´óÏó´«Ã½

... from me anyway as I prepare to hand back the blog to Betsan.

And some last words on matters that I've been blogging about. I've had a formal statement from the Assembly Government on their muscular dystrophy meeting earlier this week. Here it is:

"In the meeting, it was confirmed that the new Local Health Boards will start work on planning neuromuscular services for Wales and within that will consider the possibility of a network, or networks, and the provision of advisors.

"Baroness Finlay is carrying out work on support for children and adults with neuromuscular conditions. She attended the meeting in order to update the Campaign Group on that work."

And the last word on two strands of Welsh politics which have come together this week (not that they were ever really separate): the Welsh Labour leadership and the case for more Assembly powers.

Last night our rivals colleagues at ITV Wales held a debate between the leadership contenders.

For those watching for any hints of how the next First Minister might view chances of a referendum I thought there was an interesting difference of opinion.

Huw Lewis put very strongly his "one poll at a time" argument that Labour needs to concentrate on fighting the next General Election before any referendum. Carwyn Jones warned that it would be "a bad move" if Labour AMs pushed ahead without the support of Labour MPs. Only Edwina Hart seemed to regard the One Wales pledge committing Labour to campaigning for a successful Yes vote as the priority that Labour's partners in Plaid see it. Small differences? Maybe. But important both to those who'll select the new leader and those in Plaid who'll have to work with them.

´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales will be holding its own leadership debate in the next few weeks so we'll see how deep those differences are.

That's it from me, Adrian Masters. To those of you who've complained about an imposter blogging in place of Betsan, don't worry she'll be back in a day or two - refreshed no doubt. Thanks to all of you who've commented and debated the points I've raised.

Before she left, Betsan set a very high standard for my blogging stint. "Don't be too good," she ordered. Betsan, I think I've met your target.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

I promised you I'd update you on today's meeting between the Muscular Dystrophy Campaign and health officials from the Assembly Government.

I've just spoken again to the campaign's Policy director Robert Meadowcroft (the man I described as Mr. Angry yesterday. He didn't object to that description by the way.)

He said the meeting saw a partial victory - officials promised that the sleep study service, so needed by patients like young Jack Thomas, would be reinstated within weeks.

After that there was mixed news. Encouraging signs - according to Mr. Meadowcroft - when it comes to the appointment of two advisers and encouraging signs on a network for Wales. Encouraging signs, but no more.

The campaign says it will continue to put pressure on the Assembly Government in those areas to try to reverse the decline in services for muscular dystrophy patients that I reported in yesterday's post.

So Mr Angry is cooling off - for the moment.

Interestingly he told me he was met not by the Health Minister Edwina Hart but by eight officials and Baroness Ilora Finlay acting as a ministerial adviser to the Assembly Government.

I didn't know that Baroness Finlay (a cross-bench peer, an expert in palliative care) occupied a formal role. It makes a lot of sense: I'm pretty sure her extensive experience of life on the NHS front-line would be invaluable to those who run the Welsh NHS. So I'll try to find out how formal a role it is and let you know.

UPDATE: I've just come off the phone to Baroness Finlay. Alas she's not taken up some kind of Gordon Brown's GOAT-style role in the Assembly Government. She tells me that she's often called in to such meetings because of her area of expertise - end-of-life care - as well as what she calls her "bird's eye view" of the Welsh NHS and involvement in parliamentary committees.

She did say that one development that is, in her view, more than encouraging is the creation of a transitional care palliative consultant to look after the needs of terminally ill youngsters who fall between the two worlds of paediatric and adult services.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

I've been interviewing Robert Meadowcroft, who's director of policy for the Muscular Dystrophy Society. Afterwards he said "I'm Mr Angry today" and as I read back some of his comments, I can't disagree with his description.

"The problem lies," he said, "in a lack of health planning in Wales. There's a crisis in care for patients with muscular dystrophy."

And he went on: "Services are getting worse in Wales for people with muscular dystrophy. Not staying the same, not getting better - they are getting worse."

Strong words. So what's he so angry about?

Well it's the case of Jack Thomas, a fourteen year old from Cardiff. He has a condition Duchenne Muscular Dystrohy and needs regular sleep studies. Unfortunately for him, his local hospital - Cardiff's UHW - has stopped its service and for him to continue this vital assesment he has to travel to Great Ormond Street in London. You may have heard his mum Joanne on this morning's Good Morning Wales.

Robert Meadowcroft and his colleagues, plus another parent are meeting the health minister Edwina Hart and officials in the Assembly tomorrow. They'll have strong words for them too. This is what they want:

• The sleep service in Cardiff re-instated immediately.
• A commitment to appoint care advisers - at least one for the North and one for the South.
• And a review of neuromuscular services.

Robert Meadowcroft says the last point is the most important. "Services in Wales," he told me "are getting worse not better. There's been a serious decline which is predicted to continue for the next two years at least."

So tomorrow's meeting should be interesting. Edwina Hart has told the society that she wasn't aware of the seriousness of the situation. They met four weeks ago and tomorrow's meeting is the follow-up. I'll keep you updated.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Thanks to my colleagues Vaughan Roderick and Ciaran Jenkins I should be able to link to other sites properly. I'll test out my new found powers by directing those of you not polled out by yesterday's YouGov avalanche to the excellent UK Polling report website

Not content with masquerading as Betsan Powys I'm co-presenting Good Evening Wales. I'm not sure whether or not I'm masquerading as Felicity Evans or Olly Hides though. Judge for yourself from 4pm on Radio Wales.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

I can only apologise for the lack of links that some have highlighted in the comments. I'm still getting to grips with the software which is why you're getting a minimalist experience. I'll get the hang of it just as Betsan returns.

If I were capable of embedding links I would direct you to my colleague David Cornock's blog where he has the photo of Carwyn Jones and Gordon Brown I told you about yesterday. He's inviting captions too. Truly interactive.

I can cut and paste urls though with the best of them. Have a look.

https://davidcornock.blogspot.com/2009/10/i-had-to-wait-10-years-too.html

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Thanks for the comments after yesterday's first effort. Just to remind you, this is Adrian Masters moonlighting from Dragon's Eye and masquerading as Betsan. Only in a cyber-sense of course.

If you like what you read, remember that I wrote it. If you don't ... it wasn't me guv - look, it's Betsan's name at the top of the post.

Talking of guvs - or Govs - the YouGov poll has provided a great deal of excitement in Welsh political circles. As one colleague of mine said, it's like Christmas time for anoraks.

There's plenty of detailed analysis elsewhere so I'll just concentrate on one aspect - what it tells us about the trio trying to take over Welsh Labour and particularly the attitudes of voters towards them as First Minister.

The poll shows that 32% of voters generally think Carwyn Jones would do fairly or very well as First Minister, compared to 22% who think that of Huw Lewis and 27% for Edwina Hart.

Labour voters spread their support more evenly: 45% said Mr Jones would do fairly or very well. Mr Lewis and Ms Hart each scored 41%.

But 26% per cent of Labour voters said Edwina Hart would do very badly or fairly badly compared to 12% who thought the same of Carwyn Jones and 14% who thought the same of Huw Lewis.

So how are the three responding to this first big survey of how they appeal or not to voters?

