Just been advised by Blogger that Insidious displays spam charaterictics - assume they mean its bland & tasteless.

In case you haven't been keeping up with pre-election events, we suggest you read Malcolm Tucker's briefing in yesterday's Guardian to fill in any gaps. Just make sure that you're not eating or drinking at the time as the possibility of a soaked/splattered keyboard is a very real one.

Earlier this month, I posted this letter by Madoc Batcup about Question Time, complaining that the BBC was not fairly representing either Welsh affairs, or a representative cross-section of Welsh viewpoints on wider affairs, in the programme broadcast from Cardiff on 25 February.

Madoc has just received this reply:

Dear Mr Batcup

Thank you for your e-mail and further comments regarding 'Question Time' on 25 February. Please accept our apologies for the delay in replying. We know our correspondents appreciate a quick response and are sorry you've had to wait on this occasion.

I understand you were unhappy with the choice of panellists for this edition and that you felt there was a lack of questions related to fundamentally Welsh issues.

'Question Time' aims to generate lively weekly debate on various topical issues and to represent a broad range of views within each programme. However, it cannot do this and ensure strict political balance within the five-person panel each week. Given that it's working within a limited timeframe there will always be more question the audience would like to hear asked, and more panellists featured, than the programme can provide within individual broadcasts.

However the programme does seek to achieve balance over a reasonable period and has a firm commitment to political balance over the series as a whole.

This provides some scope for different balance from one week to another, and also for introducing variety in the guests and issues featured.

If you would like to take part in the audience and put forward a question you can find more information on how to do this on the programme's website here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/1858613.stm

Viewers can also share their views on each edition on the 'Question Time' section of the 'Have Your Say' blog here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/03/your_views_on_question_time_th_1.html

I'd also like to assure you that we've registered your comments on our audience log for the benefit of the programme makers and senior management within the BBC. The audience logs are important documents that can help shape future decisions and ensures that your points, and all other comments we receive, are circulated and considered across the BBC.

Thanks again for contacting us.

Regards

Stuart Webb
BBC Complaints

I think every one of us can see that this is nothing more than the standard template letter that the BBC keep on file to answer any complaint they receive ... though with one or two blanks filled in. And of course that doesn't make the BBC particularly different from any other large organization.

-

Before looking at Madoc's response, there are a few points that I'd like to make. The first is that the BBC seem to place considerable importance on what they call their "audience log". This seems to imply that they take rather more notice of the quantity of complaints they receive than their quality. So I would invite anybody reading this who agrees with what Madoc has said to write or email the BBC even if that involves making exactly the same points. This is the link:

     www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

I believe that the BBC are trapped in a particular way of looking at politics and current affairs that leaves their central organization largely unaware of the extent of the concerns of people in Wales in particular.

To illustrate this, the edition from Belfast on 11 February this year is still available on iPlayer. As we can see, the programme took particular care to represent all sides of the political spectrum on Northern Ireland, as well as having a UK perspective through Shaun Woodward, the SoSNI. And although some questions were specifically about Northern Ireland, a good number of them were about other issues such as UK involvement in torture, expenses corruption in Westminster, the Greek economy, and the pay of celebrities employed by the BBC.

To my mind this shows that the BBC took considerably more care to fulfill their obligations with respect to Northern Ireland than they do with respect to Wales.

•  On one hand, we should expect at least some matters of concern to Wales to be discussed on a programme aired throughout the UK. People elsewhere in the UK need and would surely want to be informed of what's happening in Wales. So if it's right that, say, the devolution of policing and justice to Northern Ireland was discussed on that programme, surely we should expect some aspects of what is or might be devolved to Wales to be discussed when the programme is broadcast from Wales.

•  On the other hand, it is of course right that UK and world issues are discussed in addition to matters that concern Wales. But even so, the majority of the panel should be composed of people who can contribute different shades of specifically Welsh opinion on these issues when the programme is broadcast from Wales. And this should be true whichever nation or region the programme is broadcast from.

As for Scotland, all we have to do is wait until Thursday, since the next edition of Question Time will come from Glasgow. I'm willing to bet that the BBC will take care that the composition of that panel and the questions asked will show more regard for Scotland than the programme from Cardiff did for Wales.

