AM's Trusted With the truth

The Western Mail has a two page spread today about a Committee on Standards in Public life survey on public perceptions of honesty. The article is headed "Our Assembly Members seen as less honest than local MP's" which, on first glance, suggests that the public prefer their MP's to AM's. The key word though is "local".

Even though the survey did find that people trusted their local MP to tell the truth more than local AM (49% v 41%) in every other part of the survey Assembly Members were the ones held in better regard.

As a whole MP's were given a 30% trustworthy rating, compared to 35% for AM's. Interestingly UK government ministers received less than general MP's (29%) but Welsh Assembly Ministers significantly more than their backbench colleagues (41%) .

In encouraging news for Welsh Ministers they outscored their London rivals in every category:

Dedicated to doing a good job for the public - 49 v 40
Competent 42 v 40
Set good example 39 v 31
Do not use powers for own gain 44 v 39
Use public money wisely 34 v 27
Explain reasons for decisions 29 v 24
Tell the truth 32 v 26
In touch with public 33 v 22
Do not take bribes 58 v 55
Own up to mistakes 10 v 13

Of course, both set of politicians come off worse against most other professions, with doctors, headteachers and judges leading the way.

For some reason the Western Mail has decided to ignore all those results and stick to the one single figure that MP's trump AM's on for their headline! Could that be the reason why, right at the bottom of the trustworthy pile, well below both AM's and MP's, come tabloid journalists!

Words of Advice

Early Day Motions are a bizarre tool of the London Parliament. They're basically way for MP's to make statements about anything and everything they want to. EDM's in the past few days have go from the USA's use of Music as torture (claiming it to be an infringement of the musicians human rights), the removal of US nukes from UK soil and congratulating Lewis Hamilton on winning the British Grand Prix!

Two EDM's this week should raise a few eyebrows down in the Bay. They are signed by, among others, 7 Labour MP's representing Welsh constituencies. Chief protagonists it seems are ex-First Secretary Alun Michael and Paul Flynn. The text of the first EDM is:

That this House congratulates the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for his principled stand in rejecting calls for a widespread cull of badgers; notes that the evidence shows that such a cull would do nothing to help eradicate bovine tuberculosis and would be likely to make matters worse; considers that he is right to take his decision in accordance with science; and hopes that the Minister for Rural Affairs in the National Assembly for Wales will set aside her intention to allow a cull, and return to an evidence-based approach.

Just in case everyone didn't quite get the message, another EDM was quickly drafted and signed, this one not even trying to appear courteous to Elin Jones and the Welsh Assembly Government:

That this House applauds the courageous decision of the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to reject the irrational, evidence-free calls for the mass slaughter of badgers; notes that after a wholesale cull of badgers in the Irish Republic bovine tuberculosis levels are higher there than in Northern Ireland where no cull took place; agrees with the Independent Scientific Group's conclusion, after a 10-year study, that badger culling cannot meaningfully contribute to the future control of bovine tuberculosis; welcomes the Government's search for an effective vaccine; calls on farmers to reduce unnecessary cattle movements that increase the susceptibility of cattle to cattle infections; and regrets the cheap populism of those who demand a cull of badgers that is likely to increase the spread of bovine tuberculosis.

Cheap populism? Ouch!

Fueling My Cynicism

Just three days ago a joint Plaid Cymru and SNP amendment to the Finance Bill was rejected after Labour, Lib Dems and Tories refused to support it.

The amendment was a Fuel Duty Regulator to help combat rising petrol/diesel prices. According to the Western Mail the Regulator would work like this

any extra cash raised for the Treasury from VAT on petrol or diesel as a result of the higher pump prices would be spent on an equivalent cut in fuel duty.

Today the Conservatives proposed changes to combat the rise in petrol/diesel prices. The BBC describes it like this

Shadow chancellor George Osborne told the BBC the party was looking at plans to cut fuel duty when oil prices rise and increase it when prices fall.

So on a nationalist backed vote to lower fuel duty when petrol prices are high the Tories refuse to support, yet three days later they bring out plans to lower fuel duty when petrol prices are high.

Don't you just love party politics?