At the risk of sounding as if speaking to the spokeys is what I do all day and everyday, here, as a public service, is what they've told me today:

A spokesperson for Carwyn Jones said, "The real votes that count in this election are those of party members and those in the affiliated organisations in which the ballot has not yet started. What this poll does, however, is to confirm our view that Labour needs a leader for the whole of Wales."

A spokesperson for Huw Lewis said: "These figures really chime with our own analysis and it shows that everything is still to play for. Our figures have consistently shown that we are ahead with the membership and the broader Labour family; our extensive phone contact has shown us that, and these figures would seem to underscore where our strengths are.

People respond positively to Huw, in North Wales, in West Wales - right across the country there is a genuine and growing connection with his message. Whilst other candidates currently have slightly better recognition, that is not translated into popularity.

People who meet Huw and hear him speak respond well to him, that is why it has always been our objective for Huw to speak to as many members as possible - he really is the campaign's greatest asset."

Edwina Hart said: "This straw poll shows quite clearly that people know me and know what I stand for. As a minister you have to take tough decisions which not everyone may agree with - but I stand by those decisions because I believe they are in the best interests of the people of Wales.

I'm very heartened to find as I meet Labour people face to face during this campaign that I am building up a great level of support."

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Please don't be confused by the name at the top of this entry. It may say Betsan Powys but this is Adrian Masters filling in for the week.

While Betsan suns herself and sips mojitos, here the clocks have gone back and the nights are drawing in. Thanks for the welcoming comments by the way. I'll do my best to keep the blog warm for the next week.

I'm sure the Welsh Labour leadership battle is uppermost in Betsan's mind as she starts her short break. It's certainly uppermost in the minds of the three candidates as they start the next phases of their campaigns.

One of the main things they each surely have to do over the next couple of weeks is highlight their differences from each other. This is always tricky to do for politicians in the same party because it risks opening divisions. Yet not to do so is also risky because it leaves the candidates open to accusations that they're all the same.

That's precisely the charge levelled by Dr. Richard Wyn Jones in last night's Westminster Hour on Radio 4. He blamed the voting system itself, the complicated electoral college that would-be leaders have to win.

"You've got to say nice things about the unions; you've got to say nice things about the Co-operative party; you've got to say nice things about Labour students," he said.

"This is a system designed for blandness and what we're seeing in the election so far is a fairly bland collection of remarks about change and develoopment and reaching out - all kinds of predictable stuff."

I should say that was given pretty short shrift by the three camps when I spoke to them.

A spokesman for Carwyn Jones rejected out of hand the claim that party rules are somehow constraining debate. "Labour's having a great time" he enthused.

A spokesman for Edwina Hart said the contest may have started blandly but clear dividing lines are beginning to show.

And a spokesman for Huw Lewis said that Mr Lewis' policies are the product of more than two years' work. Any blandness in the contest, says the Lewis camp, comes from the other two agreeing with ideas their man has set out.

Another difference could be seen in campaign leaflets received by Labour party members over the weekend.

Carwyn Jones' includes a photograph of the candidate with Gordon Brown and the caption "The Prime Minister thanking Carwyn at Labour Conference 2009 for his work in Wales."

Did this give Mr Jones an unfair advantage I asked the spokesmen? People have raised it with us said the Lewis camp but we're not making an issue of it. Neither are we said the Hart team.

Not an endorsement said the Jones spokesman emphatically. Just a photo at conference. "It's a shame not all three candidates were there (at the conference) to have their pictures taken with him."

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

It's half term and I'm taking a week off - swapping Labour leadership-mania (should such a thing exist) for Aquamania, swapping manifestos for, I hope, a few mojitos.

I'll leave you with some predictions and a promise that the blog won't be dormant:

If the poll suggests anything other than the current "winnable" but not in the bag scenario, then someone pick up the phone. I'll need a mojito or two at that point. I suspect it'll remain at no more than "winnable" but that the trend will show an ever increasing number of people saying they are in favour of pressing ahead with devolving full legislative powers to the Assembly.

The Secretary of State will have heard the same rumours as everyone else - that Sir Emyr Jones Parry's report, due to be published on November 18th - will surprise quite a few with the scope of the comment and the decisive nature of that comment. If that's right, then the pressure will be on the Labour Plaid government to deliver on its pledge of a referendum as spelled out in the coalition's One Wales Agreement.

Mr Hain can see it coming and on Thursday night he'll try to head it off.

Why?

Because he thinks a referendum could or even would be lost; because as its architect, he thinks the current system of devolving power via Orders, LCOs, is working well; because as its architect he just cannot accept that its days are and should be numbered; because despite his protestations that he's an ardent devolutionist, he doesn't actually want more power delivered to the Assembly; because he thinks Plaid would gain more than Labour from it; because he made promises to colleagues that they needn't worry about the One Wales Agreement back in 2007 because there just would not be a referendum.

I've heard all of those theories suggested or implied over the past few months. You'll have our own views but you can bet that on Thursday Mr Hain will start to apply the brakes.

There'll be no great song and dance, no press conference in a posh hotel, no noses rubbed in it but we'll know why some senior Welsh Conservatives have been looking a lot more contended recently. The bear trap they had feared their party would walk straight into - big, bad Tories stopping the Welsh from having their say - has been spotted and will be avoided.

And with that I'm off to pack. Over the coming week my colleague Adrian Masters, who usually directs the gaze of the Dragon's Eye, will be taking over and keeping the blog warm. He'll do it with style. Pob lwc.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Sorry about the lack of blogging.

I've been to a funeral today - a funeral where every thought was perfectly spelled out, every word put in its place. Nothing else would have done in a celebration of Patrick Hannan's life.

It's just struck me to share a few of his own words.

To his friends he'd apparently rued the day that his job of 'covering politics in Wales' had somehow turned into 'covering Welsh politics'. No doubting which meant more to him and no doubting either in a room jam packed full of eminent politicians and journalists that they understood exactly what he'd meant and that they'll mull it over for quite some time to come.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Just off the phone to Derek Vaughan MEP. He's "thought long and hard" and talked to the two candidates in the Labour leadership race who picked up the phone to him. He's just decided to support the candidate whose views on Europe amongst others issues most closely mirror his own: Carwyn Jones.

The official Labour list of supporting nominations has just appeared and the list of MPs next to Carwyn Jones' name makes quite an impact on the Excel page. He has 14 supprting nominations from Westminster.

But "the Edwina Three" have become five. Add Kim Howells and John Smith to her list.

Huw Lewis has four MPs on this list - Nia Griffith, Dai Harvard, Sian James and Jessica Morden. We understand Martyn Jones didn't get his in on time, so it was invalidated.

CLPs are split six to Edwina Hart, five to Carwyn Jones, four to Huw Lewis.

How they all vote? Ah, that's where it gets really interesting.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

"There's a billion pounds that we're not utilising appropriately."

Sorry?

"There's a billion pounds that we're not utilising appropriately."

Who's just said that? Paul Davies, chairman of the All Wales Directors of NHS Finance.

To whom? The Assembly's Finance Committee.

How come?

"We don't get it right now. Far too many patients end up in the wrong place, either being hospitalised when they shouldn't be, or they stay in hospital too long, or they stay in primary care, and they should be in hospital, all those mistakes...(are) extremely costly, very expensive.

"It's staff, it's capacity, it's beds, and it's basically trying to say - are we making the best use of the five billion pound (budget) and we're saying - we're not. There's a billion pounds that we're not utilising appropriately."

