Skip to content


November 13, 2017

ENTHUSIASM for the Welsh Assembly Government and its activities has always been in short supply in north Wales.

The Gogs, as south Walians irritatingly call north Walians (north Wales is Gogledd Cymru in Welsh), deeply resent the Cardiff Bay political hierarchy for a number of reasons which I will go into later.

After the suicide of the Labour north Walian former cabinet member Carl Sargeant, that short supply will decrease much further and that resentment will grow much, much deeper in my homeland.

More of the inhabitants of north wales per capita are English-born than in the south mainly because it is a hugely popular retirement venue for people who worked in the Liverpool and Birmingham areas. Places like Llandudno, Colwyn Bay and other beauty spots on the Lleyn Peninsular are their reward after a life in the factories and offices in England.

Many of these property-owning retired folks are natural Conservative voters – particularly along the picturesque north west coastal region – and look to Westminster not Cardiff Bay if they have to settle any diputes and need representation.

These are largely people who have no stake in devolution and are not motivated to pursue further independence from England and the Westminster government. In fact, the history of extremism by Welsh freedom fighters – see my post Meet the burning , bombing dragons – many of whom set fire to holiday homes in the area, has ensured that many of them will react defensively to further separation from England and strongly oppose it.

Their indifference and apathy is reflected in the low turnout figures in north Wales for assembly elections.

But even among the very considerable number of  devolution supporters in the north who want further separation from England, there are severe reservations about the Welsh Assembly Government.

Aberystwyth, many say, is the natural home for a Welsh government, not Cardiff and there are campaigns still running to move it there.

The choice of Cardiff, which is undoubtedly already over-blessed with investment and accompanying promotional activities, has always been a red rag to the sullen and brooding bull of angry resentment in north Wales.

The fact that there appears to be no branch offices or chambers where people can air their views in places like Wrexham, Bangor and Aberystwyth only adds to this sense that they are being neglected and treated like Cinderella’s sisters.

The Cardiff Bay elite will have to address this urgently now.






November 13, 2017

THE Ched Evans rape case was a serious miscarriage of justice because everything that possibly could be done was done to ensure that the anonymous young girl – who, of course, never herself made an allegation of rape against Evans; the police in this case did it for her  – was believed and reference to her chequered sexual history was banned inside or outside court.

It highlighted how the authorities now instantly abandon level scales of justice and announce that women will be believed and treated seriously if they complain then will enjoy special treatment not afforded to a man  – complete anonymity and a bar to any identifying information – because, of course, so many women and children were disbelieved in the past, particularly in the Jimmy Saville case.

This special treatment extends to historical cases where sexual allegations are made about someone’s past conduct and where, very often, the person is dead so cannot defend themselves. The recent probes into the conduct of former Conservative prime minister Edward Heath around children highlight this. A great deal of public money has been spent on these investigations, prompted by complaints from anonymous sources.

In Wales, we have had the case of former north Wales police Superintendant Gordon Anglesea, who persistently denied allegations of abusing boys in his care until he was finally convicted, further arming conspiracy theorists and radical feminists who allege all male masonic cover-ups and shocking failures in the policing of sex cases.

Vera Baird, Northumberland’s police and crime commissioner, condemned the decision by a jury to overturn his conviction at Cardiff Crown Court in October last year in a case presided over by judge Nicola Davies.

The horrendous nightmare for Evans – who served about two years of his five year sentence in jail until the verdict was overturned – started when she complained to North Wales police that she had woken up in a hotel bedroom near Rhyl in a confused and distressed state. He then openly volunteered information to police about the sex session in 2011 which he believed was consensual.

A case against Evans and his friend and fellow footballer Clayton McDonald was then prepared with no reference to the girl or her history and at Caernarfon Crown Court in April, 2012, a jury amazingly found McDonald not guilty but Evans guilty of rape in a case presided over by judge Merfyn Hughes QC.

I keep coming back to this land-mark case –  defence lawyers have been banned from cross-examining alleged rape victims in court about their sexual behaviour or history since 1999 but the Court of Appeal said Evans’ case was exceptional – because it raises fundamental questions for society about how we treat modern women who make allegations of a sexual nature. It is important to note that it is not by any means just women who make allegations of a sexual nature as many men are attacked, too.

