Why Use The Stick?

Rhetoric Innes comments on Peter Black's speech and repeats the mistakes Peter did in that speech.

As I posted yesterday I think that what Peter said needed saying and I agree with most of it. But it makes it harder for me to see it as a honest, passionate plea for a Yes campaign when he peppered it with petty point-scoring.

What on earth does London's mad ID-card scheme have to do with establishing a Yes campaign, or Edwina's new Health policy. Even more bizarre, what do ASBO's and curfews have to do with it?| Nothing of course, but I guess that as a politician Peter Black is unable of resisting the urge to try and score points.

Does Peter honestly believe that the best way to get Rhodri and Ieuan to start a cross-party campaign with his Liberal Democrats by calling them "devo-doubters" and by slagging them off on affordable homes and "Y Byd". His speech should have been a call to Labour and Plaid to work together along with the Lib Dems to bring forth a Yes campaign, not just an attempt to bash them in public.

Rhetoric Innes does the exact same thing, stating that:

If you are reading this outside of Wales. It is the Welsh Liberal democrats who are at the fore of Pro-Devolution. The Separatist Plaid Cymru do not want this compromise. Both the Welsh Conservatives and Welsh Labour do not recognise or choose not to recognise that Separatist Nationalism will increase under a Tory government with people in Wales feeling disenfranchised at being ruled by a government they largely did not vote in.

Yes it gives us all a good laugh to imagine the Lib Dems being at the fore of anything, but again you have to ask whether calling Plaid "separatist" and telling the Tories that they'll be a government that nobody wants is the best way to promote a cross-party campaign.

If you want everyone to co-operate and work together for the good of a Yes campaign, don;t start by slagging them all off in an attempt for party political gain.

I Say Yes, You Say No

Peter Black made a speech in Plenary today calling for the establishment of a Yes campaign for further powers - I can't agree more.

The One Wales Agreements commits the government to a referendum before 2011 with the caveat that they can pull out if they think they'll lose it. I understand the need for the caveat, if it was clear that a referendum would end up in a 1979 drubbing then it would set back further devolution for a decade or two. But there's an increasing worry that Labour and Plaid are planning to rely on that clause just because they cannot be guaranteed of a win.

That is poppycock.

Washed-up Has-been Peter Hain is telling us that there shouldn't be a referendum before 2011 because people don't want further powers. Of course what he really means is that Labour MP's don't want further powers. When he says that the majority of Labour members and voters are against it then he should cast his mind back to last year when his party's members voted for the One Wales Agreement by about 79% to 21%. If it was only Peter Hain making that argument then it would be easy enough to ignore, nobody listens to him anymore anyway (as proven by the 79% who wanted a coalition with Plaid even though Peter had ruled it out, and that was before his disgrace and resignation). But he isn't the only one saying it. We keep hearing that we need to be sure we'll win before we announce a referendum, that we need to be sure that we'll win before we launch a Yes campaign.

That is poppycock.

The whole point, the only point, of a Yes campaign is to convince Welsh voters that further powers is a good thing and that they should vote Yes (that's why we call it a "Yes" campaign!). Unless we put forward the case for further powers, the undecided voters will not be convinced. How can we win enough support to be guaranteed a victory if we never start campaigning for a Yes vote? It simply makes no sense.

Polls and research show more people supportive of further powers than are against it. There's enough undecided to swing the vote either way. But there's no use sitting on our arses waiting for those undecided to switch to the Yes camp, the only way that will happen is if we set up a Yes camp and start using our energies to convince them it's worth voting Yes.

It's about time Rhodri and Ieuan pulled their finger out and start putting the case for further powers.

Sunday Sillies

Sunday is a day of rest - no work, no night out to plan, nothing to do. That's why we get the big fat papers on Sunday and that's why Sunday's are usually the day bloggers, commentators and forum users bicker about stupid things to waste time.

Today seems to fit that bill perfectly. The News of the World prints a story saying that the One Wales Government is going to scrap free prescriptions. Straight away alarm bells should be ringing in a reader's head. Firstly, it's the News of the World. Now while that should be enough to make the reader suspicious of the truth of the story there's plenty more.

The paper's source is from Whitehall, that makes him an English Health Department source. Recent months have seen plenty of tension between Edwina in the Bay and Ben Bradshaw, the English Health Minister. If the WAG were about to scrap their free prescription policy then you can be sure that Bradshaw's department would not be the first to know. Another reason to cast doubt on it all is the reason given, namely that Doctor are prescribing over the counter medicine and that the cost of the policy has ballooned due to all those millionaires abusing it. As I've noted before, the rise in the amount of prescriptions issued since the scrapping is virtually the same as the rises that occurred every year for the past half decade.

So surely anyone with any knowledge of Welsh politics would have written this story off as Whitehall mischief making. Apparently not. Tory Health Spokesman Jonathan Morgan is quoted as saying:

"This news destroys the Welsh Assembly Government’s remaining fragments of credibility over health policy. Ministers in Cardiff must now give clear answers as to the future of this initiative."