Wow.

If they did manage to use it properly? "If we did, then we would see that improvement come through."

Made me sit up. Let's see what the Finance Committee makes of it.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Where does ´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales stand on the issue of inviting the BNP onto its discussion programmes?

I've read some three versions of it over the past 24 hours - one in a press release from Plaid AM Leanne Wood's office, another based on that press release in the Western Mail and another in the Scotsman.

I'll start with the press release. Headlined "´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales 'No to BNP' stance welcomed" it goes on to say that "´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales has revealed that it will not be inviting the BNP on to its programmes, after an appeal from Plaid Cymru AM Leanne Wood".

The release was based on what Rhodri Talfan Davies, ´óÏó´«Ã½ Cymru Wales' Head of Strategy and Communications had said in his Emails to Leanne Wood:

"The starting point in determining what sort of representation any party should receive on programming in Wales, for example Pawb a'i Farn (which we produce for S4C), is their past and current levels of political support. Other factors, such as consistent trends in opinion polls, significant changes in the political context, etc, can also be taken into account ... The BNP has not to date achieved political representation in Wales or other evidence of significant electoral support, therefore there are no plans at present to invite the party onto the Pawb a'i Farn panel."

In today's Western Mail the headline reads and the piece goes on to say that "´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales will not be inviting BNP representatives on to political panel programmes because it judges that the far-right party has insufficient support in Wales. Its policy - revealed in a letter to Plaid Cymru AM Leanne Wood - differs from the ´óÏó´«Ã½ network, which tonight will broadcast an edition of Question Time including BNP leader Nick Griffin".

It doesn't say how the policy in Wales 'differs' from the ´óÏó´«Ã½ network, just that it does.

The Scotsman today carries and says that "it turned his stomach that the BNP would be on television." Peter Hain, his colleague the Welsh Secretary, has said again that allowing Nick Griffin to appear on Question Time is "worst decision" the ´óÏó´«Ã½ has made in recent times. Towards the end of the piece the SNP are reported to have "called on ´óÏó´«Ã½ Scotland to follow ´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales and ban any broadcasts that include the BNP".

So, once again, where does ´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales stand on the issue of inviting the BNP onto the panels of its disussion programmes?

You may strongly wish it otherwise, or you may not, but as I understand it, there is nothing in ´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales' policy that differs to the policy adopted by the ´óÏó´«Ã½ as a whole. ´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales is applying exactly the same policy as ´óÏó´«Ã½ network but because electoral support for the BNP in Wales has until now not been as strong as in parts of England, the result in Wales is different. In Wales they got 37,118 votes in the European election. They have no MEPs here. They have no county councillors either.

Same policy, different result. Just because you get different answers, that doesn't mean to say the questions asked aren't exactly the same. As I say you may wish it otherwise. You may think the questions are wrong, let alone the answers they elicit. My point is only that the questions asked here - and there - are no different.

Where will I be tonight at 10.30pm? In the Dragon's Eye studio. Question Time will be broadcast here in Wales but as usual, it'll be on half and hour later here than for viewers in the rest of the UK.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Edwina Hart may have got five CLPs on her side last night but it's up one day, down the next in this leadership battle.

and we learn that the Musicians Union has plumped its support for Carwyn Jones. Ok so it's not very big but ... were Mrs Hart's renditions on that viola just not musical enough?

News too that the Bakers Union (not affilitated unfortunately for him) have plumped for Carwyn Jones. I'll leave that particular punchline to you.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Those fourteen "influential MPs", to quote Ladbrokes, who have come out today in support of Carwyn Jones's bid for the Labour leadership have made him the "re-hot 2/5 favourite" to win. By the way I'm guessing "re-hot" has nothing to do with re-gaining the lead given he's never lost it as far as I can tell and that Carwyn Jones is in fact the bookies' "red- hot" favourite to get Rhodri Morgan's job.

The First Minister must, of course, stand down first. Last night Rhodri Morgan attended a dinner given by the Muslim Council of Wales to celebrate ten years of devolution. The place was awash with politicians but the guest of honour was the outgoing First Minister.

The Master of Ceremonies in his finery asked for quiet to introduce the dignitaries sitting at the top table:

"The Right Honourable the Lord Elis Thomas of Nant Conwy .... The Right Honourable Rhodri Morgan MP ..."

The urgent whispers grew into a chorus of "it's AM!"

The Master of Ceremonies apologised. "Oh sorry" he said, "I've already given him a promotion".

I imagine those "influential MPs" will enjoy that one.

P.S. Yes, I KNOW that's not the sort of clanger you drop but ...

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Last week I sat with four politicians from the four major parties while a hall full of young people in Newport proved that forgiveness, as far as politicians and their expenses are concerend, is still a long, long way off.

Nick Ramsay faced the first salvo. asked a girl with attitude - the kind you as chair like having in the audience. "I didn't. The irony is I'd bought a bed and a sofa" he said, thinking what felt to him like a reasonable response would lead to the same from his audience. He was wrong. "Why should we pay for your bed and sofa anyway?" A boy from another school had nabbed the microphone. The applause was resounding. You got the feeling at least half the audience wondered why we need to pay politicians anything. Eleanor Burnham went on the attack. She got nowhere.

"Why do we need so many elected politicians in this country" called out one teenager. "Look at America. Huge and with far fewer of them!" The audience whooped and cheered.

A single hand went up, a young girl who had the guts to suggest she was rather pleased we had more politicans. It felt to her more democratic in this country than in the States. Brave girl.

You may then be surprisred to hear that the Conservatives made clear at their weekly lobby briefing that they intend to oppose a new measure - or Welsh law - that would allow the creation of an independent body to set the pay and expenses of Assembly Members. The Presiding Offcier is making a statement on the measure this afternoon.

The idea hasn't come from nowhere. . They wanted to see the current link between the pay of MPs and AMs broken and an independent Welsh panel appointed to decide how much AMs are paid and take home in expenses.

The Assembly Commission say: establishing an independent board would be one important step in the bid to create "an open and transparent process which will instil public confidence".

The Conservatives say: no way! At least that's my interpretation of Darren Millar's words: "this is a point we're not prepared to concede on". In fact I'd almost say he leaned right in front of Nick Bourne to make sure the point was made clearly.

Why? Their argument went along these lines: it wouldn't help the situation one jot, it would open the can of worms that is regional pay - we got to allusions to Welsh teachers being paid less than English teachers pretty quickly - it would be a waste of money and anyway it wasn't central to the recommendations made by Roger Jones.

The Commission, pressed on cost and waste say the new body would cost £25,000 to set up and in subsequent years would cost £5,000 per annum to run. I've looked back at the Roger Jones report. Setting up an independent panel is, from my reading, a "principal recommendation". You can decide whether that makes it 'central' or not.

What about public perception? Wouldn't the teenagers in Newport and their mums and dads and aunties and uncles and teachers and friends be taken aback to hear the Conservatives don't want an independent body established to determine their pay? Why should this play badly with the public, said Nick Bourne, unless the "public perception line" is "pushed by people who want this body set up".

What of the other parties?

The Liberal Democrats are fully supportive of the measure.
Plaid are fully supportive of the measure.

