CAMBRIA POLITICO

Time for Wales to Unlock?

Independence, Welsh Politics No Responses »

Jan 052012

Scotlands Brave New Future

A week is a long time in politics, a Gannex-clad politician once said, but in terms of international affairs a decade is the equivalent of about 100 light years. As our Celtic cousins to the north of Hadrian’s Wall fastidiously prepare for their ‘Independence Referendum’, the rest of the people of the United Kingdom look on (depending on where they reside) with a mixture of jealousy, fascination, bemusement, and Home Counties anger.

Alex Salmond’s great achievement is that he has seamlessly repositioned Scottish nationalism and forged, in its wake, a universal, ecumenical sense of Scottish nationhood. The rhetoric of ‘the nation’ has now become ‘the national rhetoric’. Patriotism, and ‘the Scottish will’, is now an essential part of not just the Scottish body politic, but each Scottish person’s body politic. Be they born in the Highlands, in the Lowlands or be they recent arrivals, Salmond’s SNP has created a national mood that simply, but firmly, says “Scotland First”. Even many life-long, instinctive conservatives, those most upstanding advocates for the retention of the Union, now see not supporting the SNP – tacitly at least – as tantamount to ‘putting Scotland down’. Hence, the primary hurdle in the way of achieving independence has already been leaped. Scottish people are thinking Scotland. Indeed, things have moved so far that the Scottish Conservative Party, celebrating its centenary next year having been set up in 1912 to bolster the Unionist voice, is now navel-gazing and wondering whether, in 2012, they’ll be reduced to waving the Scottish ship out of Port UK, at the very moment that ‘Britishness’, in whatever guises that still remains, has its own valedictory celebrations at an athletics stadium in East London.

Whatever some people may argue, history, and especially contemporary history, has taught us that movements towards constitutional and societal change – movements activated by that most stirring of concepts ‘freedom’ – are almost always irreversible. The clichés about the genie being out of the bottle since the arrival of devolution will certainly be the mantra of the status quo brigade, though the decline and collapse of Internal Empire(-ism) has a longer genealogy. Point to Gwynfor in ’66 or Winnie in ’67, if you wish, but the Union itself, fabricated in the post-Absolutist milieu of 1707, was never a truly settled political project. As time went by, and through the bonding agents of wars and colonialism, more and more people certainly did buy into the adventurism of Empire. However, there remained a sturdy band of renegades – Irish Free Staters, and Chapel attending Cymru Fydd members amongst them – who never accepted, or at the very least did not fully buy into, ‘England’s Glory’. Furthermore, flashes of the Scottish Enlightenment sporadically stirred, and memories of Bannockburn were occasionally summoned. The SNP’s recent ascendency owes much to earlier feelings of Scottish distinctiveness, though, in fairness, they have also been calculating in their eschewing of some of the more over-the-top, dewy-eyed representations of Scotland and the Scottish psyche.

So where does Wales stand in this evolving political geography? Will Wales be a player for change, or will it be a peripheral bloc, shaken and stirred by constitutional upheavals but unwilling, or unable, to discard torpor and drift; unsteadily floating as events overtake it and shape its ultimate destiny. What can, or what should, it offer?

One suggestion may be the re-invigoration of the notion of ‘Welsh Europeans’. It may be time to think once again about this concept of duality. As a nation, and as a people, we have enough skin and bone to allow both identities to live and flourish. But it is a choice, and like all choices it requires some degree of knowledge, a forum for rational debate, and a certain amount of prescience, commitment to seeing the bigger picture is also a pre-requisite, especially so as the discussion on ‘Internal Enlargement’ within the European Union resonates across the mainland of our continent, and is being vociferously advocated by emerging states such as Catalunya, the Basque Country and Flanders. Thus, cases have to be made, and arguments won, if Wales is to attain ‘nationhood’ within the European context; a context that must feel natural and not forced nor false. If that happens, then people will begin to acclimatise themselves, before they start to envisage a ‘Day One’ scenario wherein Wales is a fully-enlivened nation.

