91热爆

Is Wales losing out because of the 2012 London Olympics?

Yes, according to Culture Minister Rhodri Glyn Thomas at least whose letter to James Purnell, his then-counterpart at the Department of Culture, Media and Sport puts a figure on it: 拢70 million.

The Culture Minister doesn't pull his punches.

"The increased contribution from the National Lottery announced in March 2007 means that Wales stands to lose in the region of 拢70 million in Lottery funding between 2009 and 2012 ... Despite assurances about a return of investment from the sale of land after the Games, the impact will continue to be felt for years to come and it will take considerable time for Wales to recover."

He goes on: "All this will have a devastating impact on small community groups throughout Wales and many worthwhile projects will be put at risk. There is a growing perception that Wales is paying an unfair price for an event that will primarily benefit London and South East England."

So far but no further is the message and while that message is undoubtedly the Culture Minister's, I gather the unusually strong wording came from the civil service.

What's the word now? Not aggressive ... No, assertive. Yes, that's it, assertive. Are we seeing civil servants embracing a new spirit of assertiveness?

And it seems someone else is in a pretty assertive mood too, in private at least.

Yesterday the coalition stood firm as Labour and Plaid AMs voted down a Conservative motion calling on the UK Government to honour the pay award recommended by the Police Arbitration Board.

Were the Tories surprised? Not by Labour AMs, no but they might have held out some hope of support from Plaid Cymru AMs. How come? Because a fortnight ago Plaid backbenchers (including whip Chris Franks) supported a written statement of opinion tabled by one of their number, Bethan Jenkins AM.

It's straightforward stuff.

"The National Assembly calls upon the UK Government to honour the pay award recommended by the Police Arbitration Board in full."

So when the Tory motion called on the National Assembly to lobby the UK Government to do just that, what did Plaid do? They voted against it.

Brian Gibbons, the Assembly's Local Government Minister did the same. But I hear that's not all he did. Another assertive letter seems to have made its way down to Westminster, one in which Mr Gibbons lets 91热爆 Secretary Jacqui Smith know that while the Assembly government opposed the Tory motion, it hurt.

In fact Mr Gibbons seems to have told the 91热爆 Secretary that while the coalition voted against the Tory motion, they in fact agreed with it.

'Collective responsiblity, officer'?

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

Try these headlines for size: "Breakfast with fellow blogger"; "EC Vice President calls for all-Wales EU debate"; "Intercourse first night".

Eye strangely drawn to the last one? I thought so. Margot Wallstrom, the EC's Vice President thought so too. Thanks for the tip Mrs Wallstrom!

She IS a blogger and she was in the 91热爆 for a traditional Welsh dry croissant breakfast. She's also the EC's Vice President and was here to try and work out how to engage with us Europeans, how to persuade us to debate big European issues. She's a big fish and she's right - we don't do enough in our own news coverage. She's right too that trying to sell stories emanating from Brussels to the newsroom is tough, even if those stories about farming, food labelling, global warming do eventually ... after much consulation ... touch lives in Benllech and Bedlinog.

So Mrs Wallstrom came up with a suggestion and it seems worth listening to a woman who was voted the most popular in Sweden in 2006. She rather thought there was a lesson to be learned from a fellow Swede who for years had been trying to attract an audience to his community film nights. He lived out in the country and was finding it tough to persuade people to turn out.

He then decided to show a film with a bit of sex in it. Just a little bit but being a truthful kind of bloke he put up a poster before the premiere advertising "Intercourse first night."

The hall was packed.

I don't think it was an invitation to bring sex into everything but yes, I think we got the point that there's more than one way of skinning un chat domestique.

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

Patience please.

On January 31st a new song, to celebrate St David鈥檚 Day will be launched at the National Assembly.

The children of Ysgol Pen-y-Garth in Penarth will cross the Bay by boat to perform the song - 鈥淐enwch y Clychau i Dewi 鈥� Ring Out the Bells for St David鈥�.

They're a very wise bunch getting in so early. Leaving it until the day itself would probably mean competing with the annual March 1st Conservative Chorus calling for a national holiday on St David's Day.

