Cardiff Council leader confirms he will seek to run in the 2026 Senedd elections
Cardiff Council leader confirms he will seek to run in the 2026 Senedd elections
The leader of Cardiff Council, Cllr Huw Thomas, has previously refused to say whether or not he will run in the 2026 Senedd elections
Huw Thomas has confirmed his plans
(Image: Cardiff Council )
The leader of Cardiff Council has confirmed that he will be putting his name forward for consideration as a Labour candidate in the next Senedd election. Cllr Huw Thomas refused to say whether or not he would stand in the 2026 Senedd election when asked in September 2024.
All four Labour constituency members of the Senedd in Cardiff have ruled themselves out of the running. The Local Democracy Reporting Service asked Cllr Thomas what his plans were for next year's elections
Cllr Thomas, who was attending a topping out ceremony for a new block of council flats in Grangetown, said: "I will be putting my name forward for consideration, yes." For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here .
Cllr Thomas became the youngest leader of Cardiff Council in May 2017 at the age of 31.
Originally from Aberystwyth, the ward councillor for Splott was first elected to the local authority in 2012.
The current constituency member of the Senedd for Cardiff West, Mark Drakeford, is best known for leading Wales as the First Minister during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Article continues below
Mr Drakeford, who currently serves as the Welsh Government's cabinet secretary for finance and Welsh language, has said he will not be running for re-election.
Vaughan Gething's time as First Minister was short lived.
The current constituency member of the Senedd for Cardiff South and Penarth quit four months into the job following pressure over donations he received in the Welsh Labour leadership contest.
Mr Gething then announced in September 2024 that he will not seek re-election in 2026.
The other two constituency members of the Senedd in Cardiff, Jenny Rathbone for Cardiff Central and Julie Morgan for Cardiff North have also announced that they won't seek re-election.
Ms Rathbone, who has served as an MS since 2011, sits on the climate change, environment and rural affairs committee and the public accounts committee.
Ms Morgan has also been an MS since 2011. Over the years, she has been on a number of committees and served as the deputy health minister at one point.
Before her time in Cardiff Bay, she also served as a politician in Westminster for 13 years after being elected as the MP for Cardiff North in 1997.
The Senedd will undergo a number of major changes next year.
Article continues below
When people go to the polls in May 2026, they will be using a new voting system and there will be 16 new constituencies.
On top of this, the Senedd will be expanded to 96 members instead of the 60 that currently sit and anyone standing for election must live in Wales.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
40 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
'Victory for American people' as Fauci phone and hard drives seized in Covid probe
Hard drives and a cell phone seized from Dr Anthony Fauci could shed light on key decisions during the Covid pandemic - including lockdowns and mask edicts. FBI director Kash Patel revealed Thursday the Trump administration had recovered the devices, calling it a 'great breakthrough' and a 'victory for the American people.' Fauci was chief medical adviser during the pandemic but flip-flopped on crucial Covid safety information - such as mask-wearing - and sought to silence scientists whose views, including the lab-leak theory, clashed with received wisdom. Speaking Thursday on the Joe Rogan Experience, Patel outlined the government's continuing investigation into the origins of the pandemic and the federal response. Patel said investigators had long struggled to locate the devices Fauci used while serving as White House medical adviser - records that could shed light on key decisions surrounding lockdowns, mask mandates, and ties between Fauci's former agency and the Wuhan laboratory central to the lab leak theory. During the episode - where Patel shared a cigar with Rogan and touched on topics ranging from Covid to UFOs - he revealed the FBI had recovered the phone and hard drives just days before the interview was recorded. Patel did not clarify when the phone was in use, how investigators verified its connection to Fauci, or how the devices were obtained. Nor did he disclose what the FBI's 'multiple investigations' into the pandemic's origin have uncovered so far. It is unclear exactly when the phone was used and how they verified it belonged to Fauci. He also warned against drawing premature conclusions, noting 'everything's not necessarily in there' and that potentially relevant data may have been erased. Still, Patel called the discovery 'a victory for the American people' and said his team is actively reviewing the contents of the devices. Patel said: 'We found it [the devices], and at least we can tell the American people we've been looking because it is of public importance to figure out, did that guy lie? 