Notwithstanding this, and however much we plan and prepare for this eventuality, it is not too fanciful to visualise some of the semi-surreal events that may take place on that momentous day when mature Wales finally positions itself, eye-to-eye, with the other nations of Europe and beyond. For instance, it will be a foregone conclusion that the uncompromising voice of Dr Kim Howells will be heard on Jason Mohammad’s Radio Wales phone-in talking about “the disaster” of self-government.

“A total shock to us all….a retrograde step”, he will no doubt proclaim. But will it be? A shock, that is, and a retrograde step. Well it hasn’t got to be on both counts, though preparation will be the key.

Scotland’s ‘Yes’ vote may induce a myriad of responses and reactions. There could be calls for federating the remnants of the UK. This may be the position emanating from the Unionists, as the Conservative and Labour parties will seek, probably using desperately archaic rationales, to forge a ‘New Britain’ concord from the ashes of the old state: even though the moniker ‘Britain’ has no political meaning unless it includes the land of Scotland, which it evidently will not. In all of this flux and confusion Plaid Cymru may boldly designate immediate independence, which its grassroots members would enthusiastically endorse, or the party may adopt the more cautious, gradualist option of Devolution Max (short-term), then parity with Scotland (medium to long-term). This ‘either or’ will probably come down to the direction, ambition and vehemence of Plaid Cymru’s new leader, and the pace of political events in the years and months leading to the Scottish Referendum. Plaid Cymru, therefore, has to decide how transformative it wants this process to be, and at what speed it wishes to travel. It also needs to think a lot harder about what could be termed the ‘Welsh-ification’ of Welsh politics and society. How ‘Welsh’ would an autonomous Wales really be? But all of this may be overshadowed by two other conceivable developments.

The first of these is a potential lesson from the recent past. The Berlin Wall was an edifice, like the UK state, which was seemingly indestructible. The Berlin Wall was a symbol of state control and rigidity. It also represented outmoded patterns of thought: the totalitarian hand over the mouths of the subjugated. But once challenged, and upon being toppled, the ‘domino effect’ of change – albeit that the change was in unknown directions and into uncharted waters – proved to be rapid and widespread. It was a visible pandemic of alteration. The UK, post the Scottish ‘Yes’, may follow the same path of express disintegration and metamorphosis. If it does, and this possibility cannot be lightly dismissed, then all of the political parties and politicians in Wales will have to postulate their contingency plans. Some, possibly many, ‘Brit Nats’ will disconsolately cling on to the crumbling UK apparatus in the pitiful hope that Wales could become some sort of ‘Greater England’ appendage in a concocted UK Mark 2. But, in all reality, when this moment does arise it will be far too late for those deniers of national selfdetermination, from all parts of the political spectrum, to merely bury their heads in the sand, or to heckle their disapproval from the Commons benches or Senedd swing-chairs.

However, the other arrangement that could materialise, and one which may well prove to be the paramount, and most potent, driving force in all of the reconfigurations, will be the inevitable development of a progressive ‘radical centre / centre-left’ in England. Though currently relatively inconspicuous, the Commonweal of Albion – The Guardian letter-writers, the old SDP’ers, the Hampstead intellectuals – must at some stage offer a cogent and structured view of what an independent England, unshackled from Britannia, could look like. Fairly inevitably, a resurgent England, fostering civic nationalism and offering an honest critique of its own political traditions and history, would act as a catalyst for re-assessment and subsequent socio-political and cultural restructuring. So, though England currently slumbers, it must, and will, eventually realise it has to wake up, address the Realpolitik, and show its hand of identity and intent. Till that time comes, however, it is left to the nationalists’ imaginaire to conjure up a picture of a deconstructed UK state, which will begin to emerge once the Scottish people say ‘Yes’ and the Penny Sterling drops, clankingly, on the peoples of its three contiguous nations.

gan Dr Alan Sandry

Republished from Cambria December 2011

Is Wales Economically Viable?