But there's more:

"After their performance the children will be the first to vote in 鈥淲elsh Idol鈥� the National Assembly鈥檚 quest to find the Nation鈥檚 favourite Welsh person. During February, visitors to the Senedd will be asked to name their favourite Welsh person. People from other parts of Wales will be able to send their suggestions to the Assembly on a postcard. A shortlist will then be announced in time for voting for Wales鈥檚 favourite to begin on St David鈥檚 Day."

Someone warn the Electoral Commission now.

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

The posh doors were flung open yesterday and let me tell you, that doesn't happen very often.

Usually when we're called to a photo opportunity on the Senedd steps - and there have been plenty of those recently - the politicians stride purposefully through the same door as you and I do. Some, who've seen it all before, amble out, guarding against the cold wind of Cardiff Bay.

But not yesterday. For the new Welsh Secretary the posh doors, the ones I've only seen used before for the Queen on State Opening days, were thrown open. From our position outside we watched as Mr Murphy and Mr Morgan strode through the Neuadd, chatting animatedly as they went. On cue the man stationed at the posh doors threw them open.

If there's one things you know about the Senedd then no doubt you'll know it's transparent, or 'see-through' as one lad on a visit from West Wales once told me. The National Assembly likes to make the point that "is completely transparent at the public level and sits on a slate plinth which steps upwards from the waterfront and houses the private spaces of the building."

So we watched as they appeared beneath the "gently undulating roof" but yesterday there was no ambling. Paul Murphy and Rhodri Morgan knew what there were there to do and had ten minutes to do it before the new man headed back to London. It was a day for striding and for making a point.

What was that point? That Mr Murphy and Mr Morgan are mates; they're friends; butts since the old days when they arrived in Westminster as new boys together. I gather they were out to dinner on Sunday night and that Mr Murphy's first words when he walked into the office yesterday were "hyia butt". I think it's fair to say they wouldn't have been Mr Hain's choice of words.

Every other sentence was peppered with "trust" and "friendship". The purpose of the exercise was as transparent as the building: no-one believes the road ahead will be "gently undulating", in fact it's a pretty certain bet it'll be bumpy but these two are mates, who trust each other and that means they will get to the end of the road in one piece.

I almost swore I could hear the playing over the Senedd sound system but no, I must have imagined it. But we all heard the message loud and clear.

'When the rain starts to fall' Mr Murphy and Mr Morgan will be there for each other.

When some MPs have a moment of epiphany and realise there are things that are no longer their official business, Mr Murphy 'will be there' for Mr Morgan and his gang.

When some AMs have a moment of epiphany and realise there are things that are not - yet, if ever - their official business, Mr Morgan 'will be there' for Mr Murphy and his gang.

Job done, off they strode, still chatting, still keen to let us know that in this relationship, neither friend will be more equal than the other.

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

As I hurried off to Neath was rife I see.

Right surname but wrong job as it happens. Mr Murphy it was but Paul Murphy - Torfaen's MP and the man some had expected to emerge as spritual leader of the anti-referendum-on-further-powers campaign, let alone an anti-further-powers campaign.

Instead he's back in cabinet, back in charge of a 'smooth transition' of powers to Cardiff, just as he was in 1999. Those are his own words by the way unless my ear-piece was playing up.

As he's pointed out already tonight he was no fan of devolution back then but he did his job. Now he must do it again and work with the Assembly Government - a coalition government he never, ever wanted to exist. His job, he says, is "not to frustrate anybody". Colleagues from the opposition benches seem to want to believe him. He is, they say, a gentleman. 'What you see with Paul is what you get' says one, suggesting only in the tone of his voice that he wouldn't have chosen those particular words to describe his predecessor.

Should they be surprised that Paul Murphy has already said he agrees with Peter Hain and does not believe "there will be a referendum this side of a General Election"? (I'm relying on ear-pieces and dodgy satellite links again but I'm pretty sure that's what he said).

No of course they shouldn't.

And it's not just colleagues from London, or from other parties who will wonder what lies ahead. Things weren't rosy in the Hain/Morgan garden - that much was obvious. What of Murphy/Morgan?

