Laws and Sausages
"There are two things you should never let people see how they're made. Laws and sausages."
The world weary observation from President Bartlet's chief of staff Leo McGarry, the late John Spencer, as he despatches his deputy Josh Lyman to the Hill for another session of congressional pork barrelling and arm-twisting to get a piece of legislation through.
I'm no expert on The West Wing. Neither, come to that, do I know much about the making of sausages. As a vegetarian for over twenty years I steered well clear of them - but few people who've spent time in and around the process of making laws come away feeling it's either a simple, transparent, or particularly democratic process.
Since last May, of course, the National Assembly's been making primary legislation - Measures - and also receiving new powers from Westminster via the Legislative Competence Order process. And, of course, with added powers come higher stakes. We're talking about actual, serious real world changes in areas like the NHS, school transport, and children's education. And the higher the stakes, the greater the pressure within the process.
The most high-profile Measure making its way through the system at the moment is in that last field - 14-19 education. This is the Assembly Government's Learning and Skills measure, which sets a legal framework for a major educational shake up, giving teenagers the right to choose from a much wider variety of courses in their local areas, both from their own schools and colleges. It's just finishing its Stage One phase, where it's been examined both by the Finance Committee and by a dedicated Measure committee.
The Finance Committee report certainly didn't pull its punches.
The Measure, it said, should go no further until the Government come back with accurate estimates of how much it will cost. What's more it said little or no work appeared to have been done by the Government on these estimates. I'd call it a D- report, with 'must do better' written in red ink. The Measure committee's report is due out tomorrow and although word on the street is that it's been revised to be less critical of the detail of the proposals, it still won't make particularly pleasant reading for the Skills Minister John Griffiths, who's charged with piloting the Measure through.
But back to the laws and sausages. There was an intriguing paragraph in the Welsh Conservative leader Nick Bourne's letter of support to Shadow Immigration Minister Damian Green, following his arrest at the end of last week.
Following the expressions of solidarity, there came this. "We must clearly remain ever vigilant. For example, just this week there were veiled threats to the Finance Committee chair threatening her with removal if she did not modify her committee report. Naturally she refused."
Hello? What might this have to do with alleged leaks of Home Office documents? The answer - not very much - but the Tories are sending out a message. The committee chair Angela Burns felt under significant pressure to water down her report, which she refused.
Now where might that pressure have come from? Her fellow committee members? I don't think so. There are no stories of huge flare-ups as the report was being finalised. According to the Commission the report was agreed by committee members, which doesn't sound particularly acrimonious. So if the threats referred to in the letter didn't come from within the committee, they must have come from without. And who has an interest in seeing the Measure progress smoothly? Well, the Assembly Government for one. Ms Burns, we're told, is keeping a dignified silence on where the threats may have came from, but is said to have been left "bruised" by the process (and she's proved herself no shrinking violet since her election).
This is the part of the sausage factory the public don't see - in fact, it's the part hardly anyone sees. Conversations in corridors, unminuted meetings, cups of tea. But where does the process of compromises, assurances and agreements essential to moving the process along stop, and the darker world of veiled threats, as Mr Bourne puts it, begin?
I'll leave that question in the air.
But the very fact it's being talked about shows that the stakes are higher these days, and that Ministers really do care what is said about them.
At the same time, can anyone think of a recent flagship education policy which blew up in the Government's face due to inadequate costings? Sometimes it's important for people to point out the need for firm foundations, no matter how unpalatable to those in power.
Comments
or to comment.