Economy, Independence, Welsh Politics 6 Responses »

Aug 012011

Siôn Jobbins argues that small nations can and do survive economically.

‘An independent Wales would not be economically viable.’ Funny, were Wales given a penny every time somebody said that, then Wales would certainly pay its way!
Yet this ‘can’t afford independence’ is a common refrain by commentators and politicians alike, and is currently used with great gusto as an argument against Scottish independence. But a quick glance through the articles, editorials and letters pages of the past make it clear that Wales and Scotland haven’t been the only European countries ‘which can’t afford independence’.
Malta was one example. An editorial in The Times on 7 January 1959 noted gravely: ‘Malta cannot live on its own … the island could pay for only one-fifth of her food and essential imports; well over a quarter of the present labour force would be out of work and the economy of the country would collapse without British Treasury subventions. Talk of full independence for Malta is therefore hopelessly impractical.’
The Times published a letter on January 21st, 1964 by Joseph Agius of ‘Ta’ Xbiex’ who feared ‘… the folly of giving independence [to Malta] when we are not economically prepared for it.’
Yet Malta gained independence on September 21st, 1964: essentially a city state on a barren rock; which – from a British point of view – was no more than a very large dock. By 2009 its GDP – at $23,800 per capita – was similar to other former imperial port cities like Liverpool, Newcastle or Marsailles.
Norway was another country which – in the eyes of many – couldn’t afford the independence it eventually gained in 1905. At the time it had limited selfgovernment within Sweden and one of the great bones of contention was that the consular service and tariffs were biased towards the more agrarian Swedish economy rather than the export-biased Norwegian one. Calls for greater independence were widely felt across Norway, but there were still some who were afraid its consequences, as was illustrated by a letter from ‘R.H.’ in The Times of July 6th, 1892. Headed ‘A Warning from Norway’, it argued:
‘… as regards the immediate point of consular representation, the opinion of the commercial class in both kingdoms, as expressed in the chambers of commerce, beginning with the Norwegian capital itself, is decidedly hostile to it. … At the same time it seems scarcely possible that the leaders of the movement can clearly realise the fate they are preparing for the country by what may well be termed a suicidal agitation … would not be a free national existence but subserviency, not to say bondage to Russia … [Norway] reduced to conditions of a central Asian khanate.’
More than a century later, it is certainly obvious to all that an independent Norway has not become a ‘central Asian khanate’.
To bring us closer to our present time, Slovakia gained independence in the famous ‘Velvet Divorce’ of 1993, an event which – in an otherwise generally balanced editorial – The Independent of December 31st, 1992 foretold with some gloom. ‘ … There is no shortage of potential disputes,’ it noted. ‘Currency union is doomed, with the Czechs determined to balance their budget and the Slovaks expected to head down the road of deficit financing and inflation.’ Continue reading »

A drama from S4/C’s crisis

Language, Opinion, Press and Media No Responses »

Jun 232011

What of it’s future?