'Did he intentionally mislead the world and cause countless deaths? 'We owe those answers to the American people, and the best evidence ever is always the people's evidence who created it. So now we're going to go and exploit those hard drives.' 'We did find it [the cell phone], we're not done, we're still looking and we're on the case.' Patel did not specify how his team got the old phone or how they verified it was Fauci's. Generally, a warrant is required to seize a cell phone, even for a government official. There are no publicly available warrants out against Fauci. The FBI and CIA have both asserted they think Covid most likely originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, which was conducting risky experiments on coronaviruses in the years leading up to the pandemic. Some of those experiments were funded by U.S. taxpayer money through grants awarded by Fauci's old department, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Fauci, once seen as an 'adult in the room' amid a chaotic and confusing government response to the initial 2020 outbreak, has seen his sparkling public image take a hit in recent years. Leaked emails show that in early 2020 he commissioned a paper denouncing the lab-leak theory as a conspiracy, then publicized the study at a White House news conference weeks later without disclosing his involvement. He and other public health experts also publicly dismissed the lab leak - with Fauci saying in June 2021 that it was 'a very, very, very, very remote possibility.' It later emerged that, as the head of the NIAID, he presided over the allocation of taxpayer-funded grants for virus-enhancing research at the WIV years before the pandemic began. A federal watchdog found the NIH 'did not effectively monitor' those experiments or check whether they involved pathogens with pandemic risk. Fauci also privately expressed concern the virus may have been the product of a research accident. Internationally, other intelligence agencies have also supported the lab-leak theory. The German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) carried out a secret investigation into the origins of Covid nicknamed Project Saaremaa during the pandemic, sharing the findings with the U.S. in December 2024. Investigators found unpublished dissertations from 2019 and 2020 that allegedly discussed the effects of coronaviruses on the human body. Additionally, uncovered materials revealed Chinese scientists had 'an unusually large amount of knowledge about the supposedly novel virus available at an unusually early stage.' Based on the materials BND agents found and analyzed, they used a 'Probability Index' to measure the reliability of information, which determined the lab-leak theory was 'probable' with an '80 to 95 per cent' certainty. Robert Redfield, former CDC director when the pandemic erupted, also accused American and British health agencies of shutting down concerns over potential lab leaks. He has previously told he is '100 per cent' convinced Covid was the result of scientists becoming infected while carrying out high-risk experiments to boost the infectivity of bat viruses amid low biosecurity in Wuhan labs. Fauci has denied all accusations of Covid being 'covered up' or originating from a lab. Last year he told a U.S. House panel that he had not suppressed lab leak theories or influenced research to discredit it. He has also called accusations that he covered it up 'preposterous.' Patel said: 'My mission has always been to put out the truth, whatever the consequences, whoever it's against. What did Fauci get wrong? From telling people not to wear masks to claiming vaccines stopped infections Don't wear masks, do wear masks As global concern for Covid was surfacing in March 2020, Fauci told Americans that there was 'no need' to wear a face mask. He said they may only help people 'feel a little better', and 'might even block a droplet' — but would not provide good protection. Less than a month later, he was forced into an embarrassing climbdown after it emerged the virus spread via droplets in the air. Fauci later insisted he advised people not to wear masks to ensure there were enough available for hospitals and healthcare centers. Covid did not come from a lab Fauci has repeatedly insisted that Covid did not leak from a lab in China. He called the theory a 'shiny object that will go away,' and brushed aside claims from other top experts as an 'opinion.' Fauci has now backpedaled, saying instead he keeps an 'open mind' although insisting it remains 'most likely' that the virus spilled over from animals to humans. Two shots will stop you catching Covid When the Covid vaccine roll-out was in full swing, Fauci said the immunity from shots made doubly-vaccinated people a 'dead end' for the virus, and even suggested they may no longer need to wear masks. Schools shutdown Schools were closed from March through to August 2020, something Fauci later expressed regret about. He has since admitted he 'should have realized' there would be 'deleterious collateral consequences'.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Reform is a serious political force in Scotland but Tories in trouble