By the way just as Peter Hain's day couldn't get any worse, it did. As his agent and ever-loyal former agent arrived at Mr Hain's constituency home to greet the media, they tried a clever manoeuvre and reversed straight into the lamp-post at the top of the drive.

That damage, at least, can easily be put right.

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

As the Electoral Commision decides to refer Peter Hain's case to Scotland Yard, Mr Hain, we're told, will "resign as Work and Pensions Secretary this afternoon".

He plans to "clear his name".

Does this mean he's still Welsh Secretary then?

No it doesn't; just a bit long-winded for the headlines perhaps.

Now what were those odds on his successor?

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

(If you're from Swansea, close your eyes now).

If you just can't wait until May 1st to cast your vote, never fear. Vote for Cardiff before February 29th and it might yet make it onto the world's .

The good news is that Cardiff is one of Mr Monopoly's "pre-selected 68 great cities"; the bad news is that it's so far failed to make it into the top 20. London, Dublin and Edinburgh are all there - Cardiff is not. In fact we're down in 52nd place with 0.4% of the vote. (Well I did vote twice ... and yes, that is allowed.)

So how come?

After all there's a very impressive photograph on the Cardiff page of "the brand new Wales Millennium Centre". (Take a chance card, go straight next door, have a word with the Heritage Minister and )

What about the hard sell?

"Cardiff grew from a small town in the early 19th century into the world's largest coal exporting port". No mention of the here though. Very wise. (Go next door, plead poverty, collect plenty of regrets but sorry, no cash from the Community Chest).

What about Cardiff and Co, the company that has promised to "enable the capital to really punch its weight promotionally throughout the UK and internationally", the company that "will be a pivotal part of the city's continuing success". Don't ask the Chief Executive they appointed just a few months ago - she's already left.

If you fancy the job then you'll need "the courage to be innovative while being diplomatic and bridge building in approach and style". You'll also pick up 拢70k as you pass Go, so it can't be all bad.

Go on - get voting. After the last few months' headlines, it looks like Cardiff really does need you.

(You can open them again now).

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

I wish there were some good Wenglish words for an almighty fight but nothing quite compares to 'stooshie' - a word my colleague Brian Taylor gets to use regularly.

A quick Google search comes up with definitions ranging from 'a mild altercation' to 'an almighty fight', so you can decide for yourselves on a 'stooshie' scale of 1 to 10 where to place this latest difference of opinion over the Welsh Assembly Government's right to ban slapping.

To help you make up your mind: a copy of a letter Deputy Minister Gwenda Thomas has written to the Chair of the Vulnerable Children and Child Poverty Legislative Competence Order Committee lands in our laps. (Big title, small committee, huge task). In her letter she comes out fighting on the issue of WAG's right to ban slapping.

"You will be aware of recent press reports about the UK government's view that the law regarding physical punishment of children could not be within the Assembly's legislative competence because it relates to criminal law, which is not devolved, and therefore would not primarily relate to any of the fields currently in Schedule 5 of the Government of Wales Act 2006.

The Welsh Assembly Government does not accept this argument. In our view, a power for the Assembly to legislate so as to protect children from harm caused by parents or people with parental responsibilty physically punishing them could relate to an appropriately worded matter in the social welfare field - a field which is in Schedule 5. There is an important distinction between criminal justice in general - which is not devolved - and criminal sanctions, which may or may not be devolved. It is not necessary that the Assembly should have legislative competence in respect of the criminal law generally in order to make provision changing an aspect of the criminal law."

So far so ante upped.

Then comes this:

"It is clear that if the current draft is not amended the whole of our Vulnerable Children LCO would be endangered ... The Welsh Assembly Government has agreed that the proposed Order be amended to meet the UK Government's insistence that it should not confer legislative competence on the Assembly to enable the removal of the defence of reasonable punishment in relation to the physical punishment of children".

In other words, we're right, you're wrong .. but ... nah, we're not up for an all-out war.

So who is right? Unless the Counsel General for Wales, Carwyn Jones is ready to take on the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips in a proper, official 'stooshie' you'll just have to come to your own conclusion. Even those who agree that Westminster's interpretation is probably right seem to think this is the first of many arguments to come thanks to - as one of them put it - "a fundamental weakness" in the Government of Wales Act.