-

As might be expected, Madoc is not one to be fobbed off by such a cursory answer. None of us would be. This is his response to the BBC's letter:

Dear Mr. Webb

Your reply is wholly unacceptable, and I intend to take the matter further. You have answered none of my questions, but only given a bland reply which deals with none of the issues. The cursory nature of the reply and its general vagueness clearly indicate to me that you have not considered the matter in any detail. You do not deal with the particular issue of Wales, nor with the fact that none of the questions on the programme related to Wales, while two were wholly or largely to do with England. This programme could have been broadcast twenty years ago - there was no-one from the Welsh Assembly and indeed no mention of it, or of any decisions made in Wales. This approach gives the BBC no credibility whatsoever in terms of appropriate treatment of Welsh matters, and informing a wider UK audience about the situation in Wales. If your response is any indication of the way in which the BBC intends to cover the Westminster elections then it gives rise to great disquiet.

I believe that the programme represented a flagrant breach of the concerns laid out by the BBC well over ten years ago. I refer in particular to the BBC's programme response to Devolution published in December 1998, and the BBC Trust impartiality report: BBC network news and current affairs coverage of the four UK nations authored by Professor Anthony King and published in June 2008. The Question Time programme and your response typify the concern expressed by the BBC at the time in its response of 1998:

"... the BBC has sometimes appeared insensitive to political, administrative, cultural and linguistic differences across the UK, giving the impression of a London-based organisation dismissive of the more geographically distant parts of the UK. There have been errors of judgement, and, on occasions, of accuracy."

In the King Report it was pointed out that:

"... the review highlights concern that BBC network news and current affairs programmes taken as a whole are not reporting the changing UK with the range and precision that might reasonably be expected given the high standards the BBC itself aspires to. There are specific concerns as to accuracy and clarity of reporting, the balance of coverage, and missed opportunities of drawing on the rich variety of the UK and communicating it to multiple audiences. As examples, political coverage is seen as unduly focused on Westminster in volume and style; there is seen to be a general bias in favour of stories about England or telling stories from an England perspective; and there is evidence that several stories in the nations which may have been significant to the UK were not taken up by the network."

The BBC Trust's comment was:

"However, we are concerned at Professor King's assessment that the BBC is not reporting the changing UK with the range that might be expected, given the fact that audiences have expressed a desire to learn more about other parts of the UK in the BBC's coverage. This echoes a wider concern expressed to the Trust that audiences see the BBC as too preoccupied with the interests and experiences of London, and that those who live elsewhere in the UK do not see their lives adequately reflected on the BBC. It is not acceptable that a BBC funded by licence fee payers across the whole country should not address the interests of them all in fair measure."

In its document of 1998, the BBC, said that it would introduce certain measures to 'enable the BBC to provide accurate and well judged news for its audiences in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland but also to allow it to offer al

Caroline Lucas (5): Didn't make a fool of herself which was always the risk. Came out with some good crowd-pleasers and I did actually agree with her on the prosecution of children.

Andrew Lansley (8): Came across very well. Not as many soundbites compared to the others. Spoke from his head, rather that saying what the public wanted to here and got a lot of credit and respect for it.

Margaret Beckett (3): It's very hard defending the indefensible and Margaret Beckett was the latest government minister to fail attempting to do so. She was often caught in a fluster and the entire panel seemed to disagree with her on everything she said. I almost felt sorry for her. But didn't.

Charles Kennedy (5): He was there, often silenced by the very loud and charismatic panel but when he did have something to say he came across as genuine and what he said was well-meant. However, he seemed like he didn't really care about anything and surprised he's still an MP, I didn't sense the fire he once had inside him.

David Starkey (5): I would have given him ten for delivery but quite often he seemed like an angry, nasty and bitter old man. I agreed with him on quite a few points but felt the way he said it, despite being quite a reasonable suggestion was said angrily and viciously. Didn't win himself any fans or do himself any favours.

Very entertaining, I wish other Question Time's had just two panelists with as much fire as all these had.

What did you think?

Well I see that the Evening Post have had their way over the Tower restaurant in Swansea that I mentioned the other day. The poor chap who tried to make a go of it is now bankrupt and I feel pretty sure that all the negative publicity printed by the paper was a big factor. Whatever did he do to incur such vindictiveness?
Then again, it could all be down to the old story of another restaurant where a diner noticed one of the live lobsters steadily clawing up the side of the big tank. Summoning a waiter, he pointed out the crustacean's imminent escape. But the waiter smiled and explained that the lobster had been caught in Swansea Bay.

"Don't worry sir, the others are sure to drag him back down", came the assurance.

I just hope that the Beans on Toast (as it is known on another blog) is as steadfastly determined to uncover the dirt about shortcomings in the local social services department as it has been in exposing problems in what was an exciting but sadly short-lived enterprise.

Labour has already produced a campaign video which effectively accuses the Tories of being "the burglar's friend" for voting against the changes to the DNA retention regime.

