian, his frequent visits to Russia and his friendship with the Russian Ambassador.

Mohamed Amresi. Previously a Tory donor. Linked to controversial deals on a  secretive offshore company. A company controlled by the daughter of the ex president of Uzbekistan. He is named in the Pandora Papers as involved in offshore fraud. Mohamed Amresi’s partner is Russian born Nadezha Rodickeva, she also was a donor to the Tories.

Mohamed Amresi, is not yet a member of Reform. In his words. I am a businessman and so keeping all options open.

Reform Policy.

Reform, in keeping with its status as a company, has a Contract, rather than a manifesto.

A Contract that promises to right the wrongs in UK society, much of it within the first 100 days.

Immigration.

Immigration is prominent, for not only is it a comfort zone for Reform, but resolving it will, according to the Contract, resolve low wages, housing shortages and pressure on public services.

The problem with this approach is that immigration has little impact on housing. The ‘ illegals ‘ that Reform are fond of quoting have no right to housing and those with a right to remain, overwhelmingly live in private rented accommodation. Almost 70%..

Wage depression.

In the  numerous studies that have been carried out, there is no evidence that immigration has any role in depressing wage levels. 

Public services pressures.

While it is true that any increase in population will put further pressure on public services, immigrants play a very small part in that.

An aging population being the main contributor.

It is also the case that without immigrants public services would collapse.Over one third of all workers in health and social care are immigrants.

So without any discernible proof, it would seem that there would be very little transformation with Reform’s immigration policy.

Tackling Waste.

No not bin collection, but Reform’s money raising policy of reducing the waste they say is abundant in government and public bodies.

A reduction in government department spending of £5 in every £100 

A bit like teaching someone to add up.

If you save £5 in every £100 it will equal £50 billion. 

There is no explanation in the Contract, how it’s to be achieved or even if it can be achieved.

Then there's the proposal to cut public body waste, cut civil servants.

It will save billions.

The image of Yes Minister civil servants being cut is generally attractive, however the civil service is generally made up of people who pay out the state pension, process benefit payments, deal with passports and driving licences, run the justice and prison service and close to Reform’s heart, process immigrant claims.

Reform points to the huge amount of lost taxes, yet it is the shortage of civil servants in HMRC that are a large contributory factor.

It is also argued that it is the cuts in the immigration service civil servants by the Tory government that has led to the backlog in immigration processing processing.

In their war on waste Reform has set its sights on the NHS.

Cuts in administration and management will do the trick they say.

However, contrary to popular belief, the NHS has a remarkably low proportion of administrative staff and managers,

It has 3.2% of its staff in those categories against about 9% in the private sector and also 9% in comparable European health services.

Any cuts would inevitably mean more admin carried out by medical staff and they are in short supply.

Reform would stop the Bank of England paying interest on commercial bank deposits.Reserves 

This would save around £35 billion a year, they say.

There are many supporters of the view that the Bank of England, or eventually the Treasury is paying too much interest.

Most however, even those used by Reform for support, doubt that savings of that magnitude could be made.

The system is much more complex than Reforms fag packet calculations.

It is unclear how they have arrived at the figure of £35 billion, but it is probably done by taking the interest payment, currently at 5.25% from the reserves of almost £700 billion.

This calculation does not take into account that the BoE may reduce the interest base rate, resulting in less interest payment.

The BoE may reduce its total holding of bonds, most as a result of Quantitative Easing policy. Resulting in lower total interest payment..

Without  interest payments it is likely that commercial banks would reduce their reserves held at the BoE to the mandatory minimum. 

Without the payment of interest on reserves, the BoE would lose the central plank of monetary policy, the setting of interest rates for the control of inflation.

It is also argued that the UK would lose its status as an investment centre without the stability  provided by BoE control. 

Commercial Banks, without the income from interest payments would seek to recoup it elsewhere. Perhaps by higher charges to business or individual loans, which would be merely transferring to costs from the Treasury to the public.

Bodies such as the New Economic Foundation and Institute for Fiscal Studies, both quoted by Reform as supporters of its policy,acknowledge these difficulties and  advocate a tiered system of interest on reserves as used by the European Central Bank and Bank of Japan.

Either way, the complexities involved make the calculation of savings uncertain, although likely much less than Reforms figure and the timescale such that even If Reform was in a position to carry out this policy, they would likely be kicked out again before they are implemented. 

Reform argues that these policies would, in their words lead to 1-11/2% increase in growth [ another adding up lesson coming up ]. 1% growth in GDP = £25 billion, which if taxed at 40%= £10 billion. So their policies would add a further £10 billion pa.

I hope you are keeping up.

Of course all this growth together with waste savings, sacking large numbers of the civil service, the 5% cuts across government, a successful immigration policy and revamping of the BoE monetary policy, depends entirely on how it is to be achieved.

It remains , without proper explanation, merely a wish list.

Reforms experience in local government has shown the huge gap between rhetoric and achievement.

So together with Reform’s U turn on its £90 billion tax cuts and its rethink on its promised  raising the basic rate of tax to £20000, means it doesn’t really have an economic plan at all.

No economic plan. No Contract.

Reforms policy as always and stated elsewhere is to grab a big number and offer a simple fix.

And so to Wales.

What is Reform offering Wales?

Besides the fantasy of reopening coal mines and rebuilding the Blast Furnace at Port Talbot, very little.

Reform is not interested in Wales. It is a centrist unionist party.

Do the supporters of Reform in Wales really believe that the multi millionaire backers of Reform are really interested in control of the Senedd.

There is nothing in it for them. No payback.

The electoral campaign in Wales is a template. A test as to whether their campaign is on the right course to the real prize, government in Westminster.

That’s where payback is.

The contracts are given out.

Where the NHS is hived off to private contractors.

Reform is not a friend of Wales.

They have no interest in Wales other than to exploit it.

But for all the reasons there are in this post to avoid Reform, the two legged sheep in Wales will still say Baaa. 

 

  

.