Labour? They're still discussing their response. I'm told by a few sources now that one sticking point is that some members of the Labour group want a say, a vote even, on who is appointed to the "independent" board. Work that one out. I don't know about you but that feels to me just a bit like turkeys being prepared to vote for Christmas, as long as the catering board are all fully signed up vegetarians.

So: had the Conservatives expected Labour to come out and oppose the measure too, safety in numbers and all that ... only to find they haven't? Do they now find themselves alone, defending a wicket that feels rather stickier than they'd imagined?

It's very tempting to think so.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Mark Isherwood is a mild mannered man. He is also the Conservative chair of Legislation Committee No.5 - the committee that is scrutinising the Welsh Lanuage LCO.

For a mild mannered man he's written a bluntly worded letter to Peter Hain. It chides him for briefing journalists on the draft Order before it was published. That showed "discourtesy." It then goes on to question the decision to allow a meeting of the Welsh Grand Committee to consider the Order at all.

"We do not understand why you would wish to add another stage, of little discernible benefit, to an already complex and lengthy process ... I strongly urge you to respect the conventions for pre-legislative scrutiny, and not to develop exceptions on an ad hoc basis, so that a consistent approach can be taken to how the Assembly acquires its legislative competence".

To you and me that's hardly Craig Revel-Horwood territory but to the Welsh Affairs Select Committee - who were copied in on the letter and who discussed it this morning - it's serious stuff.

It has apparently gone down "very, very badly".

Their arguments?

1. The meeting of the Welsh Grand did not delay the process.
2. The letter is misconceived in that it is parliament who decides whether there's a debate, not the Secretary of State. He simply facilitates it.
3. Far from delaying the process. It enhanced it.

The words "a certain amount of ignorance" and "contempt of parliament" came up in the conversation too, one which ended with a rhetorical question: can you imagine how the Presiding Officer would have responded if a parliamentary committee wrote to an Assembly Committee telling them how to run their business?

I thought you could.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

What's the secret of good comedy? Timing.

And what about politics? Mmm ... if you've just toyed with saying timing again, then you may be interested by this. The Secretary of State, Peter Hain will be giving a lecture in the Wales Governance Centre in Cardiff next Thursday.

His chosen subject? "Good news: more powers for Wales."

It turns out his subject is ... timing.

Mr Hain, "as a passionate devolutionist ... presents the case for the incremental devolution of powers to the Assembly and argues the current devolution settlement is working well. The process enabling the Assembly to take on more and more law making powers delivers much more than under the old system, and is being continually reviewed and improved. He warns against a holding a referendum on full law making powers prematurely".

Rather neat really. His subject is timing and let's pause for a minute to consider the timing of his lecture. It's bang, slap in the middle of the Labour leadership race. It's a matter of weeks before Sir Emyr Jones Parry and the All Wales Convention present their report on the issues surrounding a referendum - one where it's reported we'll be surprised by the extent of the comment and the decisiveness of that comment.

Mr Hain, it seems, will be getting in first.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

is a Scottish story. The Shadow Scottish Secretary, David Mundell, is apparently regarded by some senior Scottish Tories as a problem: "the David problem".

The man who shared a stage with Shadow Welsh Secretary Cheryl Gillan just a few weeks ago in Manchester is regarded by some of his colleagues as "a political lightweight" and "not Cabinet-level material". They don't think he'd be up to the job of Scottish Secretary and think someone else should get the job.

As I say, this is a Scottish story. And in case you'd wondered, the response from the Welsh Conservatives to any whisperings that it might have resonance in Wales is that there is no "Cheryl problem."

There would certainly be a Welsh Secretary in a Cameron cabinet go the whisperings I've heard recently.

Cheryl Gillan would be it.

She would preside over a beefed up, tuned in, switched on Wales Office.

There. What shall we call it? The Cheryl solution perhaps?

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

You get the feeling the Albert Matthews suite in the pine clad lodge of the Celtic Manor has never before been the scene of a speech that says "Let Labour be Labour." You wonder what the response would be on the immaculate greens outside, or amongst those who've in the past stood there to celebrate winning the "Celtic Fourball" or "The Golden Balls" to a suggestion that the Ryder Cup in 2011 should be used as a shop window to show case social policy. They may heed the call to arms and battle for "a proper living wage for contract workers." They may not.

Huw Lewis, the leadership contender who say the two biggest unions plump for his two opponents over the weekend, hopes ordinary Labour members will like what they hear.

He launched his manifesto this morning and sounded more than one warning.

Labour has gone backwards in three elections now. Fact.

Now comes the metaphor and Huw Lewis' take on why.

When you hit rough water he said, "more of the same" - and yes, take that as a reference to his opponents, Mr Jones perhaps more so than Mrs Hart in this instance - simply means drifting and plunging over the edge: "change must come."

And if change is to come, the party - no, the movement - must be listened to. He didn't use the words 'union stitch-up' but I did and here was his response in full:

"I've got great faith in the Labour movement as a whole. The Labour movement is more than the Labour Party. One of the things that I'm trying to promote through this campaign is a proper conversation beween the wings of the movement. I just hope the lines of communication stay open. We are in tough times and unless the movement holds together over the next few years we'll pay the price for that. So I want to see open doors and open minds. That's all I'm asking".

He's referring to . His opponents - and on this occasion take it as a reference to Mrs Hart more so than Mr Jones - might suggest that what he's really referring to is the fact that the biggest unions have not given him their support.

On Saturday the political leadership of Unite voted 25 for Edwina Hart, 3 for Carwyn Jones, 0 for Huw Lewis. Mrs Hart also has the support of the leaders of Community and the Communication Workers Unions. Unison members are being encouraged to support Carwyn Jones.

Huw Lewis has the support of the Co-operative party. He must appeal to the grassroots, to the individual members or he loses.

If the block vote still existed, Mrs Hart would be laughing. It doesn't. It's up to members whether and how they vote. Not even the most influential leader of the tailor and garment makers union should be able to stitch this one up.

But everyone, clearly, is not convinced.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Let's start with the easy bit: the vast majority of Welsh Labour MPs want to see Carwyn Jones leading the party and leading the country. Before leaving London yesterday I had sixteen names next to his. They come in groups of three and four, they come in individuals who would think twice about crossing the bridge back to Wales if anyone else won. He is the runaway favourite of this crucial group of voters.

"Carwyn is my number one choice" one spiky character is reported to have said. "Edwina is my second. Huw is my fifteenth".

Another physically squirms at the thought of Edwina Hart winning. Her refusal in the past to appear before the Welsh Affairs Select Committee has gone down about as well as an offer from the Shadow Welsh Secretary to scrutinise any measures the Welsh Assembly Government may introduce in future on the Welsh language: "I merely make the suggestion". Cheryl Gillan was accused at yesterday's meeting of the Welsh Grand Committee of a crime we'll call 'trampling willy-nilly all over the legislative rights of the Assembly Government'. Edwina Hart is accused of treating Welsh MPs with disdain. Believe me: big no-nos in both cases.

Paul Murphy and Don Touhig, great friends in and out of parliament, have astounded some of their colleagues by endorsing Edwina Hart's campaign. Stunned is the word for two or three of them. Why on earth have they endorsed her? Well they've made it clear they want her to win because they can and have worked with her and her values are theirs ... I say.