It adds:
The government's crime and security bill, which includes the controversial DNA retention regime, has already passed through the Commons and is scheduled to have its second reading in the Lords on 29 March. Peers killed off an earlier attempt by the government to keep innocent DNA for up to 12 years and it is expected the six-year proposal will face renewed opposition.

All political careers have to come to an end, and I have to say that I even felt a touch of sympathy for Peter Hain as he was taunted in his final performance as Secretary of State for Wales in the Commons yesterday.

     Hain refuses to name the date for a referendum

Poor man. He put himself in an impossible position by being two-faced about devolution. He so wanted to be seen as a strong advocate of devolution in Wales. He claimed that it wasn't him who was holding back the move to primary lawmaking powers of the same sort (though still not to the same extent) as the Scottish Parliament has had for the past decade ... no, for him it was always the people of Wales who were holding things back because we wouldn't vote Yes in the referendum.

But poll after poll has shown that the people of Wales will vote Yes in the referendum.

Peter Hain couldn't live with that. I believe his support for further devolution was just posturing. He realized he couldn't stop it happening, so the only course left was to put obstacles in the way in order to slow it down. He then convinced himself that the convoluted dog's breakfast that he had devised would last for a generation. Some politicians can adapt to change, but he simply couldn't bring himself to admit that he'd misread the situation so badly.

-

But Labour took pity on him and allowed him to save face. The rest of the party eventually came to realize that it was in their own best interests to have the referendum; but by delaying the vote by a couple of weeks, and then forgetting to actually send him the letter, Cobweb Jones made sure that Peter Hain wouldn't be put in the awkward position of having to do anything about it at all. He could just let it gather dust in his intray ... which is where it will now stay until a new Tory Secretary of State for Wales sits behind his old desk at TÅ· Gwydyr. Not that I think she (or he, for the Tories might just get enough seats in Wales to be able to have a Secretary of State who has been elected by people in Wales, I suspect Jonathan Evans will be in line for it) will act very quickly ... but it would be too embarrassing for the Tories to break all their election promises. In fact, they will delight in being able to say that they delivered something for Wales, for I don't think Wales will get much else from them.

And that, of course, will be Peter Hain's final humiliation. By his logic, Labour should take all the credit for delivering devolution - but by that same logic, it will be the Tories that now give Wales a Senedd that can make laws without having to ask for Westminster's permission. How ironic. Peter Hain is the one that keeps saying "it's either Labour or the Tories" ... and he's now scored a spectacular own goal for the Tories!

-

Never mind, Peter. I hate to have to tell you this, but devolution was never about either Labour or the Tories. It's been about people in Wales, from all parties and none, believing that we in Wales should make most of the decisions that affect our lives in Wales through our own National Assembly.

On Monday the Executive Board are being asked to consider whether the increased allowances put forward by the Independant Remuneration Panel for Wales (IRPW) are accepted, I suppose it will be a matter of conscience and public relations, but to make things easier, the figures and allowances have been shuffled about so that the overall rise is still 'within the budget' of 1%, which means an increase from £1,319,892.00 to £1,332,384.00.
The 10 Board members and 11 Chairs and Party Leaders will still share out around £300,000 between them regardless. I have mentioned Meryl Gravell's possible raise here.
In the interest of PR the allowances among the top earners are being renamed 'senior salaries' in an attempt to suggest this money is earned rather than granted. They will also be required to give a 'publicly-accessible account of their council-related activity'.

This councillor business can be a very lucrative one, particularly with the common practice of rewarding loyalty by appointments to posts which carry a SRA (Special Responsibility Allowance), the 'panel' recommends that no more than 50% of members can be in reciept of an SRA - plenty of scope there then!

The panel that made the recommendations, the IRPW, is also coining it in, the Chairperson claims £256 per day, the vice chair £226 and members, £198 per day; established in 2008 and each member sits for four years, a nice little earner.

Of course, Councillors should be adequately recompensed and a few of them are worth every penny; in the same way that the decision to pay MP's removed the anomaly that only the idle rich could afford to languish their time away in Westminster, and it opened the office, more or less, to all. The problem, as with the MP's expenses scandal, is with abuse of the system and stringent measures to ensure accountability and transparency need to be in place.

In contrast to this display of of excess (and don't forget our overpaid Chief Executive) Monday's meeting will also consider an extensive report by the Social Justice Scrutiny Committee; 'Review of Poverty in Carmarthenshire'; Amongst the findings of the report are that 10.6% of Carmarthenshire households have an annual income of less than £10,000; Llandovery has the lowest average household income at £23,262 (Carmarthenshire average £28,860) with nearly 15% under £10,000. Over 50% of the county's households have an income under £25,000.

