´óÏó´«Ã½

Should AMs be allowed to employ their own spouses and children?

The commission who put AMs salaries and expenses under scrutiny asked that very question and came to the clear conclusion that no, they shouldn't. If they already do, they can carry on because 'her indoors' or 'him indoors' - when in the office - have rights as employees but if AMs don't employ spouses and children, they can't start now. They key proposals are set out clearly enough .

The headlines that day were equally clear: "The Radio Wales headlines ... Assembly is accepting recommendations for sweeping reform of AMs expenses, stopping them from buying second homes or employing family members ..."

Why did Roger Jones and his panel come to that conclusion? It's a matter of "public confidence and best use of public funds".

Is the matter closed? Thanks to the Conservatives' Mohammad Asghar, it turns out it's rather spectacularly not.

In an interview with Paul Heaney on Newport City Radio, broadcast yesterday, relating to his decision to cross the floor, Mr Asghar talked about just the one issue. The cogent arguments outlined in Saturday's Western Mail essay had been put to one side. Forget his disagreement with independence (for which he voted on November 7th as Plaid point out.) Forget his take on the royal family. This was Mohammad Asghar responding "to

He went into some detail and the picture he painted was this: the South Wales East AM was initially told by Plaid's whip that he could employ his daughter as long as she was competent to do the job. Another colleague said he should check the issue with the Fees Office. He did and was told there was "no law yet" that would prevent him.

Plaid leader, Ieuan Wyn Jones, came to see him and Mr Asghar argued the case for employing his own daughter. She has a Masters in Politics and Media from UCL. She's well qualified and "who can look after my interests better" he argued, "than my own daughter?" Mr Jones thought it "fair enough. He went back. It was everything hunky dory. Wonderful". Not a version of events the Plaid leader says he recognises.

Nor the part, therefore, where Mr Asghar says the leader changed his mind. On the day Mr Asghar's daughter was travelling from London to Newport by train for the interview, he was told it would be "sensible if you don't let Natasha have a job". Mr Asghar, who already employed his wife, offered to pay his daughter's salary to charity, a charity of Plaid's choice and made it clear that "when Natasha moves in my wife will leave".

Plaid say that "at no point" did he offer to give her salary to charity. Even if the offer had been made, they say, the response would have been the same: he should not take her on.

"I think that was the last straw" said Mr Asghar. "I was not doing anything illegal. I promised to pay every penny of her salary to a charity ... and that was refused. You can imagine, as a father, what I had to do".

What he did was leave Plaid and join the Conservatives.

So Newport City Radio's Paul Heaney spotted the next obvious question listeners and constituents would no doubt want him to ask Mr Ashgar: is he looking to employ his daughter, now that's he's become a Conservative AM?

His response, spelling out that she too has left Plaid and joined the Tories, goes like this:

"I was very pleased and I tell you ... the truth. When I resigned, I never thought but she did it straight away with me. I know the Conservative party, the priority is to make every family in the United Kingdom prosperous and happy."

"So they're happy for Natasha to work in paid employment?"

"Yes, if she's competent. If she ticks all the boxes right, nobody should stop anybody working anywhere as long as they come through the proper competition channels. I was stopped by my own party".

"But your new party are happy to go though that selection process?"

"If she's good enough ... she can contribute to the community and to the party at the same time".

It's clear from the interview that Mr Asghar believes the Welsh Conservatives take a different view to Plaid Cymru on whether he can employ his daughter or not.

This is the comment from the Welsh Conservatives, who clearly wish their new recruit has stayed off the airwaves: "We have no comment to make other than to repeat our support as an Assembly group for the findings of the Jones Review." They insist that no promises, veiled or otherwise, have been made.

What does the Jones Review say?

"Recommendation 65: Assembly Members who employ family members,
as defined under the draft standing order at Appendix 13, should be
allowed to continue to do so. However we believe that Members should
not henceforward make any new appointment of family members".

Are we clear, then, that no matter which party Mr Asghar represents, he will not in future be able to give his daughter a job?

Actually, no.

Why? Because when it came to working out how the Roger Jones recommendations could be implemented and , the objections in principle to hiring your own family hit a legal buffer.

"The review panel wished to ban Assembly Members from employing members of their family but accepted legal advice that if challenged in the courts, such a ban would be difficult to defend. The review panel recommended that Assembly Members should adopt fair and open recruitment procedures when employing support staff. This does not preclude family members applying for such posts".

So where are we?

After the Assembly election in 2011 AMs will still be able to employ family members but only if they've been through a proper and robust interview process.

The Plaid group of AMs have decided to adopt the Jones review recommendation that no AM should in future employ a family member - robust interview or not.

The Conservative group support the recommendation but unlike Plaid, haven't chosen to adopt it as group policy.

Mohammad Asghar has moved from one group to the other, as he makes perfectly clear in his interview, at least in part because of that.

"Public confidence" in the Assembly and in Assembly politics? It hasn't exactly been given a boost by this episode, has it?

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