Glyn Davies also seems desperate to believe the story while Miss Wagstaff, not a fan of free prescriptions, barely pauses to question it, and the same is true of David Jones MP.

Personally I'm no big fan of free prescriptions. As long as the means test limit is set high enough to cover the people who need it then people like me who earn enough not to be on the breadline should fork out for our pills. Having said that I don't see it as a disastrous policy, neither do I see it as just a gimmick. After all our Health Service is supposed to be free, something it simply would not be if we paid for our prescriptions. But even though I'm not a fan of the policy, I'm not going to jump on an obviously false story to try and make a political point of it.

Glyn Davies believes that this is a huge story unless the One Wales Government issue a categorical denial with no weasel words.

"The story in today's News of the World is absolute nonsense. We told the newspaper on Friday that we have no intention of 'pulling the plug' on our free prescription scheme, which is highly popular, and we're delighted that Scotland and Northern Ireland are following our lead. We're at a loss to understand where this story has come from"

Categorical enough for you?

Media Mess

So ITV Wales is, for all extent and purposes, no longer. The industry regulator, Ofcom, has announced that Welsh news coverage on the third channel will be reduced from 320 minutes a week to 240. Even worse is that non-news will fall from 240 minutes to just 90.

What this means in practical terms is that the evening Wales Today will be the only Welsh news on the channel, with the mid morning and weekend lunchtime programmes dropped. As for non-news ITV Wales' current flagship programmes like Wales This Week, Sharp End, Soccer Sunday, Fishlock's Wild Tracks and The Ferret will find themselves fighting for scraps.

ITV Wales' head of Drama was scathing in judging the proposals:

“This is the kind of vested interests and cultural arrogance we have seen over the years where they have deliberately undermined our attempts to represent Wales on the UK network."

It's already clear that coverage of devolved politics in Wales is abysmal. With the UK written media practically ignoring the Assembly all together and the Western Mail's circulation flatlining under 40,000 and seemingly concerned only in copying and pasting Adam Price's blog posts the only place the Welsh public learn about devolved politics is through their TV set. With the BBC being attacked for ignoring devolved politics and ITV now cutting their coverage to the bones things look quite bleak.

The barrenness of the media coverage was reflected by the recent poll which showed that over 30% of Welsh people interested in politics got their fix from the internet. Credit where it's due, the BBC Wales news website churn out plenty of stories, but, being the BBC, they are lifeless and simply contain quotes from government and opposition politics. The same pattern is employed by the Western Mail and her sister paper. What this means is that there is no-one left to actually investigate Welsh politics, to dig deep into her secrets and complexities. If Peter Hain had just been the Welsh Secretary and not the Secretary for Works and Pensions, would he have escaped disgrace? Because I can guarantee you that neither BBC Wales, ITV Wales nor the Western Mail would have any ability or interest to expose him.

With the possible end of Wales this Week and the Sharp End, and a further cut in Welsh news, what we are left with in this country are a few reporters. What we need is investigative reporters, but don't hold your breath.

True To Their Word

Apparently we now have a wannabe official No campaign. (Such campaigns are not official until the Electoral Commission specifies them as "the chosen one", that won't happen until we actually have a referendum called).

It seems that someone had a quiet word in David Davies' ear about his suggestion of going with the slogan "Wales for the Union" so the name is now "True Wales". While the idea behind the name is that:

"members felt that those who support Wales' presence in the United Kingdom have been for too long unfairly categorised as "anti-Welsh". True Wales aims to represent the true feelings of the huge majority of people in Wales who wish to remain in the United Kingdom"

Hmm....representing the huge majority of people in Wales who wish to remain in the UK? Funny, I thought that we were talking about a referendum on further powers, something that apparently more of "people in Wales" (not "Welsh people" note) support than oppose.

As a flashback to 1997 True Wales is led by a Tory and an unknown Labour Councillor (what happened, was even Llew Smith refusing to work with you David?). Apparently the group consists of Labour, Tories and Independents, although no names yet apart from those two - I wonder if there will be anyone else we've heard of (apart from the other Welsh Tory MP's, who we can safely assume will follow David anywhere).

So what kind of debate can we expect from True Wales? The fact that they're already talking of representing those who wish to stay in UK gives you a hint of what their tactic will be. The same theme can be seen in these two recent statements from True Wales' leading men:

"...the devastating impact separation from Britain would have on Wales."

"Granting full lawmaking powers to the Assembly would be a huge step along the rocky road to full independence for Wales, which is what many people in the Yes camp actually want. Make no mistake – independence would drag Wales down to Soviet-style poverty"

So expect True Wales to try and turn the referendum into one on independence instead of debating what the referendum actually is for, a devolved Parliament, weaker than that of Scotland. It also seems that they'll colour this theme with sweeping statements like above, telling us that there is no way on God's earth Wales could survive a Yes vote and independence without becoing a third world ghetto.