gan Eifion Lewis

Touring a show they had devised themselves about S4C’s on-going crisis my students had quite a shock. The drama – 4 waleS/C england – was the product of intensive discussions they organised on behalf of a channel that they infrequently watch. Indeed, they infrequently watch any television channel. Facebook and other social media applications have generally taken the place of television with regard to this age group. The response of audiences in the village halls and chapel vestries of our Welsh speaking communities was quite a shock to them. Audiences presented them with a depth of feeling and concern about the potential fate of S4C that they were just not prepared for.
At the beginning of this year I took part in an open discussion in my own community about the channel’s crisis. Two emotions were prevalent: anger and anxiety. The anger emanated from the UK coalition government’s high-handed treatment of our one and only Welsh medium channel. The anxiety was focussed on its future. Does S4C have one?
It’s a good question and one that has almost as many answers as there are interested parties. Some media analysts are concerned that the contractual arrangements between S4C and the small group of largely Cardiff based companies that supply the bulk of its output will make it very difficult for the channel to manage the severe budget cuts that the government has enforced.
Although they are too wary to say it out aloud what they infer is simple: S4C does not have a sustainable future. Not, that is, in its present form. Their worst day scenario is a complete – call-in-the-receivers style -shutdown.
Their best guess is that a much smaller and very much less active S4C will be rescued from the ashes. Less active would mean a return to limited hours broadcasting – from 6.00pm until 10.00pm nightly, for example. Such a reduced schedule would mean the end of S4C’s substantial children’s output – an output that is widely acclaimed not only for its high production standards but also for its tangible contribution towards delivering a bilingual Wales. Such a reduction would also raise questions about S4C’s presence at our main communal happenings which include the Royal Welsh Agricultural Show as well as the Urdd and the National Eisteddfodau. Whereas television coverage tends to have an adverse effect on sporting events Wales’ principal cultural festivals have doubtlessly enhanced their appeal and effectiveness since the advent of S4C and its comprehensive coverage.
Ned Thomas, a veteran of the battle to establish a Welsh channel and an academic with wide experience of international media, has commented that whilst many European broadcasters are heavily dependent on the dubbing of American drama and films to fill their schedules S4C, from the start, has managed to provide us with television that is home-produced through and through. But whilst the harbingers of doom warn us that such a service cannot be taken for granted in the future other, more radical voices say that cutting S4C’s working budget does not necessarily mean a less virile service.
Indeed, they argue to the contrary. A slimmer S4C could be more invigorative and much more exciting. Such an argument is based on a presumption that the channel’s guiding figures will translate the funding crisis into an opportunity to re-imagine its role and re-define its raison d’etre to take account of the very different current context of television as a national media and its relationship with the whole issue of the Welsh language in comparison to the days of its inception, almost 40 years ago. In 1982, the Welsh fourth channel was allowed to join BBC 1, BBC 2 and HTV’s collective monopoly of home entertainment. Within the last 10 years the advent of multi-channel digital television followed by the social networking revolution has consigned that situation well and truly to history.
Similarly, the day-to-day status of the Welsh language has changed considerably over the same period of time.
Forty odd years ago hardly any one of the many professional agencies that now plan and promote the language at national, regional and local level existed. Most importantly of all, there was no Welsh Assembly Government to take political responsibility for the language and to instigate progressive initiatives across the boundaries of all devolved matters.
The students who wrote and performed 4 waleS/C england are from a variety of linguistic backgrounds. They would not have gathered together on a Welshmedium university course were it not for the bilingual educational provision whose widespread blossoming is indicative of the changes Wales has undergone since S4C was first launched. Language commentators attribute much of the success of the bilingual schools movement to the change in attitude towards the Welsh language effected by S4C’s early success. From being the language of all our yesterdays it became the lingua franca of a confident and ambitious young and creative energy.
Doomsday could still happen – not least if S4C is to become merely an esoteric department within the BBC’s vast and hierarchical empire. Surely the radicals’ approach is the only possible way of ensuring a meaningful future for the channel. Such an approach would engender the development of a broadcasting strategy that is based on the multi-channel and multi-platform reality of the moment. Such an approach would ensure that S4C, and its world-wide potential, is seen as an essential component within the burgeoning framework of a bilingual nation. In Welsh, ‘language’ opinionis idiomatically partnered by ‘culture’ (iaith a diwylliant). The radical re-imagining of S4C would re-establish the symbiotic link between the language and distinctive culture of Wales. Such a step could be very far reaching. It could even provide us with the power of self-belief.
It was understanding the battle fought by a determined few that enthused my students to create a drama out of S4C’s crisis.