Many recommendations are made but I doubt if funding will be available for such 'unglamorous' projects, our senior executives would rather have a 'cutural centre' or a stadium on their CV than a drop in centre for debtors. And as all 'Communities First' projects are now on hold throughout Wales due to alleged fraud I don't suppose there will be much happening there, concern (Item 3) has already been expressed that Community First monies in Carmarthenshire have been used rather too much for 'capacity' building (whatever that might be) with not enough 'outcome'.

Language campaigners have welcomed an open letter from over a dozen lawyers calling for a stronger Welsh language law today (Thursday, 18 March). In their letter the distinguished solicitors and barristers say: "We believe there needs to be a clear...

Swansea councillors get briefed today on the contents of serious case reviews which report on findings of enquiries into events that led to the separate deaths of three youngsters whilst in the care of the city's social services department.

It is believed that only verbal briefings will be given - and by the department's director. Copies of the reports produced by the Swansea Safeguarding Children's Board will not be published until Friday. But there is already some confusion among political groups as claims fly about that some councillors have already received advance copies.

As expected, events have prompted an official re-think to the effect that a press conference is now unavoidable but actual details will not be available until later. One suggestion for the delay is that agencies are reluctant to turn up and get pilloried by the media when social services are so clearly in the frame.

No doubt we will hear more as the day progresses.

Item 9 on the agenda for the next Executive Board meeting is the snappily titled 'Local Development Plan: Preferred Strategy, Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment (SA/SEA), Habitats Regulations Assessment, Delivery Agreement'

The unremitting jargon in the 'Preferred Strategy' was highlighted by Plaid in their 'consultation' response, they quite rightly stated that it made this document, which after all shapes the future land use of the county, inaccessible to the public. The council officer's response was that it was a 'technical' document so tough luck.
The public does not need to be patronised but, for example, the ridiculous over use of the word 'sustainable' makes it lose any real meaning to anyone.
So wordy was this stage of the LDP that members of the public misunderstood the 'process' and commented on 'candidate sites'; apparently this should be done at the next stage - the 'pre-deposit plan' -which is the one to watch out for - that stage offers endless possibilities for those in the 'know' to secure advantages and do deals.

That delight will not be for some time as the whole bungling, incompetent process is behind by ONE WHOLE YEAR.

I see that the campaigners hoping to save Pantecelyn School from closure are considering a Judicial Review against the council. It also appears that the council officials have insisted that there will be no further debate, or any vote by elected members, on the whole matter of secondary school reform in Dinefwr. If a Judicial Review is sought on the grounds that the consultation process was flawed then this should be easy as every consultation that this council puts forward is biased and weighted towards the Council's preferred outcome; however any legal challenge to this council should be taken with great caution as, although the authority 'is strapped for cash', when it comes to legal fights, money is no object whatsoever.

County Councillors Jackson and Theophilus represent the school catchment area and should be outside the school spearheading the campaign instead of accepting defeat; as not only the future of the school is at stake but the future viability of Llandovery.

Thanks to a contributor for sending a link to the Guardian's guide to political posters - which includes this one.

The Ex auditor generalhas been charged with child porn offences
Jeremy Colman has appeared before magistrates in Cardiff to face 14 child pornography charges.
He , is charged with making and possessing 429 images, of which 126 were of a more serious "level four".
He also faces one charge of failing to disclose a key to protected information. He did not enter a plea.
This is chilling and he used his works computer to access and make these vile and odious images
So he didnt enter a plea
I hope they throw the book at him

It will be interesting to see if campaigning parties in Swansea West constituency take up this offer from Unity at Liberal Conspiracy to apply a Graph-Fix service to what he describes as "y-axis" abuse on election materials. The view in the Lib Dem camp is that tory contender Rene Kinzett will be unlikely to challenge anything as he has hardly been seen out of the stump this year. They also claim that local Conservatives have all but conceded that the seat is not winnable given the handicap of a part-time candidate and the majority of their resources diverted into the fight to win neighbouring Gower.

Then again, as we've mentioned before, the result from 2005 was achieved when the Lib Dem candidate was Rene Kinzett - who also held the role of spokesman for a hotch-potch political administration at County Hall which was still being given the benefit of the doubt. How times and circumstances have changed.

It was strange, to say the least, for last night's Week In Week Out on BBC Wales to feature Professor Christie Davies so prominently. His totally bizarre solution of Welsh enclaves in which people would have to speak Welsh not just fluently, but "excellently" - and forced to leave if they didn't, even if they'd lived there all their lives - would have been sinister if it wasn't so obvious that he was taking the piss.

