Letter: Welsh referendum

M. C. Fitzpatrick
Friday 19 September 1997 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: The Welsh referendum was intended by the Government to build on the apparent enthusiasm for devolution shown in the results of the May general election; in fact the deeply underwhelming "Yes" result has undermined this enthusiasm.

Just 25 per cent of the Welsh electorate voted in favour of the principle of a Welsh assembly, with the other 75 per cent either voting against or abstaining. By contrast, at the general election, 57 per cent of the Welsh electorate voted Labour, Liberal Democrat or Welsh Nationalist, with these parties taking nearly four out of five of the votes actually cast. All these parties were committed, as a central part of their respective manifestos, to some form of devolution.

Given that little more than one in three of the Welsh electorate were prepared to go out and vote, the referendum result hardly represents a convincing mandate to push the proposals through the two Houses of Parliament. At worst for the Government, the results suggest that there has been a total collapse in support for devolution and that a longer campaign might have led to the proposal being rejected altogether.

M C FITZPATRICK

Head of Economics

Chantrey Vellacott

London WC1

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in