Formerly a seat where the SNP could be confident of winning a substantial majority, Hamilton is now a marginal seat for the first time, with a Labour majority of just 602 votes over the SNP. Reform UK is clearly on the march in Scotland, and this result bears out the surge in support for the party seen in British-wide opinion polls so far this year, with over a quarter of voters who turned out in Hamilton casting their vote for the party. Read more It would be wrong to read too much into one by-election result. By-elections are unusual events, where governments tend to lose support, people may vote in protest and turnout is typically much lower than at Holyrood elections. Nonetheless, the result in Hamilton will matter to all Scotland's parties for its symbolic importance ahead of next May's Scottish Parliament elections. For Scottish Labour, this by-election win will help to reverse the recent narrative of Labour decline. Following the party's slump in the polls over the last 10 months, the result signals that Labour can still win in Scotland and will put wind back in the party's sails. It underlines that listening to and acting on voters' concerns can help to turn the party's fortunes around – Keir Starmer's announcement of a U-turn on cuts to the winter fuel payment may well have helped the party's popularity among voters in Hamilton. The win will also give the UK Labour Party a much-needed boost, after its heavy losses in parts of England at May's local elections, losing the Runcorn by-election to Reform UK and trailing 7 points behind Reform UK in the polls UK-wide. Nigel Farage is less popular in Scotland than he is in England (Image: free) The result is a major blow to the SNP, who were widely tipped to win the seat. While incumbent governments tend to suffer at by-elections, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse is the kind of central belt seat that the SNP will need to retain if it is to hold onto power in Scotland next May. This result is an early sign that that will be a tough contest. The SNP has topped recent national polls, with a double-digit lead over Scottish Labour – a remarkable position for a party that has been in power in Scotland for 18 years. This by-election will be an unwelcome reminder that voters' preferences can and do shift. While John Swinney is widely seen as having steadied the ship since his election as party leader last May – and is the least unpopular of any of the party leaders among voters – this result suggests more turbulent times may lie ahead for the SNP. Reform UK were the unknown quantity ahead of this by-election. Their performance in Hamilton, finishing less than 1,000 votes behind the SNP, proves that the party can attract significant swathes of voters north of the border as well as in England. The result emphasises that Reform UK are now a serious political force in Scotland. Ahead of the next Holyrood elections, the party has a real opportunity to paint itself as the home for voters who want change. While Nigel Farage is less popular in Scotland than he is in England, this does not appear to have been holding the party back in the polls – reflecting that the rise of Reform UK may be being driven by wider public dissatisfaction and the unpopularity of other parties more than by views of its leadership. The result signals continued gloom for the Conservatives in Scotland. While the party was widely expected to come fourth, this was a poor result for Russell Findlay's party, who managed to hang onto their deposit with 6% of the vote. Read more The pattern seen in recent Scotland polls of the Conservatives haemorrhaging voter support to Reform has been borne out at this by-election. On this evidence, the Conservatives have a mountain to climb if they are to convince Scottish voters to lend them their votes next May. Will the result in Hamilton turn out to be a sign of which way the electoral winds are blowing ahead of Holyrood elections next May? It certainly underlines that this is a time of volatility in Scottish politics and shifting voter preferences. While Anas Sarwar and his team will take heart from this win, Scottish Labour's fortunes are closely connected with those of the UK party. How Scotland's voters are feeling about the UK Government's performance under Keir Starmer's leadership is likely to be an important factor shaping voter support at the ballot box. If it is to take seats from the SNP next May, Scottish Labour needs to show those who voted for the UK party at the General Election because of issues like public services, the cost of living and inequality that they were right to do so. Emily Gray, Managing Director, Ipsos Scotland
Edinburgh Reporter
2 hours ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Lorna Slater will stand for leadership and selection