OK, he might have fooled some BBC researchers into thinking he cared about the future of Welsh ... but that says more about what passes for research nowadays. If anybody needs reminding about what Professor Davies really thinks of Welsh, these two articles should help:

The last gasps of a dead tongue

Christie Davies argues that as the Welsh language will and must die out, encouraging people to learn it is a pointless exercise

The study of Welsh is compulsory in all schools in Wales. In Gwynedd all teaching is exclusively through the medium of Welsh. Yet, in my opinion, learning Welsh is of no use to anyone, since even in Wales itself the language is spoken by less than a fifth of the population and the vast majority of Welsh speakers are bilingual, often with English as their stronger language.

Whereas there is a strong case for ensuring that all school children in the United Kingdom should acquire a thorough mastery of all aspects of the English language, no such argument can be applied to the teaching and learning of Welsh. Rather, two libertarian principles should prevail throughout the Principality. First, all pupils should have an inalienable right to be educated through the medium of English. Second, every pupil should have the right not to study Welsh and to have access to a choice of modern languages in school.

While the Welsh language will, should and must die out, it does not follow that the study of dead Welsh should be abandoned. On the contrary the Welsh of the past should be made available alongside Latin and Greek for the more gifted pupils.

Times Higher Education, 4 July 1997

Why I ... believe the Welsh Assembly should not compel students to be taught in Welsh

For centuries, the Welsh were trapped by their obscure Celtic language in which little of importance was written. When they switched to English they entered the mainstream of European science and culture.

Next Thursday the Welsh will vote for candidates to the principality's new assembly. There will be a strong coalition composed of Welsh Nationalists, some Liberal Democrats and some Labour Party members. This coalition is likely to push for the spread of the Welsh language.

In my view this will be a disaster ...

Times Higher Education, 30 April 1999

I'm sure the word "libertarian" would have pricked up some ears, too. Yes, he's also part of the Social Affairs Unit, a right-wing think-tank. Who'd have guessed?

If the Welsh language had friends like this, it would hardly need any enemies.

I was recently given a code by a friend of mine to get a free ‘Graze box' and the second half price. It's a box delivered to your door with healthy food in for you to snack on during the day. It beats chocolate bars and crisps but is just as filling.

Anyway, to get your free Graze box

Go to graze.com

Type in the promotional code: HTPYKHT

And Bob's your uncle. I wouldn't recommend just anything on this blog, I love it and spend about £6 each week on a couple of boxes.

Enjoy!

I quote
"Not only because of his advancing years, but there appears to be more than a whiff of fin de siècle decay in the air over the global pandemic of priestly paedophilia: the disease has gone viral. The Independent refers to 'the lonely reign of Benedict XVI' as he is 'plagued by scandal upon scandal'."
So what is happening?
The amount of bad press over the antics of catholic priests from the drink to the serious child porn and paedophile activity is legion and the cover ups and shielding by the Pope himself is making headlines.
Its time there was a serious enquiry into what is going on and being covered up, and this undertaken by people outside of the Catholic Church. This would not be taken as passively if it was any other organisation.
Read more here
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7060444.ece
The Chief exorcist at the Vatican blames the Devil who he says stalks the corridors of the Vatican. Another blames the celibacy laws.
In an article for an in-house Church magazine, Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna, called for a debate on celibacy. He said "it was time to examine "the issue of priest celibacy and the issue of personality development. It requires a great deal of honesty, both on the part of the Church and of society as a whole".
More here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/7416458/Chief-exorcist-says-Devil-is-in-Vatican.html
Apparently odds on the Pope resigning have shortened to 3-1.
Interesting the news tonight was announcing his itinerary for his UK visit
He isn't coming to Wales.
Who ever and what ever is the case, it needs to be opened up and sorted out, those responsible need to be brought to justice in wider society and the Catholic Church needs to be a damn sight more honest about what is happening in its all male club.

We hear that some Swansea councillors have been asking uncomfortable questions in advance of the serious case reviews due to be published on Friday. Among these is a request for details about senior staff who have been allowed to resign or take early retirement from the social services child protection section during the periods covered by the three highly critical reports.

What appears to be driving these enquiries is an allegation, as yet unsubstantiated, that ex-staff & managers ignored their legal responsibilities in one or all of the three cases and that professional misconduct charges should follow.

Update: Looks like earlier hopes by council spinners at down-playing have been dashed by events in Wrexham. Nothing worse than a media trend when you're trying to keep a lid on things.