I use the words “modern women” because recent forays into genealogy have made me very aware of the shameful history in Britain of unchallenged male oppression of and violence towards women.

Women who weren’t married did not get the vote until 1928 and a marriage licence has traditionally afforded the husband many rights over his wife, including until fairly recently the right to force himself upon her sexually. Many wives, I have no doubt, have suffered in silence over many years.

Much of modern society is now being organised specifically to address this past injustice and imbalance between the sexes and, more specifically, how they were traditionally investigated and prosecuted by police and lawyers who were overwhelmingly male.

It is no accident that the chief constable of the Metropolitan police, Cressida Dick,  is a woman.

The stench of masonic corruption still hangs around that force, particularly, and so much more needs to be done to restore public faith in them.

First, it is wrong for police officers to state that people who complain about sexual misconduct will be believed because they are automatically discriminating against others who have other allegations to make – will people who complain of burglary at their homes, fires and financial fraud, and non sexual violent assaults be believed?

They should not, either, be encouraged to report, just as none of the people who may have been affected by any of the above are ever encouraged to report it.

The scales of justice are so powerful and so well respected because they are always level and not weighted in favour of anyone, no matter how rich, powerful or, in this case, female.




November 10, 2017


FORMER Welsh Labour cabinet minister Leighton Andrews – who I have been critical of on this blog in the past – is emerging as a highly principled, honest and hugely important man who could now ensure that justice is seen to be done over his friend Carl Sargeant’s sudden suicide.

Mr Andrews, now a professor at Cardiff University, rightly pointed out on BBC radio this morning that a coroner’s inquest into the death of the former communities and children secretary  – to be held on Monday – will not address the sacking itself or, indeed, any of the events leading up to it but only establish the facts concerning the death itself to officially establish the cause.

Yet his other friend, first minister Carwyn Jones – who as a former criminal barrister must surely know this – referred to the inquest yesterday in this way: “These are matters for the future – things that will need to be properly disclosed through what should be a Coroner’s Inquest. As there will in all probability be an inquest, I and my team will of course be cooperating fully with any questions that are raised there. The family deserve to have their questions answered and if that isn’t possible through the Inquest then I will endeavour to make that happen through other means. There is a legal process to go through and I am obviously acting within that.”

Mr Jones surely must have known that these questions would not be raised and he also must have known that he could have answered some of their questions yesterday.

Mr Andrews confirmed that there was nothing to stop him from answering questions in the radio interview this morning.




November 9, 2017

SOME of us have been there …. someone has alleged that we’ve done something stupid and offensive at work. The boss tells us that regretfully he has no option but to sack us so off we go with our tail between our legs to lick our wounds then decide what to do next….

What we do not expect then is for that boss to go out in front of the national media and tell them that it happened because a number of women made allegations of sexual misconduct against us without telling us exactly what the allegations were or who had made them. That would be twisting the knife in an open wound and could very well prejudice a future inquiry into your actions at work. It would also leave you hopelessly isolated and vulnerable and frantic with worry.

Welsh first minister Carwyn Jones today said he had no option but to sack his communities and children secretary Carl Sergeant – who later took his own life after his sacking – and told his audience that he tried to do it “by the book”.

If that is how he operates “by the book” then how on earth does he operate when he is off the book?

Let us take him at his word that he had no choice but to dismiss Mr Sargeant, but why oh why did he have to refer to allegations of sexual misconduct publicly when by all accounts they were neither criminal nor at the serious end of the scale?

Mr Jones broke his silence on AM Carl Sargeant’s suicide (requests for him to speak to the BBC have been repeatedly declined by him and Welsh Labour) by giving a prepared statement while standing at a presidential lectern in front of an impressive Welsh slate circular seal in the old Welsh Office when we wanted him outside on the steps of the Sennedd – meant to be a glass beacon of transparency and openness – answering our urgent questions about how he handled the sacking.

He tried to look presidential and reverend but he was unable to maintain firm eye contact with his audience, instead concentrating on the words on the prepared statement he was reading out, and he was swiftly shuffled out of the building with a minder at his side after his much too brief statement to ensure that journalists eager for answers and desperate to get the facts were unable to question him (I would have shouted a question to him as he was being led out).

He even claimed that there had been “inaccuracies in the press” – maintaining that false moral outrage and indignation about the activities of the press (particularly the London-based press) which is so beloved of this shabby and totally discredited Welsh  Labour party and positioning himself as the final arbiter of what is true or untrue.