Will the formation of True Wales mean a Yes campaign is set up soon? There will be lot of pressure on Labour and Plaid to form one but don't hold your breath, I have a feeling the One Wales Government has decided to wait until after the All Wales Convention before they make any such move. While that may or may not be a good idea, those in favour of a Yes vote should better start banging their drums a little louder, even if the first signs from the No campaign seem a bit weak. After all, it's important that they remember that the 1997 No campaign that so very nearly derailed devolution was also lead by an unknown Labour Councillor from the Valleys.

Wow, Thanks Big G!

So here's those brand spanking new promises made in Brown's big comeback speech, the things that will benefit all of us who have young kids or are old, poor or sick and make us all love Labour again...

1. Free drugs for cancer patients

2. Free universal check ups for over 40's

3. Free broadband vouchers for low-income families

4. Free nursery for 2 year olds

Anyone see the link?

Here's a hint. When Gordon said this:

"In April a Labour Britain will become the first country in the whole world to offer free universal check ups for everyone over 40."

he was very much lying.

The Times thought they'd spotted the link, but still managed to mess it up...

"Free universal check-ups for the over-40s? Extension of nursery places? No prescription charges for cancer patients? A commissioner for victims of crime? More children connected to the internet? All England and Wales only, I'm afraid."

I despair sometimes!

British Bull

Vaughan Roderick points us in the direction of a paper by the Minister of State Liam Byrne on Britishness. Apparently:

"Britishness is quite simply one of the most important associations that we have; it is a code, shaped by our history and reinforced by our everyday experience, which defines so much of the way we look at the world"

Really?

One of the days suggested as a potential bank Holiday to celebrate our Britishness was St George's Day! As to how we should celebrate it, Liam Byrne has his opinions again. Not too much idolising of the Union Jack (thank god for that!), by promoting posters of iconic figures like Churchill, by incorporating ex-Empire countries (oh yes, I'm sure they'd love that!), another Queen's speech (isn't one per year enough?!). Finally there is a suggestion that celebrities with the right values should take part in the national celebrations. Who are these celebrities? Liam suggests David Beckham and Kate Moss. Ah yes, a cocaine addict and a multi-multi-multi millionaire who moved to Spain and America - the perfect values for Britishness!

The document is also a masterstroke of ignoring the elephant in the room. In a 96 page document about Britishness today the word "devolution" isn't mentioned once!

Wales For Whom?

A few weeks ago I asked this:

The second question that has to be asked is: Who on earth will run the No campaign this time round? The Electoral Commission gets to decide which No group is to be the "official" one they will be seriously hindered this time round by the fact that there will be no major party to start the campaign. Highlights of the 1997 count gave us Michael Ancram and Nick Bourne (how times have changed!) telling us how bad devolution would be - who will be the criticiser in chief this time round? It seems that the No campaign will have to be lead by Labour Welsh MP's who desperately tried to stop the One Wales Coalition and their Tory counterparts.

Well David Davies MP has decided that he wants to be the No campaign's knight on a white horse and has declared that he will be launching the No campaign. He has already had what he describes as "tentative talks with one ex-Labour MP" (in other words - Llew Smith!) and he's open to suggestions for a name for the No campaign. His personal favorite is "Wales for the Union".

As someone who will vote, and probably do some campaigning, for the Yes campaign my reaction to this news is: BRILLIANT!

Firstly it will hopefully jolt Labour and Plaid Cymru to actually move on the issue and set up the Yes campaign. While the All Wales Convention trundles along anyone with a calendar can see that by the time they finish there won't be much times for a campaign and vote before 2011 so let's get the ball rolling on the campaigning side.

Secondly, it's David Davies, the eternal clown of Welsh politics. The very fact that he wants to call the campaign "Wales for the Union" shows how out of touch the man is. While the Yes/No split is relatively close at the moment, the way to bolster the Yes vote is certainly not to make voters think that they're voting for the Union if they vote No. The way to convince people to vote No is to say that it is a vote for Wales, to protect Wales, to improve Wales - not to tell them that they're voting for the Union. If David Davies starts printing posters with "Wales for the Union. Vote No" on them then all the Yes campaign need to do to win is print posters with "Wales for Wales. Vote Yes" and they'll have the referendum in the bag!

Finally, it's David Davies (yes I know I've already said that but bear with me!). As I explained in my previous post the Electoral Commission will have to chose a campaign group to be the official group. David Davies is clearly angling to be the man who leads the group. For a strong No campaign he will need cross party support. Clearly there is cross party support for a No campaign, at least Tory/Labour - I'm not as confident as David is that he'll have the support of many Lib Dems, but how many of those will want to be linked to David Davies? While Llew Smith may well be happy to throw his hat in, how will Chris Bryant or Ian Lucas feel about getting into bed with their Tory counterparts?

Interesting times!