As some of you will have noticed from the blog list on the right, an important research paper on what will happen to countries such as Catalunya, Euskadi, Flanders, Scotland and of course Wales with regard to the EU when they become independent has just been published by Dr Antoni Abat i Ninet, visiting professor of law at Stanford University, California.

     

One slight problem is that it's only been published in Catalan so far, though I would expect an English version to be available before very long. We can get a flavour of what it says through Google Translate ... but for a paper that deals with legal and technical issues, it probably won't be enough. However this post from Oriol Junqueras seems to shed most light on what's been happening:

The president of the European Free Alliance (EFA), the Flemish Nelly Maes, and the President of the parliamentary subgroup in the European Parliament, the Welsh (and increasingly popular in Catalonia) Jill Evans, met some days ago with the President of the European Council, Van Rompuy, to explain the priorities of the EFA for this term. One of the topics that was addressed at the request of Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (the left of centre pro-independence party) was the consultation process of self-determination in Catalonia. In December the Jill Evans, along with other members of the Alliance, came to Catalonia to see first hand the first wave of referendums.

Van Rompuy was interested in the concept of internal enlargement that we have developed in the EFA, and about which Professor Antoni Abat i Ninet has written a report (pdf) ... very interesting, by the way, I recommend reading it. The report is published by Sobiranistes Studies Center (ESC) and advocates the feasibility and ease-of-entry to the EU once Catalonia declares independence, with solid political and legal arguments.

The President of the European Council, Van Rompuy, said he loved the concept of internal expansion as it was defined by the EU. On the one hand, it is normal for me to say a matter of courtesy, but on the other it is also true that the EU is very interested in any political project has a pro-European vision. One of the biggest problems in the EU is Euroscepticism, and the EFA advocates a policy of independence 'within the EU' clearly and unequivocally.

Incidentally, Van Rompuy's brother is a fervent supporter of Flemish independence. So we might suppose he would see and understand the benefits of internal enlargement ... or in any case would not have a distorted picture.

Anyway, these are small details that I think we should take on board to build trust and credibility to the Catalan independence project.

Oriol Junqueras, 15 March 2010

This meeting with Van Rompuy seems to be quite an advance, since previous attempts to raise questions in the EU about what would happen when our countries become independent have been met with less clear answers. And this of course has led to scaremongering by Unionist politicians that we would be thrown into outer darkness if we dared to become independent ... and that what was left of the UK would veto our application to join anyway. The paper by Dr Antoni Abat i Ninet will add yet more weight to counter that argument.

For the EFA report on Jill Evans' and Nelly Maes' meeting with Herman Van Rompuy, click the picture:

     

And I have been meaning to write an update on the situation in Catalunya for the past few weeks. I'll try and make time.

Why do you get the feeling that the people behind the Conservative poster campaign are either having creative problems or just going out of their way to make sure their efforts get dissed?

If ever a poster lent itself to a counter theme depicting non-dom, tax-avoiding, tory paymaster Michael C-Ashcroft  then surely this is the one.

I wonder if Charlie Whelan will be spitting feathers? Maybe he'll just go on strike over it.

We've recently been getting various comments from sehr kleinen Führer Edwards and some other anonymous pro-BNP bums. They seem to have mistaken this blog for a newspaper website where they can post their fascist crap at will - a belief which suggests that they're either on drugs or that they should be.

The bus can not pull in and the 4x4 driver justs ignores the situation!

Last week Betsan Powys posted something that gave me, and I guess everyone in Wales, cause for a small smile of satisfaction; namely that the much trumpeted difference in NHS waiting list times between Wales and England was not so clear cut as people had been led to believe.

While it's not possible to directly compare figures between Wales and England, as the data is not collected in exactly the same way, it is possible to get a rough indication of performance between the two, helpfully provided at a briefing on today's waiting list figures.

So with those health warnings in mind, at the end of December 2009:

In Wales, 89.9 per cent of patients waiting were waiting less than 18 weeks.
In England, 90 per cent of patients waiting were waiting less than 18 weeks.

Winner? Wales - by a whisker.

In Wales, 0.7 per cent of patients waiting were waiting over 26 weeks.
In England, 4.5 per cent of patients waiting were waiting over 26 weeks.

Winner? Wales

In Wales, no patients were waiting over 36 weeks.
In England, 47,459 patients were still waiting over 36 weeks.

Winner? No contest.

In England, the tolerance level for their 18 week maximum wait target is set at 90 per cent. So - or so at least the argument goes in Cardiff Bay - what you gain on the time you lose on the tolerance.