In just under a year's time the Scottish Parliamentary election will have decided who will be running the government for the following five years. As is the way of the polls there are some showing that Labour will win, and others that the SNP will win. The proportional representation by which MSPs are elected is not supposed to return a majority government – it happened only once, unusually, with the SNP under Alex Salmond in 2011. Labour won most seats and most votes in 1999 and 2003 but no overall majority. In 2021 the SNP was one short of a majority (there are 129 seats so the majority is 65). In an effort to do business more easily, then First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, entered into the Bute House Agreement with the Scottish Greens and Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, the co-conveners of the party became government ministers. Now that there is one year before the election Lorna Slater said that her party offers the 'real, hopeful' and 'transformative' change that Scotland needs. We met with Ms Slater on the day when the programme for government was about to be announced by John Swinney the First Minister. She did not believe it would bring many changes, but was proved wrong on one policy – the scrapping of peak rail fares. However the Scottish Greens later responded to the announcement to say that while very welcome and a 'huge win for commuters and climate' the policy change amounted to a U-turn by the government. They also pointed out that this policy was 'initially secured by the Scottish Greens through budget negotiations in 2023 before it was then dropped by the SNP who said the numbers did not stack up to allow them to continue supporting it'. Ahead of the Programme for Government Ms Slater – who hopes to be selected to stand as Green candidate next year, and who hopes to continue as co-leader after an internal election in the summer, said: 'I don't think there'll be any new news. I think it will absolutely be a holding pattern. They don't have a plan for bringing down people's bills, because that would involve having an ambitious heat and buildings bill to insulate homes and improve the grant system and really roll out that programme. 'I think that they're going to kind of curl in on themselves and be unambitious because they're worried about doing anything ambitious before an election.' Out of government Asked if she misses being in government Ms Slater said: 'I really miss the ambitious positive energy we have because we had some really good, ambitious things going, and all the bills that have come out since we've been in government without our influence have been gutted. 'Natural Environment Bill, gutted, heat in buildings Bill, gutted, rent controls watered down. And it just goes to show that with the Greens in there, we were much more ambitious on taking practical action on climate, much more ambitious on tackling landlords, tackling polluting corporations, tackling the vested interests – and the SNP have a lot less interest in that. They have much more interest in keeping things as they are, sort of steadying the ship instead of making big change. And the Greens were about making that big change.' As to the fallout from Scotland's deposit return scheme which has landed the government in court, being sued by Biffa for their expenses getting ready for legislation which did not materialise, she is matter of fact. She said: 'The legislation for that was, of course, passed before I was elected. So in 2020 Scottish Parliament agreed that Scotland would have a deposit return scheme. So that already existed before I was in post, my role was to work with industry to implement that scheme. And that I did, we were weeks away from launching the scheme. 'We had nearly all the producers in Scotland lined up. I think it was 95% of the items that were on shelves in Scotland. The producers of those items had paid their money. They were part of the scheme and we had a workable scheme. It would absolutely have launched on time. It would have had maybe a bit of a rocky start, a bit of a phasing in period, but we absolutely would have launched on time. 'But then because Alister Jack (then Secretary of State for Scotland) interfered with it from February 2023 by putting doubts in the media, (and that was despite the fact that he had stood on Boris Johnson's manifesto to implement a deposit return scheme with with glass), he was able to use the internal market act to veto the scheme. 