The Lord Does Cometh

I haven't blogged yet about the row between Alun Michael's merry men and the Lord of the Assembly. Having read Peter Black's take on the matter here I don't feel there's any purpose in me saying anything - just read what he says!

Lessons From 1997

I've just re-watched ITV's online highlights of the 1997 referendum result night and a few things struck me. (Warning: Very long and probably boring post. Maybe you should stop reading here!)

Firstly it is important to remember that before the ballot boxes were opened in 1997 everyone assumed that the Yes campaign had won easily. That's what the polls said, that's what the media said and that's what both the Yes and No campaign thought. You won't need my reminder that in truth the result was very close and that until the last two results came in (Gwynedd and Carmarthenshire) the Yes campaign had virtually conceded defeat. This is a lesson that a Yes campaign in a new referendum has to take heed of. While the few polls that we have show support for a Parliament, there is a hell of a lot of work to be done by supporters of devolution if Wales is to say Yes again. Even with every major political party on board the result is far from certain. Back in 1997 only the Tories and a few Labour members supported the No campaign, and this was at a time when the Tories were in tatters remember. One of the leaders of the campaign was a Labour Councillor (Carys something, my memory fails me), not in the least bit well known, not in the least bit charismatic and yet the No campaign came within less than 7,000 votes.

The second question that has to be asked is: Who on earth will run the No campaign this time round? The Electoral Commission gets to decide which No group is to be the "official" one they will be seriously hindered this time round by the fact that there will be no major party to start the campaign. Highlights of the 1997 count gave us Michael Ancram and Nick Bourne (how times have changed!) telling us how bad devolution would be - who will be the criticiser in chief this time round? It seems that the No campaign will have to be lead by Labour Welsh MP's who desperately tried to stop the One Wales Coalition and their Tory counterparts.

Surprisingly perhaps, such a situation may harm the No campaign more than in 1997, when the only MP I remember opposing the plans was Llew Smith (Yes, even Don Touhig was in favour). Back in 1997 there was no AM/MP divide because we didn't have any AM's. How will Welsh voters react to having their MP's on one side and AM's on the other? I can't answer that question but the only guide we currently have is the vote at Labour's Conference when the One Wales Coalition was supported by about 3.5/1 of Labour members, even though the majority of MP's opposed it. While there's no doubt that such a majority would not be repeated in the Tory voters it does show that, at least in Labour, people are more willing to listen to their AM's than MP's (obviously I am generalising here, there will be Labour MP's in support as well).

Another issue that the 1997 result highlighted was that Powys, where both Lib Dem seats were held at the time, voted heavily against the Assembly. While the Lib Dem party supported devolution in 1997 and will do so again in a future referendum, will they be able to carry their voters along this time? Honestly I'm not so sure. While Labour and Plaid have always had a "Welsh" wing in their parties, and the Tories have been working hard to develop one, I can't quite put my finger on the Lib Dems. I wouldn't be too surprised to see the Lib Dem areas, at least in Powys, rejecting further devolution against the wishes of their party.

Obviously, just as in 1997, Plaid would expect to have the unwavering support of their voters for devolution. One interesting sidenote from the 1997 campaign was that Plaid did not immediately voice their support when the referendum was announced. their spin at the time was that they didn't think it was enough and might campaign against it. From what people have said since it seems that this was a conscious ploy by Dafydd Wigley to distance Plaid from the proposals so that they wouldn't "taint" it in the eyes of Labour voters who, in 1979, had seen devolution as Plaid's desire not their own party's. The effect of this can be seen when you review the 1997 count night, there is a thousand and one references, by both sides, to "the government's proposals" and "Labour's plans".

Whatever the result across Wales in a new referendum one place where I would expect a big change is Cardiff. The capital voted overwhelmingly against devolution in 1997 but I cannot see the same happening again. In the last 12 years Cardiff has really grown into its role as the Capital of Wales and I'd be surprised if it voted against again.

One final note: When we talk of the Assembly these days, more specifically about the Labour group, we always plant Huw Lewis and Leighton Andrews together as the "anti-devolution" side who think more like Labour's MP's than AM's. When Huw lewis opposed the Labour-Plaid coalition and then lost his place in Government a lot of people commented on how Leighton had kept quiet even though he surely opposed the coalition. Back in 1997 Leighton Andrews was one of the main organisers of the Yes campaign and was interviewed fro the Yes HQ throughout the night. While his hatred of the Nationalists is well-known, have people been a bit hasty in placing him in the anti-devolution camp?

Goodbye Mr M?

The annual rumours about the death of the the Welsh Office are making the rounds again with several of the London papers (and the Wales on Sunday) reporting that the Ministry for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland will be merged into a Ministry of the Nations.