Eifion Lewis

Eifion Lewis is a proud product of the Rhondda Valley. However, it is the rural communities of the west that have provided him with a base of creativity and energy with which to question both the fragility and resilience of Welsh culture. During his time as Lecturer in Charge of Theatr Felin-fach he instigated radical projects that
sought to develop a creative dialogue between cultures. Subsequently he established Cwmni Cydweithredol Troedyrhiw – a co-operative company that produced, in 2010, a whole year of multi-media work dedicated to the re-telling of how the community of Epynt was lost, 70 years previously. In May, 2010 he was appointed Performance and Script-writing Fellow at University of Wales, Trinity St David’s. He has one son, Rhodri, and his wife, Eleri, is part of Tinopolis’ Wedi 3 production team in Llanelli.

Rhodri and the tax raising question

Independence, Welsh Politics 3 Responses »

Dec 092009

AN INTERESTING answer from Rhodri Morgan on how the Assembly should fund its programme in his final press briefing before retiring, writes Clive Betts from the Assembly press gallery.

Should the Assembly have tax-raising powers.

The sort of right that almost every democratic body possesses, right down to ecommunity councils.

As he so often does, Rhodri gave us a general tour around the landscape. Particularly when he doesn’t want to answer a question.

On the one hand, it was surely wrong for a body which spends £16bn a year to possess no powers to raise even a penny of that money.

On the other, the German Laender are generally similar to Wales. But they depend entirely on money from central government in Berlin.

Mr Morgan said that light may be shed on the entire issue when the position in Scotland is clarified over the next couple of years.

Mr Morgan said there was a “strong feeling” that, because Scotland possesses such strong powers, “it must be able to raise taxes”.

And of course that is the way that things are going for Edinburgh, with London even thinking of Scotland taking powers over half of the income tax sector.

Carwyn bucks Labour’s language phobia trend

Language, Welsh Labour, Welsh Politics 2 Responses »

Nov 112009

A possible hint as to who would be the new leader of the Labour Party who is best fitted to serve ALL of Wales.

Carwyn Jones was presenting the cabinet weekly press briefing. And it was all set out for bilingualism presentation.

Translation sets at each journalist’s seat and an official carrying a wandering microphone – to ensure that the translators could hear what had to be translated.

Now, I am totally unsure that the bilingual Mr Jones has always availed himself of the system.

Certainly, in the early days of the Assembly, the only AMs who were sure to use Welsh were those in Plaid Cymru, and Rhodri Morgan – principally to answer oral questions.

But today Mr Jones threw himself strongly into the bilingual camp. Several of his fellow Labour AMs have over the years doggedly avoided the Welsh language – presumably because of its connection with another political party.

But no problem with Mr Jones. Which augers well for if he wins the Labour leadership.

Now, it may be that today was nothing out of the ordinary. But with reports being heard that Edwina Hart, his main opponent, has voiced anti-language thoughts – very much in line with her party’s subliminal attitude over a century, a very close eye has to be kept on the Labour Party.

Declaring for Welsh Democracy

Independence, Welsh Politics 1 Response »

Nov 032009

CYNOG DAFIS seeks the support of Cambria readers for the activities of Cymru Yfory-Tomorrow’s Wales and for the Declaration for Welsh Democracy.

We are entering a critical phase in the history of our nation. During the next two years we have the opportunity to transform our National Assembly into a proper legislative parliament. In June 2007, the new One Wales coalition government committed itself to seeking primary law-making powers for the Assembly and ‘to campaign for a successful outcome’ to a referendum on that subject.

By the end of November, it is anticipated that the All-Wales Convention, chaired by Sir Emyr Jones-Parry, will have reported on its finding to the Government of Wales, and it is likely to come out in favour of law-making powers. But even then there will be a number of major hurdles to cross before the finishing line is reached.