Perhaps by then one of you will have come up with our very own alternative word for 'fight' or 'battle'.

In the meantime, my advice to the children of Wales: you'd better behave yourselves.

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

Granted: the Politics Show has a fairly informal dress code. The team call it 'continental elegance' but whatever you care to call it, I did wonder whether the First Minister had taken it just a bit too far yesterday.

Now I know you care about this sort of thing because of all the entries on Newsnight's blog, guess which one broke the record for the highest number of comments ever - 348 in all? It was this one in which Jeremy Paxman asked whether Newsnight presenters should wear ties or not.

Adrian Masters wasn't wearing one on the Politics Show yesterday. Neither was Rhodri Morgan. It wouldn't have gone with the jumper, the one he wore last week to see Timmy Mallett in panto in Porthcawl; the one that made you think he'd rushed to the studio from his allotment; the one that made it rather hard to listen to what he had to say.

But listen we did, especially to his response to Peter Hain's message last week that the Assembly Government won't be allowed to ban smacking.

Why won't they? Because it's not within the Assembly's competence. It would involve the Criminal Justice System - not devolved so out of bounds.

Simple? The Wales Office seem to think so. Mind you they also seemed to think Rhodri Morgan was to agree with them and that wasn't the impression he gave yesterday.

What he did say was that Whitehall feel so strongly about the ban on smacking being dropped, that they'd rather scupper the whole LCO than allow an Order that fails to make absolutely clear that the Assembly cannot bring in a ban on smacking. The Assembly Government don't really want to set that sort of precedent for the future.

This is how the First Minister put it: "What they (Whitehall) are saying is if you want to have the ability to have a measure in the future which would enable you to remove the so-called reasonable chastisement defence against common assault charges - parent to child or parental guardian to child, then we won't let you have the LCO at all, so on that condition we are really being obliged to rewrite the LCO".

And in case we didn't get it the first time:

" ... if you want that power in there, or any doubt about whether you want that power, you won't have the LCO at all."

Today the Wales Office say there's nothing in the 'blocking move' story. But then they also say that unless the Order is redrafted so it's made explicit that the Assembly can't bring in a smacking ban, then they won't get any of the powers.

Now I'm not sure if this is just the predicted "London calls the tune" story or not; but I'm pretty sure it's a story. And the very well placed WAG insider who said something about 'big brother politics' as I walked by this morning seemed to agree.

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

Actually, no it didn't but reader Richard Harris' comment gave me the idea ...

I don't own a dog and my mouse and laptop are in perfect working order. However my children are not, so please forgive the light blogging at the moment.

I know it's a fevered time in certain parts of Welsh politics but the children's fevered brows have kept me busy. Nothing serious and temperatures are now back down even without spoonfuls of the pink, sticky stuff.

School tomorrow. Back to the Senedd, home of the National Assembly for Wales to scrutinise the Welsh Assembly Government for me.

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

No, not the Welsh Secretary this time but us at 91热爆 Wales.

I've spent an afternoon eating humble pie and handing out big dollops of it for others to swallow. In other words I've been talking about the things we get wrong in an effort to ensure we get it right more often in the future.

Now I accept your list of our cardinal sins might be longer than mine but on my hit-list this afternoon were: writing scripts and stories that refer to the Assembly when we mean the Assembly Government, closely followed by coming up with snappy headlines that sound good ... but are wrong.

How about discussing new measures or Welsh laws when what we really mean are the Legislative Competence Orders that may one day lead to new measures?

I could go on ... and on ... but you get my drift.

After a long and not particularly exciting session in plenary, the Presiding Officer was keen to participate and ready to let off some steam.

Why is it, he asked, that we 'get' the difference between Gordon Brown's government and parliament and would be out of a job as journalists if we didn't but regularly fail to differentiate properly between the Assembly Government and the Assembly?

Why do we talk about the institution when we actually mean the executive?

Why do use pictures of the Senedd when we refer to a government that is based in Cathays Park?

Why do we write "Assembly boss harassed colleague" when the boss in question worked for the Assembly Government?

My job? To make a video about the above, one which my colleagues won't want to throw out of the window without bothering to watch.