Very significantly, he offered nothing to correct these “inaccuracies” and completely refused to engage in open questioning or debate.








November 9, 2017

“No member of the Party shall engage in conduct which in the opinion of the NEC is prejudicial, or in any act which in the opinion of the NEC is grossly detrimental to the Party. The NEC shall take account of any codes of conduct currently in force and shall regard any incident which in their view might reasonably be seen to demonstrate hostility or prejudice based on age; disability; gender reassignment or identity; marriage and civil partnership; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; or sexual orientation as conduct prejudicial to the Party: these shall include but not be limited to incidents involving racism, anti-semitism, Islamophobia or otherwise racist language, sentiments, stereotypes or actions, sexual harassment, bullying or any form of intimidation towards another person on the basis of a protected characteristic as determined by the NEC, wherever it occurs, as conduct prejudicial to the Party. “

THIS is the Stalinist language of the radical, feminist left and this is the language which sealed the fate of suicide AM Carl Sargeant. He had done wrong because under the terms of this, a wide variety of things could be considered to be wrong. In fact, take your pick.

Free speech, healthy interaction between people and open communication is totally impossible under these draconian rules.

Instead, we have tragic stories like Mr Sargeant’s, a good man with good intentions who devoted his time to help others but was hounded out by the very political party he proudly served and represented.

This kind of diversity, inclusivity and multicultural militant and zealous policing of language, expression and behaviour  – growing menacingly in our universities, particularly in the NUS, and spreading ever further into British society like a cancer – is now having hugely adverse effects on the mental health of vulnerable and isolated people who may have, often unwittingly, transgressed these rules.

Solicitors acting for Mr Sargeant received letters from the Labour Party with this frightening diktat from high command which could have been written by Stalin himself with a threatening warning if you break the rules from his hitman Beria.

We then had the unedifying situation of Labour shadow cabinet member dithering Dawn Butler first stating that Mr Sargeant had not been dealt with fairly and agreeing that an independent inquiry was now necessary then changing her mind when the Labour high command “re-educated” her.

Welsh Labour has stayed ominously silent on the matter though first minister Carwyn Jones, who faces calls to resign, will today face journalists and p0liticians in Cardiff Bay who will press him for an explanation of why he went public on accusations made against Mr Sargeant.




November 8, 2017

MAX Moseley doggedly persists in adopting a ludicrously self-righteous and almost self-congratulatory position over his outing in the News of the World in 2008 for indulging in sado-masochistic sex orgies.

Max still doesn’t get it and now he wants to further clamp down on journalists and researchers and protect what he sees as the privacy of others to prevent them from all shame and embarrassment for past misdemeanours. He has tried to ban photographs taken at the orgy from the internet. He wants all kinds of information banned and destroyed and he wants to censor and control expression.

It’s a bit like a family history researcher finding out that one of their relatives indulged in some dodgy behaviour and then they do everything in their power to make sure that that is expunged from all the records and completely destroyed so nobody else can find out about it.

He stubbornly refuses to believe that deceiving those closest to you, including his wife, and living a sadomasochistic secret life is wrong.

His bitter and deeply dangerous crusade for privacy using his Impress press regulation body to control and censor stories persists and he persists in crusading for ever more draconian and prohibitive rules which would stop independent investigation and the free exchange of facts and information on the internet.

He failed in the European Court of Human Rights and he failed when he took on Google because, thankfully, free speech and freedom of expression is still much more important than his wounded ego and pride.


November 8, 2017

IN AN earlier post on this blog, I referred to two police special constables who told me about the Data Protection Act when I spoke to them recently in my neighbourhood.

Today, I discovered that frightening changes are being considered to the Data Protection Act which would prevent open and robust investigative journalism and protect wrongdoers.

The two special constables were using this act as a way of ensuring that there was no free-flow of information and I was told nothing, again.

The Catholic church did much the same thing in Boston when the Boston Globe started investigating paedophile priests. The film Spotlight brilliantly captured the way the great and the good actively tried to prevent us from knowing about the scandal by restricting information to journalists and the public.

Now the House of Lords is considering doing the same thing by further expanding draconian laws which prevent us from asking questions, establishing facts and probing the rich and powerful. We need to fight these proposals.