Before a referendum can be held there is a statutory process that could take as long as 160 days:

• The National Assembly has to pass by a two-thirds majority a resolution calling for a referendum

• The Secretary of State has to consult and may, or may not, then place a draft order before both houses of the UK Parliament

• If (s)he does so, that order, setting the date, the question and time allowed for campaigning, has to be approved by both houses

• The Assembly itself must then approve the order, again by a two-thirds majority

The first hurdle should present no difficulty but it is far from certain that the next two will be crossed and there might be issues of detail that could make the fourth uncertain.

If all of these hurdles are successfully crossed, there remains the task of winning the support of the people if Wales in a referendum. There is every reason to be optimistic about the outcome. Rigorous analysis of public opinion shows a steady and strong growth in support for devolution since 1999, with law-making powers on the Scottish model the most favoured option. At the same time there is widespread support in ‘civil society’ for a legislative parliament (although the business sector is perhaps more ambiguous). At the same time the current arrangements, whereby the National Assembly has to seek the power to legislate, item by item, from Westminster is widely regarded as cumbersome, inefficient and an obstacle to effective democratic government.

However referenda are by their nature unpredictable and it would be the height of folly to take success for granted.

It is in this context that Cymru Yfory has launched its Declaration for Welsh Democracy (see panel), which has already attracted thousands of signatures, including prominent people from the worlds of sport, entertainment and the arts, the law, academia etc as well as hundreds of ordinary citizens.

Cymru Yfory was established in 2004 to press for the implementation of the recommendations of the Richard Commission on the Powers and Electoral arrangements of the National Assembly. We are a cross-sectoral, nonparty-political body and our able chairman is the Archbishop of Wales, Barry Morgan. Since 2004 we have been active in lobbying for a law-making parliament and have established strong links with civil organisations to encourage a well-informed debate about democracy and effective government in Wales through networking, seminars and conferences. Our Layman’s Guide to the New National Assembly for Wales, the only publication of its kind, is currently being updated. Our briefing papers on various aspects of devolved government have been widely welcomed and we have published a number of popular leaflets.

We have been able to attract funding for our activities from various sources including the Rowntree Charitable and Reform Trusts and a grant from the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation has enabled us this year to obtain the professional services of a Development Officer, Elin Wyn. We are in the process of establishing a formal membership system.

Cymru Yfory will not be the Yes Campaign which will no doubt be established early next year. We have a broader remit than such a campaign. However we believe we have a responsibility to prepare the ground for the debate that will occur as the Referendum approaches.

It is now vitally important that a powerful momentum be created in favour of bringing proper parliamentary government to Wales and to do so we need the support of people from all walks of life and all parts of Wales.

Cambria readers can help in a number of ways:

• By signing the Declaration for Welsh Democracy which we see as a key tool in building momentum

• By asking others to do so: family, friends, neighbours and colleagues. Imagine the effect if each of Cambria’s 60,000 plus readers got ten signatures each!

• By joining with others to establish a local group to distribute leaflets and gather support • By contributing financially

• By joining in the debate on our blog at: www.tomorrow-wales.co.uk/blog

Information on Cymru Yfory and materials, including leaflets and petition forms for the Declaration, can be obtained from Cymru Yfory at Tyˆ Meandros, 54a Bute Street, Cardiff CF10 5AS or by visiting our website www.tomorrow-wales.co.uk

A DECLARATION FOR WELSH DEMOCRACY

We the undersigned believe that the creation of a system of effective democratic governance for Wales is a matter of major importance. Such a system should:

• Be efficient in its use of time and resources

• Be comprehensible and transparent

• Promote wide participation by the public and civil society

• Respect the autonomy of the National Assembly as the elected body which represents the people of Wales

• Offer constitutional stability and thus a means of concentrating on the implementation of a policy programme that can get to grips with the problems and release the potential of Wales

We believe that this would best be achieved by the granting of primary law-making powers to the National Assembly, and we call for the holding of a referendum to that end.

Tories and ‘the slippery slope’

Independence, Welsh Conservatives, Welsh Politics No Responses »

Oct 092009

DAVID MELDING spelled out a few Conservative principles to the weekly Conservative party briefing, writes Clive Betts from the Assembly press gallery.