Plaid Cymru and the Tories have lashed out, insisting that this is a snub to Wales and will delay the progress of LCO's through Parliament. Labour MP Paul Flynn went on to the airwaves saying that such a move made perfect sense while Plaid's Parliamentary Leader Elfyn Llwyd disagreed, saying that

I believe it would be foolish to take this step at this moment in time

Cheryl Gillian, Tory Shadow Welsh Minister agreed with Plaid, saying that:

Quite frankly, if Labour does make that move it will say everything about what Wales means to Labour

Now wait a second! We've got (apparently) Labour for the closure and Plaid and the Tories slating them for it? Here's a historical pop quiz for you:

1. Between 2003 and 2005, who was the Tory Shadow Welsh Minister?

Answer: They didn't have one!


2. Only 10 months ago, who argued for the close of the Welsh Office, stating that:

Today the Wales Office is acting as a brake on the Assembly Government’s ambitions, doing the bidding of Whitehall departments in seeking to restrict the legislative powers passed to Cardiff Bay

Answer: Plaid Cymru MP Adam Price


3. Which party responded to Adam Price's call to close the Welsh Office with the words:

This is typically ill thought through hyperbole from Adam Price, which may make a good headline but demonstrates a total ignorance

Answer: Yep, that would be Labour (through ex-Welsh Minister Peter Hain)

How times change! Personally I agree with Paul Flynn, we don't need a Welsh Office any more. When Peter Hain was the Governor of Wales the Welsh Office was not Wales' voice in the Cabinet, it was the Cabinet's voice in Wales. Since Paul Murphy took charge it's not even the Cabinet's voice in Wales, it's just trundling along, apparently doing nothing. Ask yourself this, when was the last time you saw Paul Murphy on the news?

As a final note on this topic, the Western Mail has always had a rigid formula to writing political stories, it goes like this:

1. Party A says this (10 paragraphs)
2. Party B is angry that Party A said that (3 paragraphs)
3. Party C disagrees with Party A (1 paragraph)
4. The Lib Dems said something or other (1 sentence)

While it's a pretty boring formula, it makes writing articles very easy for the "journalists" at the paper, as long as they make sure they write down the quotes right. It now seems that they can't even do that right! I'm pretty sure that Tory Cheryl Gillian was saying she'd be disappointed if Labour closed GWYDYR House (Welsh Office's London HQ) not, as the Western Mail says, GWYNFOR House (Plaid's Cardiff HQ, about to be vacated for plush new offices down the Bay (also called Tŷ Gwynfor!)) (Hat tip: Miss Wagstaff Presents)

Federal Friends?

A couple of the newspapers today are winking and nudging about informal talks between David Cameron's Tories and the SNP about what happens after Labour are removed from government sometime in the next two years.

The Tories' worry is that Glasgow East has proven that Alex Salmond knows exactly what he's doing in delaying the independence referendum until after the next General Election. They have looked at the by-election results and have come to two conclusions:

1. They will win the next general election with a comfortable majority, and

2. Scottish voters now see the SNP as the alternative to Labour, leaving the Tories with only a couple of seats up north

The Tories know damn well what the result of that will be. Alex Salmond will have a field day (or, to be more specific, a field year!) and will not miss a single opportunity to decry the Tory government's lack of mandate in Scotland. While this may or may not result in a yes vote for independent it would undoubtedly make David Cameron's first year in office very very hard.

The Herald states that:

It would benefit the Conservative Party on both sides of the border if David Cameron pre-empted this by having informal, exploratory talks with First Minister Salmond about granting far more powers, which must include taxation to the Scottish Government, while making it clear that unless a referendum decided otherwise, this would occur within the Union.

But the London Daily Mail goes further, saying that such talks are already ongoing:

That is why, I can reveal, allies of Cameron have entered into informal talks with the SNP over recent months. Their objective is to save the union by working out a new kind of constitutional settlement for Scotland...An incoming Tory administration would need to meet Alex Salmond's demands that the Scottish Parliament should have massive new powers over taxation and public spending. In domestic terms, a Scottish administration would be entirely self-governing and have complete command over economic policy. And yet the union could be maintained through the retention of shared armed forces, and foreign policy, and the monarchy.

Is this the start of a Federal UK instead of full blow independence? And where does it leave Wales?

The Numbers Game

MP's have today called on the Welsh Assembly to stop sending them so many pesky LCO's request. Apparently the Assembly's thirst for new power has caught the MP's off guard, and they just cannot keep up with the workload. There are 11 LCO's working their way through the complicated mess of a system at the moment, and the MP's are throwing their toys out of the pram, insisting that they only expected four or five.

Back in late 2006 the Lord that is our Presiding Officer suggested that the Assembly would propose 18 LCO's during the first year of the new system. His prediction was shouted down by Labour, who insisted that:

"We've been working on the assumption of about four or five.This is a little bit wide of the mark from Dafydd Elis-Thomas"

In fact, according to Peter Black, 18 was a much more accurate figure and that the Assembly would have reached it if the One Wales Government weren't holding back.