Not good enough for some. For them it's a case of 'what the hell' are they up to. That sort of astonishment tends to bring out conspiracy theories and I heard a few yesterday. Number one: at heart Paul Murphy and Don Touhig hate "the project" (devolution and all it brings with it) and Carwyn Jones is far too closely aligned with "the project" to be trusted. In fact they hate it so much that they've voted for Edwina Hart because they think she's the most likely to make a mess of it and bring it into disrepute. Yes, really, that's the theory put to me from more than one direction. Discuss.

But let's move on from complex double bluffs and easy maths - a Carwyn Jones hands-down victory - to something else that struck me. There was a stark difference in attitude to the other two candidates.

Huw Lewis has huge fans in Westminster. He will get votes from the north, the west and the south east of Wales from colleagues who think he's got it right and has called it right for quite some time. But if you're not a huge fan, you think he's a loser. There are MPs who for all sorts of reasons would not back anyone who's thought of as a loser. That leaves Edwina Hart and while she commands huge disrespect amongst many of her Westminster colleagues, they're not sure she's a loser. They're afraid she might somehow or other be a winner. As far as their own votes go, I'm not sure that means anything very much. In all sorts of other ways, it might matter rather more.

Over the next few days the big unions will decide which candidate they're backing: Unison tomorrow, the even more massive Unite on Saturday. Union members don't have to vote according to the steer given by their leaders. How do they do vote will be reflected in the percentage of the vote each candidate gets. But look back to the deputy leadership campaign in which Peter Hain was involved and each time, I think I'm right in saying the majority went with the steer from the top.

What the leadership decides matters. More simple maths then: what is decided tomorrow and on Saturday matters a lot.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Now wouldn't it be fascinating if - bang, slap in the middle of the Labour leadership campaign - a poll came out, one that includes a question about attitudes to the candidates in that leadership race.

Wouldn't it be even more fascinating if that poll covered not only voting intentions in the next general election but voting intentions in a forthcoming referendum on law making powers? After all, if you asked the three leadership candidates directly where they stand on that referendum, what would they say? Who'd be lukewarm, who'd be ambivalent, who'd be gung ho?

The very, very good news in a land brimming with blogs but devoid of polls - and therefore, very often, of political context - is that YouGov has established a Welsh panel. That means they have a pool of people who will take part in regular internet polling. The results of their very first Welsh poll will be published in a fortnight's time when the tantalising prospect of regular polling in Wales will be dangled before us.

Doing the dangling? YouGov President Peter Kellner.

Doing the analysing, Richard Wyn Jones from the Wales Governance Centre at Cardiff University and Roger Scully from Aberystwyth University.

Waiting on tenterhooks? Just about every political anorak in Wales.

Off to London on the early train to find out what the Welsh Grand Committee makes of the Welsh Language LCO. My colleague David Cornock is threatening to live tweet the event. Political anoraks rejoice!

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Watch this space? The full story is now .

Briefing highlights.

The Permanent Secretary Gillian Morgan describing the current crop of policies governing International Business Wales expense claims as "this mish-mash of policies," "cobbled together" and "not fit for purpose". That's pretty clear then, as was the pledge that they're about to be reworked, the first of many "re" words used this morning.

Of the 11% of claims where the policies governing them are perfectly clear - but the reasons for claiming are not e.g. football kits, school text books, substantial bar and bar hire bills, she was "cautiously optimistic" that this part of the system - in other words probably one of the most risky parts of the system - showed no sign of systematic abuse.

It's also worth noting that, given this started with claims about "first class life styles" and IBW officials turning left on planes when the rules said they ought to have turned right, some of the first class tickets claimed and made public a few months ago turned out to be perfectly legitimate. Names were named back then. We can't name the names now exonerated because we don't know who they are. When all becomes clear, we should.

"This is not a sick part of the system" said the Permanent Secretary. Yes, there are questions to be answered but she "has seen worse reports in other organisations". She had, incidentally, been through the evidence at first hand: "I was a very bored bunny for two days".

Would this have been picked up if it hadn't been for the Lib Dems and "that apology" the First Minister was forced to make? Yes, it would she insisted. Work had been underway since earlier in the year to sort out the system and these problems would have been picked up.

What would not have happened, you might be tempted to suggest, is that the detailed evidence would have been made public, put before journalists and put before you in the way that it has been today.

The Economic Development Minister and Deputy First Minister didn't look like a bored bunny. Ieuan Wyn Jones didn't look like a particularly happy bunny either when the figures in the tables handed out turned out to be wrong. They were wrong at the second attempt too. A problem with printers he could have done without on a day the accuracy and record keeping of others was under attack.

On the implications of the benchmarking report questioning IBW's performance? I noted four "re-" words: he talked of the need to "refocus", "reshape", "realign" and totally "rethink" the future of economic policy in Wales.

Had it taken him two years in the job and a growing amount of criticism of his department to come to that conclusion? Granted he's had other things to deal with recently - like steering Wales through the recession for a start - but this report is pretty damning and it's come out on his watch.

He took the rap - but only kind of. "Look, I could have accepted the report and said, there we are. I haven't. It crystallized a great deal that I'd felt already ... I'm accepting that things in the past need to change. That's a strength".

He was sitting next to a woman whose I.D lanyard had the words "Safe and Sound" printed on it. I'm not sure all of those offiicials crammed into Mr Jones' office felt that way by the end of the briefing.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Remember ?

If you do, you'll probably remember what followed: and .

The moral of the story? Never, ever make the mistake of causing the First Minister to accuse a leader of another party, in this case Kirsty Williams, of telling "an outright lie", only to find that he's the one to have told an untruth. It's the ultimate no-no.

International Business Wales may well be reflecting on just that thought this morning.

They are the people who promote Welsh business abroad. That costs money. That won't be news to you. But the Liberal Democrats wondered out loud some months ago whether the amount IBW officials were spending wasn't a heck of a lot - and I mean, a HECK of a lot - compared to the amount they were bringing in. The implication, that they were living "first class" and "jet set" lifestyles, said the First Minister, was "repugnant".

Then a couple of receipts were leaked, showing that first class flights had indeed been paid for from the public purse. The upshot - an inquiry by KPMG into their expenses at a cost of £129,000 (to the Tories' astonishment) and a wider inquiry into IBW's efficiency - a benchmarking study against its counterparts elsewhere in the UK.

IBW might think of it as retribution. I couldn't possibly comment but the promise was of an "independent and comprehensive" review.

It's both. Watch this space.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

I came back from Manchester and fell into the Mastermind Cymru questioner's chair for two days. The children's final is a corker and the celebrities? My lips are sealed but the way Gavin and Stacey's Dave Coaches, Nessa's partner, says 'Nesa' - pass in Welsh - is a joy.

So what's occurrin' in the Labour leadership race? What have I missed? On Friday the bookies got in touch to share their view that "Rivals can't keep up with Jones". Carwyn Jones' lead was stretching. A string of three figure bets had convinced them to cut his odds and put Edwina Hart and Huw Lewis in joint second.

Less than 24 hours later and it was "Hart moves up the rails". Why? Had there been big money bets put on her? Not exactly. "Health Minister Edwina Hart is now proving popular with political punters following her endorsement by Vale of Glamorgan AM Jane Hutt".

Wow. Who'd have thought she had such pull down the bookies.

AM nominations closed at midday and so there are now officially three in the race:

HART, Edwina
JONES, Carwyn
LEWIS, Huw

Strange how a different type-face makes the election of our next First Minister seem rather more imminent.