'Alister Jack never gave any justification or basis for that interference. We asked repeatedly why he didn't want glass in the scheme. He never produced any evidence for that. So that was purely political interference in terms of the scheme itself.' At the time in April 2023 the Scottish Greens called for an investigation into the comments Mr Jack made, saying he had misled the House of Commons. Ms Slater said that this particular interference shows how the Internal Market Act has been used to 'stifle devolution'. She said: ' The deposit return scheme was a fully devolved matter, protecting the environment, recycling schemes – all fully devolved. That the internal market act can be used to undermine Scotland's ambitions and to harm Scottish businesses is a shocking state of affairs.' Under the still relatively new UK government administration she still holds the view that devolution is under threat. She said: 'It's an interesting question about how the Labour government is going to treat this. I have noted of course, that Wales is being allowed to continue forward with a deposit return scheme that has glass in it, even though that does interfere with the Internal market act. So why can't Scotland? Why does Wales get a free pass, and Scotland doesn't. So it isn't clear at all that Keir Starmer is changing direction. He hasn't said he will repeal or even revise the internal market act. So the status quo remains. It depends on the goodwill of individual ministers.' One of the reasons that the Scottish Greens and the SNP made for a relatively easy marriage was over the question of independence on which they agree. Ms Slater said: 'I'm a proponent of Scottish independence, and that is the only way we can be sure to put in place plans and programs that we know won't be interfered with by the UK government.' Whether or not I am selected as a candidate, the Scottish Greens will be standing on being a proudly progressive party of Scottish independence. Other parties, Labour, SNP, have conceded that left ground are moving toward the centre. They're allowing Reform to pull them in that rightward direction. You can see that with Labour, with its anti immigration policies, with its neglect of the social security net, the betrayal of the WASPI women, betrayal of disabled people, people who need benefits to live on – sick and disabled people. 'The Scottish Greens will not betray that ground. We are solidly behind equalities. We are absolutely trans rights supporters. We are absolutely in favour of ambitious work toward net zero. We are not going to give this ground. All of these things are really important to us. Human rights are important to us. A secure social safety net. Taxing the rich to pay for it is something we will we are not shy about saying, the rich for too long, have been under taxed. Have increased their wealth enormously well the poorest suffer. We have hungry children in this country. We also have billionaires. The Scottish Greens don't think that that's right, and that's the ground that we are going to contest the election.' This then shows little change in any policy which the party has stood on before – and their numbers improved at the last election. She continued: 'We are a party of values. We are a value led party. We believe in peace, equality, sustainability and human rights. Radical local democracy. We are not going to change our values, we believe that we set out a vision for a fairer, greener, independent Scotland, and it's how effectively we can persuade people that we have the power to implement such a vision, that it is possible that the future can be brilliant. We just have to decide to make it so. Constituency As to her constituents in Lothians they tell the stories of poverty and lack of benefits that are heard all too often. Ms Slater said that at the top of people's minds is their 'quality of life, and that includes everything from being able to pay their rent, being able to find housing in Edinburgh to anti social behaviour, whether it's in Portobello or Corstorphine. And people are experiencing anti social, social behaviour in the streets, all the usual troubles that go with having an NHS and care system industry and people being able to find places for loved ones in care homes people being able to get medical procedures in a timely manner. 'All those things are, of course, what people are concerned with. We also get a reasonable amount of case work because of decisions of the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). Those are decisions that are not taken it at the Scottish level, but we work with constituents who are, you know, facing exorbitant fees, deportation, uncertainty in their visa status because of paperwork problems, those are all the kind of things we can support people with.' But there is at least one small chink of light. Asked if it is easier to work with the UK Government under Labour she concedes it is 'slightly easier, yes it is slightly easier. The Conservative government was extremely hostile to Scottish interests. Some of their MPs wouldn't take, correspondence from MSPs, wouldn't help our constituents if they went through an MSP – so they had to always go through an MP. 'I think things are definitely more cooperative, but it doesn't solve the problem that so much of what we need to do we can't help people with because it has to go to London, because it's not devolved. 'And every single day we come across things, Oh, can we help with this? No, it's not devolved. If only Scotland were an independent country, we could take action these things, and that is frustrating every single day.' Lorna Slater MSP Like this: Like Related