This fresh moaning from the MP's only serves as further evidence that the whole Devolution 1.1 dreamt up by Rhodri and Peter Hain (remember him!) to keep their MP's happy was always going to be a mess. The UK Parliament passed 31 acts last year, the Scottish Parliament 17. Did they really expect the Assembly to only want to legislate on 4 matters per year?

The so-called "senior Labour figure" back in 2006 went on to stick the boot into the Presiding Officer by stating:

"It's worth remembering that he's quite far away from the process of deciding how the new system will work."

Looking at how things panned out you must wonder whether it was the MP's who have been a bit far away from the process of how the system works!

The End of Englandandwales

The first Welsh made law since the days of Hywel Dda is about to come into force. The NHS Redress Bill, a bill making it easier to receive compensation after negligent treatment from the NHS, is awaiting the Royal Seal - the final stage of enacting any law.

A new Seal has been designed for the Queen to stamp the law. It features the Crown, the four lions standard, the words "Pleidiol Wyf I'm Gwlad" and, bizarrely, the four plants of the Home Nations - English Rose, Welsh Leek, Irish Clover and Scottish Thistle.

Although there's been Wales-Only laws before in modern times (e.g. Welsh Language Act 1993) this is the first piece of law made by Wales for Wales.

While UK laws will still refer to Englandandwales, on the approval of this first Welsh law both England and Wales will finally be separate legal entities - at least in Civil law.

Something of the Night

Wendy Alexander appeared on the Scottish Politics Show yesterday, and gosh was it painful. She seems to have been left dazed and confused by the past week or so, and is trying desperately to portray herself, and Labour, as the "winners" of the happenings of the last week. Listening to her mumble and stutter it reminded me of Michael Howard's famous "Did you threaten to overrule" interview in that she simply couldn't answer the question put to her.

Clearly Wendy had prepared a stock answer to the expected question on the referendum (something to do with "exposing the SNP's hollowness" and "Gordon Brown has endorsed my right to choose tactics") and stuck by them, even when they didn't answer the questions asked!

You can see the interview here. Thankfully Ordovicius has provided a transcript of the interview, and it deserves to be quoted here...

Glenn Campbell: Factual question first of all: Who is the leader of the Labour Party in Scotland?

Wendy Alexander MSP: [sighs] Gordon Brown is the leader of the Labour Party and I am leader of the Labour Party in the Scottish Parliament, and I think that goes to the heart of this issue, because...

Glenn Campbell: He's the leader in Scotland as well as elsewhere in the country..

Wendy Alexander MSP: Yes.

Glenn Campbell: In those circumstances then, when he's told the Telegraph newspaper this morning that he was "not persuaded" of the case of a referendum, was he speaking for the Scottish Labour Party?

Wendy Alexander MSP: No and he wouldn't seek to do so. What he was saying is laying out his position on the referendum. Where Gordon and I are at one is we want to expose the hollowness of the SNP and I have the First Minister's -Prime Minister's support- in pursuing whatever tactics are right in the Scottish Parliament. I mean this goes to the heart of the devolution settlement...

Glenn Campbell: But this is fascinating, you're saying that the Prime Minister who is as you've acknowledged the leader of the Labour Party everywhere, that his position is not the same as the position of the Scottish Labour Party.

Wendy Alexander MSP: No, what the Prime Minister said to me this week was that he supported my right to pursue whatever tactics we need to pursue in the Scottish Parliament to expose the hollowness of the SNP's position, and what we've learned this week is that the SNP are unwilling to let Scotland speak...

Glenn Campbell: We'll come onto that in a moment. Is this your universal declaration of the independence for the Labour Party at Holyrood?

Wendy Alexander MSP: No, far from it. What I've been about is so we can say that the SNP have been in power for a year, it's quite clear that their agenda is to fray the relationship with the rest of the UK, they want to parade around Scotland claiming there's support for independence, manifestly there's not...

Glenn Campbell: Are you going to toe the London-Labour Party line?

Wendy Alexander MSP: No what it's..it's not about towing a line it's about tactics in the Scottish Parliament to harry and expose the dishonesty of the SNP is one for Labour in the Scottish Parliament, and I have the support of the Labour Party in doing that.

Glenn Campbell: Even if that means gambling with the constitutional future of Scotland?

Wendy Alexander MSP: I don't think it's gambling with the constitutional future of Scotland to say we trust the people. I mean a year ago Labour in Scotland lost an election and I said we would listen. We've listened to people in Scotland and I think two things they want is that we look again at devolution, and through the Calman Commission which I proposed we're doing that, and the second thing is that Scotland does want to have its say and I think in a moment you'll have the Tories on...they have to explain why they think Scotland shouldn't have a say in the matter, and the SNP have to tell us why they don't believe Scotland should have a chance to speak before the next general election.

Glenn Campbell: Okay, well can you help us with a few things: If the Prime Minister is not persuaded of the case for an independence referendum why did you tell Newsnight Scotland on Tuesday that he had endorsed your call?