Betsan Powys, The Long Wait - 11 March 2010

As others—notably Welsh Ramblings in this post—have said, a small difference in waiting times probably doesn't matter very much. If Wales is slightly ahead now, we might well find ourselves behind in a few months time. And all of us will be aware that whenever an arbitrary target is set there will be a temptation to organize resources in a way that helps meet that target (like SATs in schools) at the expense of making more sensible and practical decisions about patients as patients, rather than as statistics. Even yesterday we have a reminder in this article that figures might say one thing, but that the actual experience might be different.

If we want to look at differences between our NHS and that in England we need to stand back and look at the bigger picture.

-

One part of the Politics Show yesterday stood out for me as a perfect example of something that I've said on more occasions than I can count. The biggest change in the NHS came about by restructuring the NHS as an internal market in which clinicians caring for people in need of treatment would buy that treatment from one of a number of competing providers. The stated aim of that reorganization was to drive down cost and provide choice. It was brought in by the Labour Party as a way of responding to the more right-leaning inclinations of middle England (Tony Blair got elected by being as right wing as, if not more right wing than, the Tories) ... but the reorganization in England was duly replicated by the Labour Party in Wales. The most obvious sign of this was to break up the existing Health Boards into 22 smaller units, precisely so that they could compete with each other over the provision of services. Yes, it meant a lot of duplication, but ideology dictated that the benefits of competition would outweigh the duplication.

     

I've perhaps shown more of the clip than is necessary to make the point, and the point is of course overlaid by a number of other points, but I wanted to put things into context. Gordon Brown firmly believes that he saved the NHS by introducing the internal market (much as he saved the world economy, I guess) and it is something that we can see he remains proud of. And we all know that so much money has been poured into the NHS over the past decade (in England by the UK government, with a proportionate amount to the devolved administrations) that things were bound to improve, despite the wastefulness and unnecessary duplication of the internal market. But what Labour did has fundamentally changed the ethos of the way that the NHS works, because it imposes a competitive business model on a service in which most of the staff are motivated primarily by compassion and the desire to help others rather than money and profit. The NHS works better when the people in it collaborate with each other rather than compete with each other.

I think Sally Austen expressed that perfectly in the clip, especially when she talked about the demoralizing effect it had on clinical staff, wearing them down and draining energy that should be directed towards patient care rather than squeezing the last penny on a funding deal with that part of the NHS that would provide the best care for the patient. And, as Mike Weston said afterwards, when staff are put under that sort of pressure what develops is a culture of blame and fear rather than cooperation. He was looking for a fundamental reappraisal of the way the NHS in England works ... Mr Brown seemed blind to the big picture and only tried to offer solutions that addressed the symptoms rather than the root cause of the problem.

In short, I fear for the NHS in England because I think the direction they have chosen is in danger of destroying the nature of the service. Apart from the most outspoken free-marketeers, nobody wants this. But, in the same way as with the Royal Mail/Post Office, politicians cherry-pick the things that will make an easy "efficiency saving". So, for example, if the profitable bits are farmed out to private companies who can do the same thing slightly more cheaply, the rest of the service will find it harder. And so, step by step, the NHS will keep getting cut back to the point where it only provides a basic safety net to those who can't afford better.

-

In Wales it is different. Yes, we did follow the Labour model in the early years of devolution, but we then decided to dismantle the internal market ... and yes, that did mean another change of structure. It was awkward and embarrassing, and change for the sake of change is useless, but once you realize you're heading in the wrong direction there's no real choice.

The reversal came about as the result of the 2007 election. Although there was a commitment in Labour's manifesto not to use PFI/PPP for capital NHS projects (a very welcome U-turn) there was nothing in the Labour manifesto about dismantling the internal market. The closest they got to it was a mention of ending competitive tendering for hospital cleaning contracts!

So the change clearly came because of Plaid Cymru. But that isn't to say that Labour AMs weren't willing collaborators. I like to imagine the conversation between Tony Blair and Rhodri Morgan, with the latter saying, "Well of course we don't want to get rid of the internal market, Tony. It's one of your greatest achievements. But the Plaidis are insisting on it, and it's either working with them or us being in opposition." At that stage Blair was on the point of retiring anyway and so didn't kick up a fuss. Why not leave Gordon to handle the mess that would be bound to result from abandoning sane, right-wing policies. "Bloody Welsh, they never know what's good for them", says Blair as Rhodri leaves. Rhodri walks out of the office with a spring in his step, then allows himself to punch the air once he thinks he's out of range of the security cameras. Labour in Wales got the sort of NHS they wanted (well, I'm not sure that applies to their MPs) but until then had been afraid to stand up for.

-

So there are now three big differences between our NHS and that in England: dismantling the internal market, the refusal to use PFI/PPP for capital projects, and an emphasis on dealing with longer term issues to improve the nation's general health and fitness. In the long term, doing it this way will make us healthier and save us money. Compared with these, the rest is less important.