Some journalists almost-presumed the briefing would not have been held because the party’s UK conference was then currently under way in Manchester.

But it was – unlike the Lib Dem do, which was ditched because they were all in conference and didn’t think that either the press or Wales was important enough to turn up for.

But the principles that Mr Melding spelled out had nothing to do with federalism or any other sort of devolutionary development which he himself personally favours.

Mr Melding spoke rather of the present system of Legislative Competence Orders (“elcos”) being both “very untidy” and a “dog’s breakfast”.

His principle for government was that the legislative process should be clear and easy to understand. The present system is however like the soup which can be found in any canal – these are not his words, but mine – with anything passing through likely to find their passage snagged by hidden underwater debris, dumped there by Labour Party anti-devolution members – again my words, not his.

Mr Melding stated the obvious – that his party is not united on devolution. He reckoned it was split in three equal parts – pro extra powers; happy with the present split between Cardiff and London; or favouring the abolition of devolution.

Then he brought into our gaze another Tory principle – that Cardiff and London should work together within the UK. He spoke of the Prime Minister coming down to Cardiff to be quizzed by the Assembly.

And the committees established by Labour – but seldom used; some of them encompassing the old Irish Free State – to link the devolved nations and London would meet regularly at First Minister level.

These committees’ inactivity is surely a not-unimportant reason why the relatively new Irish consulate in Cardiff, staffed by a full-time Irish foreign ministry official, is being abolished.

Cheryl Gillan, the shadow Secretary of State, spelled out the latest stage of thinking on that principle in her Tory conference speech. It sounded pretty good – the problem, however, is the party politics which could so soon come to dominate proceedings of meetings between Cardiff and London, instead of being just one our of many strands of that committee’s existence.

Ms Gillan said, “We are examining the mechanisms for joint working between the two institutions [Assembly and Parliament] and will be aiming for cooperation to achieve this.”

Mr Melding talked of the changes the Tories will bring in as being not much more than the formalisation of what currently happens (behind the scenes, of course, between Labour and Labour-led governments in the two cities).

Ms Gillan’s speech sounded reasonable – as you would expect from a one-nation, non-dogmatic Welsh Tory. Reading her words, it was difficult to pick out the gaps into which political opponents – of her own party in London, rather than the Nationalists in Cardiff she professed to fear – will wriggle in order to cause trouble.

But once trouble starts, particularly between two democratically-elected institutions, it would prove extraordinarily difficult to eradicate.

Mr Melding acknowledged the relationship between Cardiff and London once the party in control is each city is different would be “more difficult”.

But as a fellow non-dogmatic, one nation Welsh Tory, Mr Melding is examining things from the same point of view as Ms Gillan.

But there’s another standpoint. It is held by Ms Gillan’s assistant (or should it be “deputy”) David Jones, MP for Clwyd West.

When he spoke to Cambria at the Tory conference in Cardiff this spring, he used much the same words as Ms Gillan. But he pitched them in a different direction.

Simply, Ms Gillan wants Cardiff and London both to know what the other is planning and doing.

Mr Jones wants to know the same sort of information. But his aim is different. It is to ensure that Cardiff does the same as London. Mr Jones is an anti-devolutionist.

Wales can be different, he feels, only as long as it is not different.

I personally can hardly imagine Wales ever voting for independence.

But everyone in Ireland (the 32 counties) did not always wish to be independent, although a few did.

The events of 1916 and the execution of the leaders changed that for ever. For which you can blame contemporary Tories.

There’s no chance of any similar repetition in Wales.

Our troubles are purely constitutional, with the rare exceptions, such as those who blew themselves up on Abergele station, and John Jenkins, who is still with us (see Freedom Fighers, by John Humphries, University of Wales Press).

But the Tories should realise they are currently standing atop a slope which could easily prove to be very slippery.

It they aren’t careful, they’ll push us all down that slope. And goodness knows where we’ll end up then.