Wendy Alexander MSP: I said that he had endorsed my right to pursue whatever tactics were right in the Scottish Parliament to expose the SNP, including my right to call on them.

Glenn Campbell: What you were asked was, did the Prime Minister endorse your call for a referendum and you answered 'Yes'.

Wendy Alexander MSP: The Prime Minister has endorsed my right as the leader of Labour in the Scottish Parliament to do whatever we think it takes to expose the hollowness of the SNP.

Glenn Campbell: But that's not what you said.

Wendy Alexander MSP: Well let me make this clear. On Wednesday the SNP refused our challenge, they confirmed it again on Thursday...

Glenn Campbell: But..you said you had spoken to the Prime Minister earlier that evening, and when asked directly if he endorsed your call for a referendum, you said 'Yes'. That's not true.

Wendy Alexander MSP: He has endorsed the right of Labour in the Scottish Parliament to lead on how we expose the SNP in the Scottish Parliament.

Glenn Campbell: But he has not endorsed your call for an early referendum.Wendy Alexander MSP: He's endorsed the right of Labour in Scotland...Glenn Campbell: Has he endorsed your call for a referendum?

Wendy Alexander MSP: Well I mean understandably I am not -and this is important- I am not calling on the Prime Minister in Westminster to pursue a referendum. I think people would think that was a very odd thing to happen in Westminster. This is about whether in Scotland...

Glenn Campbell: Isn't Westminster the only parliament that can call a referendum that would be binding?

Wendy Alexander MSP: Well, the SNP have put forward a proposal to call for a referendum in Scotland, we've said that there's no blank cheque but we will look at that issue, and they've declined, declined the chance to let Scotland speak...

Glenn Campbell: But obviously Gordon Brown has declined the opportunity to back your call for an early referendum on independence. Isn't the truth in all of this that what you did was try to bounce him into support by broadcasting his support on Newsnight on Tuesday?

Wendy Alexander MSP: No, I think what yo see is the press having a lot of fun this week. The big issue...I mean look at the press today, the Prime Minister is clear in his support for me, as people know we're great friends, we go back a long way, the issue is whether the tactics for pursuing the SNP in Scotland is the arena where Labour in Scotland lead in the Scottish Parliament, we have done so this week, goodness me, you spent years telling us that we should take the initiative. We take the initiative, put the SNP behind the eight ball, and the SNP's bluff was called. They are as yellow as the colour yellow that supports their party.

Glenn Campbell: Do you accept though that the SNP's referendum is now the only chance of a public vote on Scotland's constitutional future?

Wendy Alexander MSP: No, well self-evidently it's not. I mean the Tories and the Liberals have to explain to people why they believe that Scots have no right to speak on this issue. What happened this week and what history will record is that Labour was saying 'We do think'. This issue's been around for thirty years, the SNP are lying when they say a majority of people in Scotland supports independence...

Glenn Campbell: But this position you've already clarified is not Labour's position. This is Wendy Alexander's position. It may be the position of the Labour group at Holyrood but it is not the Labour Party's position, it's not the Prime Minister's position, it's not the position of the UK cabinet, including your own brother. It's your position, you tried to bounce them, and it didn't work.

Wendy Alexander MSP: No. The decision as to whether the referendum has support in the Scottish Parliament is a matter for the Labour group in the Scottish Parliament. Part of devolution is to say we will harry the SNP to bring forward a bill to let Scotland choose, and the SNP are not letting us do so.

Glenn Campbell: Well they say that they'll bring forward their bill on January 2010, and they say that they'd like to hold the referendum in the autumn of 2010 after the last possible date for the UK general election. In those circumstances will you back their bill?

Wendy Alexander MSP: What we've said is that we do want Scotland to choose, we'll scrutinise their bill, I've been saying that all week, what is deeply dishonest...

Glenn Campbell: Will you back their bill though?

Wendy Alexander MSP: Well there's no blank cheques here. We want to see the bill, we want to see the question, but I...

Glenn Campbell: But instinctively you're in favour of a referendum now?

Wendy Alexander MSP: I have called the SNP's bluff. They will not let Scotland speak.

Glenn Campbell: They're sticking to their manifesto commitment!

Wendy Alexander MSP: No, the reason for this is they want to fray the relationship with the rest of the UK for the whole of the foreseeable future...

Glenn Campbell: Now I understand something of the politics of independence, what I don't understand yet in this interview: whether or not you are going to lead Labour MSPs to support an independence referendum in 2010?

Wendy Alexander MSP: We have said that the people of Scotland should be allowed to speak and we will not vote down the opportunity for Scotland to speak, but we will want to harry them on things like what the question is, what the process is, we think it is right after thirty years that Scotland be given the chance to speak, and I just want to say...

Glenn Campbell: But this is really important, because you're now saying...I'd like you to clarify, are you saying here right now that you are going to back the SNP's independence referendum -with a couple of caveats- and theefore there shall be a referendum before the next Holyrood elections?