Here's a checklist of who's supporting who.

Edwina Hart tops the list of AMs with nominations from nine AMs:

Edwina Hart Ms Rosemary Butler
Edwina Hart Ms Christine Chapman
Edwina Hart Mr Jeffrey Cuthbert
Edwina Hart Mr Andrew Davies
Edwina Hart Mrs Janice Gregory
Edwina Hart Mrs Edwina Hart
Edwina Hart Ms Jane Hutt
Edwina Hart Ms Val Lloyd
Edwina Hart Mrs Sandra Mewies
Edwina Hart Mrs Gwenda Thomas

Carwyn Jones gets 8:

Carwyn Jones Mr Leighton Andrews
Carwyn Jones Ms Lorraine Barrett
Carwyn Jones Ms Jane Davidson
Carwyn Jones Mr Alun Davies
Carwyn Jones Dr Brian Gibbons
Carwyn Jones Mr John Griffiths
Carwyn Jones Mrs Lesley Griffiths
Carwyn Jones Mr Carwyn Jones
Carwyn Jones Mr Carl Sargeant

Huw Lewis has six - (as you've pointed out correctly in the comments, five + his own vote).

Huw Lewis Ms Irene James
Huw Lewis Ms Ann Jones
Huw Lewis Mr Huw Lewis
Huw Lewis Ms Lynne Neagle
Huw Lewis Ms Karen Sinclair
Huw Lewis Ms Joyce Watson

Now what? It's on to so-called supporting nominations from MPs, lone MEP, affiliated organisations and Constituency Labour Parties. They have ten days to respond and their support will be there for all to see in the election booklet that goes out with the ballot papers.

Huw Lewis - whose 'blooper' has received 305 hits on YouTube, 60 more than his actual campaign message - launched in Aberfan on Friday. Most prominent members of the audience? It must have been the young Labour supporters who had "Swansea Labour Students" emblazoned on the backs of their red hoodies. Point made. The Co-operative Party has now come out in support of Huw Lewis, as has Alun Michael MP.

Former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and Don Touhig are in the Edwina Hart camp. Big names, big endorsements, out early to kill off the sort of narrative that says MPs couldn't work with her. I have and I could is the gist of Mr Murphy's message.

But two MPs - or three with local MP Martin Caton - does not a First Minister make, at least not without a huge number of compensating votes from the affiliates and CLPs.

The Carwyn Jones camp are absolutely confident of a majority of MPs. Given there are 29 of them, they;re talking 15 or more. They say UK government ministers are lining up in the wings. The question is whether Mr Murphy's faith in Edwina Hart will cause some MPs to rethink their first, or even second preference.

And finally another Email, not from a bookie but one who understands the lay of the land in betting terms considerably better than I do. He's getting excited. Why? Because if you'd asked the bookies to quote a price on Carwyn Jones losing, last week you'd ahve been quoted a price of 8-11. That means that though he's the favourite to win, in a one to one battle the combined price of being beaten by either of the other two contenders means ... he could lose.

In other words if all of those who choose Huw Lewis as their first preference put Edwina Hart's name second, "not one of the three front runners seem set for a clear passage to the winning line".

Or in yet more words, this is going to be a proper contest.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• |
• Reddit
• - What's this?

If there'd been blogs about 40 years ago Patrick Hannan's would have been an ought-to-read. Even better, it would have been a must-read.

´óÏó´«Ã½ Wales' "Political and Industrial Correspondent" as he was known back then - before proving over thirteen years that there really was enough politics to keep a correspondent fully occupied - had a great lightness of touch to go with his depth of knowledge. It was a good combination. It made his searching questions and scrutiny acceptable to the politicians and union leaders who faced it and made politics palatable, inviting even for the audience he wanted to reach.

I've just been back through the archives. It's fantastic stuff. The graphics are dreadful, the passion and the commitment brilliant. While Wales was going through four decades of huge political upheaval - miners striking, Neil Kinnock taking on his own party at ferocious conferences, the "crushing defeat" of the referendum result catching broadcasters unawares, Pat Hannan was always there, getting straight to the point, interpreting, making sense of it all.

And that was the point for him. He wanted "the constitutional question" and everything that went with it to mean something to people. He wanted implications to be spelled out so that people would come up with answers for themselves - the best kind after all.

On Radio 4's Round Britain Quiz he and Peter Stead - and I've just caught sight of a young Mr Stead tearing a strip off Neil Kinnock - were given a licence to show off. Patrick couldn't help himself sometimes. Just the slightest prod and he'd reel off the train of thought that had led the Wales team to obscure solutions and to victory five times in ten years. An answer to which 'twins' was the key was his proudest from the last series. "Do you know what Betsan, I don't know where it came from but ..." They invariably got there.

Patrick died on Saturday. I - we - will miss him.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

My attempts to live blog and even to 'as live blog' this morning's session on The Union and its future, featuring Cheryl Gillan, Nick Bourne ("they're a bit like you and me" whispered the man sitting next to me to his wife) and the Shadow Secretaries of State of Scotland and Northern Ireland were scuppered by technical problems.

Ok I just couldn't log in for some reason. Give me a time and I'll blog my notes for those of you who show more interest in these things than the man sitting on the other side of me, the one who spent the session trying to finish a particularly tough Sudoku puzzle.

The only problem with devolution, said Nick Bourne this morning, "is that we don't run it". So what would happen if the Conservatives did run it?

Two things of note this morning: number one is a suggestion - though no more - that those Conservative Assembly Members who had been seriously concerned that a Conservative Welsh Secretary might block a request for a referendum by the Assembly can relax. A clear hint from Cheryl Gillan that as Secretary of State, it is inconceivable that she would turn down such a request. "We will let the people decide" is what she said. The language of "let" is more than we've heard from her before now.

What can she - and David Cameron - see coming? Conservative activists out campaigning, leaading the fight on both sides. Splits in the party made clear on platforms everywhere. But better that, the party may well have decided, than being seen to turn down a bid to let the people decide.

Secondly, our Scottish friends had heard rumours that talks were already underway between the Conservatives and the civil service on what the early days of devolution - what the Scotland and Wales Offices - might look like under a Tory regime. They were right.

On Tuedsday Ms Gillan will be off to meet senior officials at the Ministry of Justice to discuss a possible transfer of power after the general election. In other words if we win, let's start talking now about what we'd do. She'll meet the Ministry's permanent secretary and its director general of devolution. We gather she's already held talks with the director of the Wales Office, now part of the MoJ.

We'll hear more, we're told, after the All Wales Convention reports. Rhodri Morgan and Ieuan Wyn Jones get that report on November 18th. It is already written. Every 'i' has been dotted. Every 't' crossed. It's now being translated so that every 'ch' and 'll' are in place too.

What if the rumours now making the rounds are right? What if it doesn't turn out to be an 'on the one hand this', 'on the other hand that' report after all? What if caution hasn't been thrown to the wind but kept in rather more check than many had imagined?

There could then, of course, be a vote on a referndum held in the Assembly before a general election. Imagine how central the issue would be then in the run up to that election.

Even the man sitting next to me might be persuaded to put down his Sudoku puzzle.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

It's Wednesday in Manchester. What are we fixing today?

Broken politics? That was Monday.

Broken economy? George Osborne was pretty open about his plans on that one yesterday.