"What exciting story are you covering today?" asked the man from Coed Cadw, who'd wandered over from his stall in the Neuadd. I told him. He was sympathetic but confused. "Important to differentiate between what and what?" he asked. "The Assembly Government and the Assembly" I said. "No, you've got me there".

I think, deep down, he was glad we cared but was rather more concerned about how the Assembly Government plans to spend its money and whether Peter Hain's time is up, because of the way he raised and spent his.

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

Will he stay or will he go?

Peter Hain will certainly ride out the current storm. How do I know? Big Karl, our E-betting guru says so, that's how.
If Mr Hain has any cash to spare after paying back that 拢25,000 loan, he might be tempted by these odds in his favour:

Peter Hain to remian as Welsh Secretary: 1-2
Peter Hain to stand down or be sacked: 11-8

IF he goes, who comes in?

Kevin Brennan: 6-4
Huw Irranca-Davies: 5-2
David Hanson: 7-2
No Welsh MP appointed; position combined at next reshuffle: 5-1
Kim Howells: 10-1
Wayne David: 25-1

By the way the odds-on favourite to become one of Plaid's new batch of Lords - Dafydd Wigley - has finally confirmed that his 'conditions for standing' have been met. In other words, he wants the job.

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

It's round at our place tomorrow then.

MPs who are members of the Establishing Committee of the All Wales Convention are coming to Cardiff for round 2 of the talks. Round 1 gave us Nick Ainger as chairman and Helen Mary Jones as his deputy. Round 2 promises to be much more fun.

Why? Because this time they'll have to get down to the nitty gritty. This time they'll have to start deciding what the remit of the Convention on further powers should be and how it should operate .. and rumour has it that Labour and Plaid Cymru members of the committee have come to radically different conclusions about their remit. Cosy it won't be.

The Convention will be chaired by former diplomat, Emyr Jones Parry. That much we know - but just like a certain think-tank I could mention, we know very little else. It sounds as though Labour members want a Convention with a pretty narrow remit - in other words a group designed to advise Wales' political parties on the timing of a referendum campaign. It should be neutral and simply advise on the circumstances in which a 'yes' vote would be won. It would commission research on public opinion, assess it and make recommendations. In other words its remit wouldn't run further than examining the potential for winning a referendum under Part 4 of the Government of Wales Act.

So how about Plaid members? I gather they favour a much wider ranging remit. They want a Convention that's allowed to examine the case for widening the areas of policy which the Assembly can legislate on, like criminal justice. How about an increase in the number of AMs to deal with the extra powers which would come with additional competencies? Yes, they want that looked at too.

What about the really fundamental stuff? Labour members, I'm told, view the Convention as a neutral body. It may be aimed at paving the way for a 'yes' vote but it's essentially an evidence gathering body, not a campaigning one. Plaid on the other hand see its role as making the case for more powers, a campaigning body to build consensus, not just measure it.

Labour seem to want a smaller Convention, run by an executive. Plaid a more ambitious body, a 'rolling Convention' where the establishing committee would lead the work of a large number of smaller groups right across Wales.

Entrenched? I'm sure they'll find a way of meeting in the middle - especially since the boss, Sir Emyr himself, will be in Cardiff and part of the discussions.

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

The statement expected at 11am finally came at 3.30pm.

As far as I can see it answered just two questions: Mr Hain is not for jumping and yes, he's going to repay the 拢25,000 interest free loan he got from diamond broker, Willie Nagel, via the PPF think-tank.

These are the facts that remain:

Progressive Policies Forum were set up a few weeks after Mr Hain said he was going to stand for the deputy leadership. It appears to have done very little to progress any policies.

One of its trustees, John Underwood, was one of Hain4Labour's main money men. I've spoken to more than one source who were closely involved in the campaign. They're agreed on one thing: they regarded John Underwood as the Hain campaign treasurer.

Some of those whose donations were channelled via PPF had decided against donating to the Hain campaign because they didn't want their names to be made public.

All of those who donated via PPF now say they are happy that their money went to the campaign but it's nowhere near clear that they were asked first, as they should have been. One says he can't remember but he might have been; one says he wasn't asked; another seemed to say he wasn't asked but in a statement, then skirted the issue.