Wendy Alexander MSP: Well we have said this week that we believe that the voice of Scotland should be heard and the SNP are running scared, and they have got to stop claiming as Nicola Sturgeon claimed this week that there is majority support for independence. The truth is that they are running scared and they are trying to wait for a time that is politically oportune to them and they have also made clear this week, most importantly, that they are willing to put David Cameron into number 10...

It hurts just to read it doesn't it!

The Case For The Union

Gordon Brown made a strong case for the Union in his speech to his Scottish party last week. Here's part of it...

"But what matters even more are the common values we share across the United Kingdom: values we have developed together over the years that are rooted in liberty, in fairness and tolerance, in enterprise, in civic initiative and internationalism.

These values live in the popularity of our common institutions from the NHS, the BBC, to the Queen - and even more recently in UK-wide support for the Olympics, Children in Need, Comic Relief, Make Poverty History and action on climate change"

In other words - don't vote SNP in May or you won't get to wear a red nose once a year!

Spot the Difference

When the white paper that eventually became the Government of Wales Act 2006 was published the words used to describe it by many were a mess, a fudge and a compromise.

As the white paper became a bill and then statute there was many a non-Labour voice criticising it for being confusing and that it would result in no-one quite knowing what the Assembly could or could not do.

While the constant bickering between London and Cardiff over the LCO's suggest those critics may be right, it's hard to blame the GoWA2006's muddles for the mess this week concerning the protection of NHS staff.

London wants extra laws to protect NHS staff from abuse by patients and guests. These were published with fanfare last week and it was only a matter of time before someone asked whether Welsh nurses would get the same protection. Welsh health Minister Edwina Hart thought not, and the London Justice Department semed to agree, although they were hopeful of convincing the Assembly to copy the new laws so that they apply in Wales. A Ministry of Justice statement said:

"Health is a devolved matter in Wales ... We are discussing the issue of the extension of this provision to NHS premises in Wales with the Department of Health, Wales Office and the Welsh Assembly Government."

But wait a sec, we're talking about new criminal laws here, not Health policy. Surely that has nothing to do with the Welsh Assembly? It was only last month that Peter Hain was slapping Rhodri Morgan down over the issue of a smacing ban, saying that it was outside the Assembly's powers. How can the Assembly decide whether or not they want to implement these new criminal laws then? 24 hours later, cue a second statement from the Ministry of Justice...

"Health is a devolved matter in Wales ... We are discussing the issue of the extension of this provision to NHS premises in Wales with the Wales Office and the Department of Health".

The two obvious questions here, firstly who was it that made the rushed phone call to the MoJ to correct them, I'm prety sure it wasn't Edwina or Rhodri! Secondly how on earth was our Health Minister, along with the London Ministry of Justice, unaware that Wales were not abe to make its own criminal law!

(Thanks to Betsan for the quotes of the statements)

I'll Protect You Boyos

Here we all were, thinking that a cut (or is that a cull?) in the ranks of Welsh MP's was a forgone conclusion if a referendum was won. We considered Scotland, who maturely accepted in 1997 that there was much less work for their MP's now and that it would be quite unfair for them to continue to be overepresented at Westminster. They duly carried out their cull with a minimum of fuss.

But our new Mr Secretary has shown all these assumptions to be wrong. By carefully looking at each argument and thoroughly discrediting them with slick advocacy and intellectual pondering he has made us all realise that we need all those MP's desperately.

Well, his actual words were that it would be "bonkers" to reduce the number of Welsh MP's - but we must assume that he had done the thinking, slick advocacy and intellectual pondering alone in the shower.

Deja Vu?

Paul Murphy, October 2000

Paul Murphy warned that voters want better public services ahead of further constitutional change.

Paul Murphy, January 2008

"No [I will not be banging the drum for more powers], I will be trying to ensure good services for the people of Wales."

Just hours into the job and he's already dusted down his "how to answer questions about more poers" book!

London Rules OK

Rhodri Morgan, on today's Politics Show, revealed that the message he had gotten, loud and clear, from London was that unless the LCO on Child Protection expressly ruled out a smacking ban, London would torpedo the whole thing, giving Wales no additional control over that area.

This is like the bully in the playground not only demanding a penalty for a non-existent foul, but also insisting that there should not be a keeper when he takes it. Unless the keeper agrees to give him an open goal, he'll take his ball home.

This is the second stage of a hardening of London's attitude towards the brand spanking new LCO's. Before last week there had been some tension between AM's and MP's, most notably the MP's complaints that both ends of the M4 should be reviewing potential LCO's at the same time instead of the Assembly passing judgement before London. The Child smacking/abuse threat this weekend comes hot on the heels of a Welsh Office "warning" last week that the Assembly should not "overpromise" the number of laws it would deliver.

The new message from London is quite clear then:

1. We'll give you enough so that we are be able to say there's no need for a referendum, but don't think of asking for much more.
2. If London don't like, Cardiff can bugger off.