It must be the broken society. Can we fix it? Yes, we can. Prepare for policy plans on criminal justice, redressing the balance as the Conservatives see it between the rights of the criminal and the rights of those communities who suffer because of them. It's familiar territory that will appeal to those sitting in the conference hall, one or two perhaps feeling slightly wobbly after yesterday's lesson in honesty from the Shadow Chancellor.

They boy, they believe, did good. But did he HAVE to be photographed drinking bubbly and did he HAVE to be SO honest about pay freezes and delayed pensions? Isn't there a danger, they might worry this morning, that people say they accept the need to take a hit but when it comes to putting a cross in a box, that they'll see themselves still turning up at 9.00am in their suit and tie when they're 66 and simply despair ... And think again?

There is of course. That's why the speech was a gamble but honesty, the party faithful have decided, was a good move. Come a day that is the day after a Conservative victory in the General Election, then honesty won't just have proved to be good. It'll have proved to be crucial. It'll be the moment Mr Osborne can say that he told us so and it'll be the moment he can point to that all important 'm' - a mandate.

As I left the conference hall this morning after an early shift, I bumped into George Osborne. At least I bumped into a man - a man from the Mirror I assume - who was trying to serve him with a glass of champagne on a silver platter. The Mirror man was all dressed up for the occasion. The Shadow Chancellor's rattled minders made sure he had nowhere to go.

Mr Osborne himself kept his cool and carried on with a round of live television interviews persuading us that we're all of us "in this together".

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

It's the Legislative Competence Order that's become known as the Hell-co. I'm talking, of course, about . Yes, go on, prick up your ears. We're talking about transferring powers to legislate on matters concerning 'the language' to the Assembly.

Some of you have an unhappy tendency to comment on the language, no matter what the blog posting is about. The draft budget? Why should a single penny be spent supporting the Welsh language? Labour leadership campaign? Which candidate speaks Welsh, which one doesn't, why do we even mention it? Edwina Hart's terrifying shoes? Photographed in ... a Welsh language magazine. Why should it get any public subsidy?
And so it goes on.

It's a bit like a game of six degrees of separation, except most of you don't need anything like six moves to kick off a thread laying into the language, those who speak it and those who spend any public money supporting it.

This morning, let me make it easy for you.

We're about to be presented with . I seem to remember a pledge to publish a draft on March 1st - St David's Day last year that is. There'll be more details later but I gather that there are some key changes to the LCO as we knew it. Here they are:

The threshold for organisations receiving public money has gone up from £200k to £400k in a financial year before they fall under the scope of any future legislation on the language. It's understood there was pressure from Whitehall to push the limit up to a million. Sounds as though they met somewhere near the middle.

There will be an appeals mechansim, so that any organisation that feels it's been wrongly included in the scope of any future measures can ask to be excluded on the grounds of 'reasonableness and proportionality.

Shops won't fall under the scope of future legislation, neither will electricity and gas transmission companies. Bus services will, as will telecommunication companies.

Watered down versus common sense? Expect the Wales Office to claim they've brokered the deal and that common sense has won the day. The Welsh Assembly Government will try very hard to bite their collective tongue and insist this LCO still allows them to deliver their key One Wales agreement commitments: all together now - the language commissioner, linguistic rights and an official status for the Welsh language.

Either way there's confidence the LCO will be with the Privy Council be next February, which suggests the right to legislate will be translated into actual legislation before the next Assembly election. Ah yes, never forget that crucial bit of punctuation.

Next week the Welsh Grand committee meets to discuss the Welsh Affairs Select Committee's take on the old LCO. Got that? By then it looks as though the new one will already have been agreed upon.

A strange process this, in anybody's language.

UPDATE

The Assembly Government lobby briefing is always translated. Questions asked in Welsh are translated to English and the same goes for the answers given. Because I speak Welsh, I don't wear a headset which means the translations I'm about to offer you are my own.

Alun Ffred Jones, the Culture Minister took the briefing. He was asked what he'd made of the role of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee in scrutinising the language LCO. Hadn't the Secretary of State said this morning on Radio Wales said that it was the scrutiny process - and the Welsh Affairs Committee's input as well as the Assembly Committee - that had made this piece of legislation "fit for purpose?"

The Welsh Affairs Committee had had "a far more interventionist role than anticipated - I can't deny that" said Mr Jones. His choice of word was 'ymwthiol.' I've gone for 'interventionist'. 'Pushy' does the job too. But that wasn't just the case with the language LCO. It went for their role in general with regard to drawing powers from Westminster. That process he called "cumbersome", quoting the First Minister. It was incomprehensible to the public he said and therefore, seriously weakened.

No need to translate Conservative David Melding's take on the process of transferring powers: "the areas of conflict have been greater than people anticipated." Or to put it another way, "messy and a dog's breakfast".

I wonder what his colleagues in Manchester have in mind by way of an alternative?

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Last week a colleague took to the streets with three photographs - one each of the three likely Labour leadership contenders. He drew a blank. No-one recognised them, no-one, that is, until he came across a civil servant on a lunch break. Even they could only name two of the three. I hope for their sake it was the two Ministers.

I'm not sure he would have had much more luck if he'd taken to the streets of London with photographs of Alan Johnson, Andy Burnham and the Milibands but Rhodri Morgan? Yes, ok. Point made.

So to those of you who drop into the blog every now and then and who think Jones, Hart and Lewis sounds vaguely like a firm of lawyers - the kind who specialise in conveyancing and rarely get thrust into the limelight - then here's my Good Morning Wales guide to the three.

The order, by the way, is alphabetical because otherwise, I might get a firm of lawyers who specialise in areas other than conveyancing after me.

Edwina Hart

If you had to guess which instrument Edwina Hart used to play in the National Youth Orchestra of Wales I bet you'd take a punt on the first violin. A bit piercing and shrill to some ears, to others a clear sound cutting through the guff around it. Well you'd be wrong. This former first violinist moved on to the viola - bang, slap in the middle of the orchestra. Pretty apt. Mrs Hart's involvement in the union movement has put her bang, slap in the middle of the Labour movement which is precisely why her fans think she could take the top job. Problems? Certainly.

Her critis say she digs in her heels - and such heels - even when she's wrong. The Health Minister will need and will get votes from fellow Assembly members but her fan base in Westminster? It's rather lacking shall we say. She rarely bothers to pay us a visit, say MPs. Not a team player. Slaps us down as meddlers. She's certainly never curried favour in Westminster and it's hard to see how she can now rely on many MPs' votes. Notoriously camera shy - ah yes, slaps us journalists down as meddlers too - Edwina Hart is an effective communicator ... but only when she wants to be.

She'll stand on her considerable heels, only if she thinks she's going to win.

Carwyn Jones

Carwyn Jones - think all the 'Bs'. The member for Bridgend was a practising barrister and a man who, depending on which side of the fence you are, is either a bit bland and rather blase about being the bookies' long-time favourite to take over from Rhodri Morgan, or the one candidate who has an all-important 'b' - broad appeal.

As Minister for Agriculture he hit the headlines and gained respect over his sure handling of the Foot and Mouth outbreak. His most recent job - Counsel General and Leader of the House - have seen him blend - ah, that 'b' again - rather more into the background. He tends, whisper some of his colleagues, to be lazy. Could he not, they ask, have made more of an impact? Others might suggest his portfolio and role as legal adviser to the government, rather than policy man, have made it difficult to stand out.