The donations, say Mr Hain, were made by people who were legally entitled to do so but it's a fact, driven home by this morning's papers, that it doesn't look good nor feel right.

Mr Hain is no fool and won't even dare to think it's all over.

And all for the pleasure of beating Hazel Blears into last place

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

A call from the Hain camp. John Underwood, they say, was not Hain4 Labour's campaign treasurer. In fact, the campaign had no official, overall treasurer.

Why don't I find that too hard to believe. And yet ...

The two campaign managers - Phil Taylor until he left in early April and after that, Steve Morgan - were in charge I'm told, until the latter stages of the process when John Underwood took overall charge. 'Latter stages', I think, means when they'd lost but still needed to raise an awful lot of cash.

That's not the version of events a source very, very close to the top of the campaign is giving us even now. He insists Mr Underwood was the campaign treasurer.

Chaos reigns.

As for Mr Hain? They're not sure where he is today apparently.

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

So now the Electoral Commission know and so do we.

Peter Hain failed to register 拢103,156.75 in donations to his deputy leadership campaign. Who was it who whispered in my ear that the undeclared proceedings of the dinner in the Park House in Cardiff was just the tip of the iceberg? How right you were.

And it doesn't come in dribs and drabs either. We're talking sums of 拢2,000, 拢5,000 and 拢10,000 from wealthy friends and supportive businessmen. There's Mike Cuddy, joint managing director of the Ospreys; Patrick Head, co-founder of the Williams Formula 1 team; Bill Bottriell, an IT recruitement millionaire.

It's late and I thought I was seeing stars for a moment but actually, five donations are marked with an asterisk. Why? Because those donations were made "on behalf of the named individuals by a think tank, Progressive Policies Forum. The monies had been previously donated to PPF. When unpaid bills came to light PPF was approached and with the permission of the individual donors concerned the monies were donated to Hain4Labour to meet these debts".

Have you ever heard of PPF? No, neither have I. Who are they? What have they been 'thinking' about? What have they published? Nothing I can find. When were they set up? It looks like December 2006, which is some weeks after Peter Hain launched his deputy leadership campaign.

Who donated via PPF? There's Willie Nagel, an international diamond broker; Isaac Kaye, and one name you will surely recognise: Steve Morgan ... you know, the Steve Morgan who was "brought in to sort out the mess" - his own view admittedly.

Who is the contact at PPF? The statement says its John Underwood. Ah yes, another name that rings a bell. Could that be the same John Underwood who was the treasurer of Peter Hain's campaign?

Meanwhile Mr Hain has admitted to that he solicited most of the undeclared donations himself but just didn't think to check that they were registered. He's sorry. Very, very sorry and belives it is "his duty to carry on in government".

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

The important bit from Sir Christopher Kelly's evidence session in Westminster today is probably his response, as Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, to a question about Peter Hain. He ventures to say that:

'the committee would be concerned that even now not everyone appears
to have understood the importance of being absolutely transparent about
political donations" ...

Quite interesting I thought but not everyone agreed. Read on.

About half way through today's evidence session, Sir Christopher admitted he
was a "boring" person.
Challenging him, Tory MP Ian Liddell-Grainger said: "No disrespect intended,
but you strike me as a very boring man. Are you a boring man?"
Sir Christopher responded: "Am I boring man? Probably."
Asked whether, as such, he was an appropriate choice for a dynamic job, he
said: "Well it's never good to be boring is it? People don't listen to what you
say."

Ah ... some real news. Peter Hain has met with the Electoral Commission. They will now carry out 'permissibility checks' on every declared donation. If the reported scale of under-reporting is accurate, that may take some time.

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

I feel a bit like Carol Vorderman (and yes, all right, I know I don't look much like her) counting down to the all- important, match-settling Hain Countdown Conundrum.

Like any number of colleagues I'm waiting to decipher the Secretary of State's submission to the Electoral Commission when it comes. If he really is about to throw anything like an extra 拢100,000 into the open, then you get the feeling that "three big figures, two little ones and oh, one more nought" might be about right.

But who from? And will the boss accept that the blame lies with the campaign team, even if the buck stops with the deputy leadership candidate himself?