Sacrificing the language

Language, Welsh Politics No Responses »

Oct 072009

IF LANGUAGE and heritage minister Alun Ffred Jones is confused about what is happening to the Welsh government’s legislation on the Welsh language, he would be far from the only one, writes Clive Betts from the Assembly press gallery.

Of course, he knows what is happening.

Particularly when Secretary of State Peter Hain is busy throwing additional obstacles in its way. The latest of course is that toothless, political party dominated talking shop the Welsh Grand Committee which is so useful that it hardly ever meets.

Except of course when someone wants to use it to blow the Assembly off course … in this case, the course which is winding so incredibly slowly to the passage of the Welsh language Legislative Competence Order.

Of course, Mr Jones may be the only person in either Cardiff or Westminster who really knows what’s happening !

But what can anybody make of a hearing of the Welsh Grand Committee windbags – producers of nothing other than hot air – being suddenly inserted into the process. Giving them a say in the LCO procedure is NOT in the Government of Wales Act.

With this current language LCO Mr Jones had discovered the hard way what a colossal cat’s-cradle of time-wasting was drawn up by anti-devolution Welsh Labour MPs in the so-called devolution “settlement” produced by the that Government of Wales Act.

When there have been two such Acts in just a decade, it is clear that this is in no way a “settlement”.

Despite all the problems that have been thrown up by Westminster, it seems we can be pretty sure by now, says the minister AM for Arfon, that the language LCO (or Elco, in spoken parlance) will be in operation early in the new year.

Thus, no risk of it running into the period of the inauguration of a new Tory Government – which would perhaps mean that months of negotiations with London ministers will have to be reopened.

Always, of course, that someone in Westminster doesn’t invent yet another time-wasting procedure …

After discussions throughout the summer, Mr Jones revealed this week what is something like the final version of the LCO.

Everything would seem at last to be going swimmingly.

One just hopes that the not-so-Grand Committee doesn’t decide to resurrect some all-but-forgotten power and cause yet another delay. Mr Hain’s decision means that the Assembly is now facing not one, but two, revising chambers.

The LCO has of course already been sent around the Welsh Select Committee, which has forced changes to be adopted. The Select Committee has been acting as a sort of House of Lords – we always knew that this was a possibility, but we always hoped that the Select Committee wouldn’t take a maximalist view of its own powers.

This maximalist view of Commons power links neatly with the minimalist decision taken by the London Labour government about the breadth of power that any LCO can transfer to Wales.

Bearing in mind what most people think about their MPs – despite the fact that none on the Welsh Select Committee possess duck ponds – it is hardly appropriate for them now to be acting like the Lords.

But that on earth are the Grand Committee planning to do ? Who are the Grand Committee ?

It’s a body which hardly ever meets because it has for years been seen as an internal Labour Party committee. A membership restricted almost solely to Welsh MPs means that it is totally unrepresentative of Wales – compare the percentage of voters in Wales who put their crosses beside Labour candidates with the vastly inflated percentage of the country’s MPs that Labour manages to attain.

The Grand Committee is of so much (or little) use that no-one will ever give it anything worthwhile to do.

How has it now muscled in ? Presumably some half-wit members of that gallant band of Labour representatives who are by now so unrepresentative of Wales managed to pull a few strings with a Welsh Secretary who is pro-devolution in the hope that they can throw a spanner or two into the works.

We shall have to see.

Older Entries

Time for Wales to Unlock?

Scotlands Brave New Future

Is Wales Economically Viable?

A drama from S4/C’s crisis

What of it’s future?

Rhodri and the tax raising question

Carwyn bucks Labour’s language phobia trend

Declaring for Welsh Democracy

Tories and ‘the slippery slope’

Sacrificing the language

Stuff from other blogs

Poll

Politics Twitter Stream

Cambria Magazine Subscription

Save Money!

Business4Wales

BBC Welsh Politics

Cambria Books