He's the only candidate who's a fluent Welsh speaker - enough in itself to persuade some Labour party members he's a closet nationalist who's too at home in coalition with Plaid. Rubbish, says the man himself who points to another couple of uncomfortable 'bs' for Labour - ballot boxes and bloody noses. It's time, he says, for Labour to be honest. Yes, it must appeal to its core vote but to win again, it must reach out and touch new supporters - and that's where he hopes broad appeal will come in rather handy.

Huw Lewis

Huw Lewis? Right, join in. In, out, in, out ... in, out and now is the member for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney about to shake things all about?

He resigned as party whip following Alun Michael's resignation; resigned again as a deputy minister over the disposal of carcasses is his patch during the foot and mouth crisis. Proof he's a man of principle, say his fans. Proof he's a man with a short fuse, say his critics. He wa sacked as a deputy minister when Plaid struck their deal with Labour - a partnership he vehemently opposed. He now knows that opposition will stand him in good stead with some parts of the party come the leadership election.

No cabinet platform then for but as a back bencher he can and does speak his mind. He dismissed suggestions that some in the party had cost Labour votes in Welsh speaking Wales because of their attitude to the language as "self-evident nonsense". He's slammed the Labour-led government's failure to do more to tackle child poverty. But anti the language? He's learning Welsh. Anti coalition? He says he'd abide by the deal his party has struck.

It's old news that Huw Lewis divides opinion. The question is whether the man in the neat suit, white shirt and dark red tie can now make that work for him.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

Off to Manchester this week to but first, there's some pain to endure this end - a great deal of pain in fact.

It's the kind of pain you know is coming but can do nothing about. It's the kind of pain that I always knew to expect when the dentist suggested putting on the Richard Clayderman CD when I walked into his room. I used to take my pain muzak-free.

It's the kind of pain that hits the pocket and comes at the end of months of dire warnings that there is less money in the public spending pot than ever before. It's the kind that gets local government leaders preparing to pen press releases in anger and resorting to cut and paste ... 'at the coal-face' ... 'front line services must be protected' ... because they're convinced that as deliverers of our services, they will always bear the brunt of cuts.

It's the kind of pain you feel when you're a Finance Minister in a National Assembly and you're seeing an ever decreasing pot of money coming at you. You know that your budget is largely fixed and anyway you've already nicked a bit of extra cash from this year's budget to spend last year and you've dipped into your reserves ... and now it's pay-back time.

Bear in mind that all Andrew Davies can reveal later is how he intends to divvy up the money the government has to play with. How much he and the Assembly Government have to play with was decided some time ago. He's debated the spending choices ahead with his cabinet colleagues for months. There is £416million pounds to be found in efficiency savings - £200m of it already taken from the pot to be spent early in order to inject some cash into the Welsh economy asap and another £216m that is a straightforward cut.

Will he ring-fence some departmental budgets? Can he afford to protect the health and education budgets or will he simply ask everyone to take a hit? Will he look at the £216m and divide it up between the long row of begging bowls in front of him? The health budget is projected to be some £6billion - just over in fact. If you're talking about serious constraints on spending, will he insist that they share the pain of efficiency savings? His language so far seems to suggest he expects everyone to feel the squeeze.

Up in Manchester the race to prove you're really, really good at this constraint business goes on.

The Conservatives are talking about a "big and bold shake-up" of incapacity benefits. In other words the cuts they're promising are real cuts but they're cuts for a purpose. Gordon Brown has finally brought himself to talk spending "cuts" and Nick Clegg has tried to trump both with this "savage cuts".

Le'ts listen closely to Andrew Davies' language this afternoon. Will he be tempted to join in this every-so-slightly macho competition to prove he's not afraid of cuts? Or will he simply accept that the really big cut has been made for him by the Chancelllor and adopt the language of partnership and co-operation to ease the pain we all know is coming?

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

There will be no campaigning in the race to succeed Rhodri Morgan until midday tomorrow - well, officially at least.

But do me a favour. Don't miss tomorrow's Good Morning Wales.

Albert Owen MP will be in the Carwyn Jones corner. Sian James MP - whose constituency postcode is, of course, SA - will not be in the corner of the AM who shares her postcode. She's in the Huw Lewis corner.

Can we bet the third corner will be filled very soon? Will Edwina Hart be in the race or not? Let's put it like this. She left the special meeting in Transport House this lunchtime in a taxi. I happened to spot the last letters of the registration number - UP.

Game up? No. Game on.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?

That Rhodri Morgan stepped on to the stage for his big Welsh night farewell during "the fightback conference" as it was dubbed must have been a bit galling but he'd have to admit it made sense somehow. The irony was there for all to see. The man's personal appeal might not have waned one bit but his party's under his leadership? It's been hitting an all time low.

Let's come out with it: Rhodri Morgan is remarkably popular - not just well known, not just well liked but genuinely respected. He's the First Minister who has a pint down the pub. He's the local Assembly Member who buys his loaf in the farmer's market on a Sunday morning looking like the rest of us on a Sunday morning. He's the man who shows you his garden and the wrens nesting in it with a delight that tells you he'll have a life after all of this is over. He's the man who missed Mwnt so much last month that he went swimming in the sea off Barry Island for the first time since he was a child. "Miss Baywatch Barry Island 2009" who offered to save him clearly thought he was struggling. He revelled in what he thought was his powerful stroke.

He was our lad, put down by the Prime Minister, "shafted" as Rhodri Morgan was to put it years later by Tony Blair. He lost the election for the Labour leadership first time round to Alun Michael by 52.68% of the vote to 47.32%.

Now you can argue that 5.36% of the vote was the making of him. When he eventually got the job, it came with an enormous amount of goodwill and the feeling that the right man was now in the right job.

Even people who had no intention of voting Labour would answer the door to a canvassing Rhodri Morgan and be pleased to see him. It was "Hyia Rhodri" before - in recent years at least - going out and voting for another party or simply staying at home. His personal approval ratings as a politician caused a psephologist to send me a note saying simply: "With figures like those, Rhodri for Pope I say". Yet his party's approval ratings in Wales? With figures like those, they are, as Mr Morgan himself once said, toast.

On Sunday night in Brighton he was saying goodbye to a party with its back against the wall, a party that was beaten to second place in Wales by the Conservatives back in June and that has happened on his watch. How is it, one colleague and friend after another has said over the past few weeks, that people like Rhodri more than they like most politicians virtually anywhere in the UK but in Wales, in successive elections now, Labour has suffered more in the polls than virtually anywhere in the UK? Why can he no longer endow his party with his own popularity?

We're about to set off to Transport House - Labour's HQ. More irony. There's rebuilding work going on inside but outside the place simply looks under siege, a bit like a bomb site. That is where Mr Morgan will tell the Welsh Executive Committee of the Labour party and his fellow Labour AMs that he intends to stand down, that - as he put in Brighton - he's getting "ready to hand the baton over to the next generation".

That's when we'll learn who really wants to grab that baton and when we start to learn whether the race for the Labour leadershp will be about personal appeal, or a realisation amongst the candidates that that doesn't seem to cut it any more.

• Bookmark with:
• del.icio.us |
• Digg |
• Newsvine |
• |
• Reddit
• - What's this?