Mr Hain may be surprised to learn that, so far, one old enemy has "until now given Mr Hain and his team the benefit of the doubt." Plaid's Elfyn Llwyd MP isn't prepared to carry on though. Despite falling foul of parliamentary rules on campaigning himself just a few months ago, he's calling on the police to investigate "an under-declaration of this magnitude".

Keep counting down.

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

What does Ieuan Wyn Jones make of the UK government's decision to give the go-ahead to a new generation of nuclear power stations? Given his constituency will - in practice - probably house the one and only new nuclear power station in Wales, we thought we'd ask.

He is, as we know, in favour of replacing Wylfa on Anglesey. His party is not pro-nuclear but the leader and local AM has "a responsibility to defend jobs" on the island. Anglesey's MP, Albert Owen, is all for it too. No wonder Secretary of State Peter Hain has already put out a statement chomping at the bit "to work with them to take it forward".

So what does Mr Jones think? Apparently that this is an issue for Jane Davidson, Minister for the Environment and Sustainability.

What does Mr Jones Ynys Mon AM think?

That this is an issue for Jane Davidson, Minister for the Environment and Sustainability.

Don't suppose there's any point asking him as Plaid Cymru leader ...?

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

I read a few days ago that 2007 was a vintage year for pronouncing the death of things. You know the kind of 'things' I mean - family, tv, adverbs ('it happened real quick'), grown-ups, the music industry. An awful lot of 'things' were on their last legs or dead as a dodo.

The political death of Hillary Clinton's campaign wasn't on the list and that's just as well, given the overnight news from New Hampshire. Lobbyist Steve Morgan, helping hand to Hillary and Peter Hain's deputy leadership campaign manager, might be starting to wonder whether this time, at last, he may even be on the winning side.

He might not be so pleased that his version of events surrounding the non-declaration of donations to the Hain campaign has been challenged head-on today.

Phil Taylor, who ran the campaign until April 5th - a good 11 weeks before the contest came to its costly climax - has given an interview in which he blasts Morgan's claims that he was called in 'to sort out the chaos'. There was no chaos on his watch says Taylor, neither financial nor political.

Here's a taste of what's to come:

>"I just in all conscience and honesty couldn't stay on board with the campaign and work with Steve Morgan. It gives me no pleasure to say but the things that are becoming public now in a way vindicate that feeling I had at the time. "This was a minefield and a territory I wanted to keep close to my chest and manage myself. As soon as I became clear I wouldn't have total control over that area of the campaign, that combined with my concerns over the direction of the campaign, meant that I felt no option but to leave".

"You know it's widely believed there were a number of donations made during that period in June that weren't declared. Now I can't prove that. I don't know that. We need to wait and see what the campaign actually says when they finally publish their list of results but I think it's inconceivable to suggest that the person who ran the campaign throughout that period didn't know that donations were coming in and failed to declare them and at the end of the day, if you choose to run a campaign you have to take that responsibility yourself."

And as for the Secretary of State? He is, after all, legally responsible for whatever chaos did reign ...

"I've worked for him for a number of years and consider him to be a friend and the Peter I know would have had nothing to do with any of this. He is one of the most straightest, honest, decent men that I have ever met and I just cannot understand what went on in that campaign but I can only assumed that decisions were taken by his campaign manager that he knew nothing about because the Peter that I know would never in a million years have ever accepted any donation and not declared it and not followed the rules and in that sense when Peter says there was chaos, that must absolutely be true. That chaos has to be the responsibility of the person running the campaign and that was Steve Morgan."

So are those predicting the death of his government career getting ahead of themselves?

"So what I'm clear about is that there won't be any guilt attached to Peter personally. You and I both know that politics doesn't work like that and we'll just have to wait and see what the fall-out is when it becomes public about the donations that weren't declared."

That may be as soon as tomorrow.

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

I might have missed the top day for a new job hunt by 24 hours but if you're still keen to make a fresh start, then read on.

You'll already know there's an opening in the House of Lords for any Plaid Cymru sympathisers among you. Now that your party's 'doing' the Lords again, you may fancy your chances. If you do, then you'll need to get your names in by January 16th at the very latest. That's the day Plaid will be announcing their shortlist of candidates who'll then face hustings and the vote of the National Council ten days later: a lesson in being 'a bit democratic' which I suppose is just about more possible than being 'a bit pregnant'.

Where? Pontrhydfendigaid of course where the National Council voted for the coalition. (The London-based producer who gasped "you mean they're deciding on the future of the Welsh government in a place with no mobile phone signal, that we can't pronounce" take note).

Who will you be up against? Deputy Chairman of the Principality for one; the second to go for it is Janet Davies, former AM for South Wales West. The list grows by the day.

And who'll chair the hustings I wonder? Given to grill potential successors to Ann Widdecombe in Maidstone and the Weald, I look forward to seeing who Plaid can persuade to take on the Pontrhydfendigaid gig.

If that's not for you, then how about one of two new jobs as a Special Adviser to the coalition government? A bit of foraging in the minutes reveals members of the cabinet were told in November that the Privy Council has approved the request for two new Assembly Government SpAds, who'll be recruited "by open competition".

Open competition? Really? I can't imagine anyone has an objection to that but it doesn't always happen that way does it? Call me cynical but I always had SpAds down as political appointees. But if you spot the advert, decide to go for it and get it, you will remember who pointed you in the right direction, won't you?

Last but not least I gather there may be an opening soon as unofficial moderator of Eleanor Burnham AM's new blog. I don't know what the pay is like but the Welsh Liberal Democrats will forever be in your debt.

UPDATE: And the next ... Dafydd Williams, former General Secretary of Plaid Cymru has thrown his hat into the ring as well. Those with a long memory will remember he topped the list back in 1999 and had to watch it being ripped up when Plaid decided against taking seats in the Lords.

Read the rest of this entry

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

Let's start the new blogging year with a bang.

"The Welsh language is no longer in decline because Wales is no longer in decline". Discuss.

Who am I quoting? No, not the Presiding Officer, Dafydd Elis-Thomas who got into hot water a few years ago when he claimed the battle for the language had been won. It's someone else in authority who speaks Welsh and whose new year's resolution is to remind us all what Welsh Labour has done for the Welsh language. More importantly, his plan is to remind those who speak it and live in West Wales that Labour cares for them.

A little caring in return is what he's after, especially the kind of caring that translates into votes.

It's the First Minister of course and not a day goes by without someone pausing in a lift or in the canteen to comment on how Rhodri Morgan seems to be enjoying his job at the moment ( unlike the Prime Minister perhaps - as some are starting to wonder ).

He is, of course, on a health drive. We all know that by now and are bracing ourselves to listen at the very first briefing of 2008 tomorrow morning that he enjoyed only the fat-free bits of the turkey and went without gravy. But he'll be on a different kind of drive towards the end of the week - one that takes him to Carmarthen East, Ceredigion, Aberconwy, Ynys Mon and Arfon on a whistlestop two-day tour. It's official title is the "Taith iaith" - the language tour - though it could be sub-titled "How will Plaid like it up 'em?"

Why? Because as Rhodri Morgan puts it May 3rd delivered a political map of Wales that has no red on it "west of the Loughor and west of the Clwyd". When the big Welsh Labour debrief aimed to analyse what went wrong on Assembly election day, one recommendation was that the party must accept "a need to revise at least perceptions of the party brand in Wales if it is to provide a more appealing message to both 'Welsh speaking' and 'British' voters, as well as one that appeals to more 'centrist' voters".

Yes, this is an exercise in visiting bits of Wales far from Cardiff that feel left out of the investment loop, remote from the decision-making, low in the pecking order ... bits that didn't vote Labour in great numbers. But it's called the "Taith Iaith" remember. Rhodri Morgan's one aim will be to persuade the school children and parents and workers and students and pensioners of West Wales that he believes language prosperity goes hand in hand with economic prosperity - and that Welsh Labour cares about both. An even taller order? The argument that his government and his party is delivering on both.

By the way THAT Plaid poster. Thanks to all of you who sent me an electronic version of it and for letting me know that there exists a framed version of the original artwork. If it ever turns up on Ebay along with other unwanted Christmas gifts, a love of irony may cause me to break my online bidding duck and put in an offer.

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