I wonder if Flintshire councillor Matt Wright could clarify his position on efforts to tackle climate change, his parties policies state;
"A Conservative Government will make developing renewable and low carbon energy sources a priority. We will Expand offshore wind and marine power and provide government backing for a network of large-scale Marine Energy Parks."
Yet he has signed an on-line petition campaigning against renewable energy sources at saveourscenery.com stating;

"My family and I have very happy memories of our times spent on holiday in Llandudno! We were both shocked and horrified to find out about the proposed windfarms. Please add our names onto your petition list and all the best for a successful campaign."
Cllr Matt Wright, Vale of Clwyd Welsh Conservatives

Either he is cynically supporting anything he sees as a vote winner (surely not!), is opposed to his party's policies or hasn't got a clue what he's talking about. Could he perhaps enlighten us?

ICM/Guardian Tories 40% (+2) Labour 31% (NC) Lib Dems  20% (-1)

The Tories are back in the 40s which they'll be very happy with, however...

Opinium/Daily Express Tories 39% (+2) Labour 28% (-2) Lib Dems  16% (NA)

So the gap has jumped to 11% with Opinium! Wow, they're not quite in the 40s but just look how low Labour are, the Lib Dems won't be happy with 16% either. The Tories need to establish themselves in the 40s permanently now to make sure Cameron becomes PM with an outright majority.

The Mirror's journalist Chris Hughes has ‘done a Jan Moir' and decided to write something very controversial about dead soldiers. What an idiot.

He's making out that the bikers riding through Wootton Bassett are a nuisance and the people of Wootton Bassett don't really want them there, but put up with it so they don't appear ungrateful.

What an tosser. I've never read something so idiotic, spiteful, rude and insulting. If there's a group of people I wouldn't want to piss off, bikers are them. To question their commitment by ‘doing a hobby' beggars belief. Some have ridden over 500 miles on a motorbike (which I'm assured is very painful) to be there and pay their respects to the people of Wootton Bassett.

I hope he meets a few ‘hairy bikers' down a dark alleyway sometime. Then he may think twice about writing such dribble.

The first Ben & Arnie Politics Show of 2010 is here. If you like it we'll make more. If you don't, we won't bother you any more so let us know what you think!

Click here to listen.

As a pollster observed on Newsnight the other evening, the only thing that makes the Lib Dems relevant at the moment is the prospect of a hung parliament.

So it's not exactly an earth-shattering insight to discover that Nick Clegg sees himself & his party as holding the role of 'guarantor' within such a scenario. The phrasing employed in his weekend speech signals that things are getting real and we will, hopefully, hear no more of those silly references to 'moral mandates'.

Even so, taking on the debts of others, which is the accepted dictionary definition of a guarantor, is a big commitment for a political party that pollsters reckon will suffer an overall loss of seats on 6th May (or thereabouts). So it is crucial that punters do come to see the Lib Dems as arbiter rather than alternative too soon or else even the predicted 17% mark and the fifty-something seats that would it deliver becomes too big an ask.

Clegg doesn't need the Telegraph to tell him that there is a fine line between being coy and appearing disingenuous to press and public, but if he is to enter into any deal with sufficient collateral then he will need to walk it for a while longer.

I love his parents Itchy and Scratchy too.

I get really angry when YouTube blocks videos due to copyright restrictions. For ages we weren't allowed to watch British music videos due to a copyright argument with Youtube and a series of music giants and now it seems you can't watch Channel 4 videos that aren't on 4OD on YouTube. Stop with the restrictions!

Because of the way the human eye is designed, we each have a blind spot. The problem is that we're all so used to it that we're not usually aware that we have one. Such is the case with the BBC.

Any reasonable person might have thought that the row over the upcoming party leader's debates on the BBC, ITV and Sky would have made the BBC look hard at how they approached other programmes in the run up to May's election—not least the ones that they alone are responsible for—but the Politics Show yesterday proved that they haven't taken a blind bit of notice.

It was an extended hour-long question and answer session with Gordon Brown (followed by the usual 15 minute regional opt out). Next week Nick Clegg will be given the same place in the media spotlight, and it will be David Cameron's turn the week after.

So what should the BBC do?

Simple. Having devoted three hour-long sessions to three of the elected parties who stand in the next election, the BBC have a duty to give the same opportunity to both Plaid Cymru and the SNP in Wales and Scotland. Because the Politics Show already has a UK/regional split, it would be very simple to change that split for one week to have 15 minutes of UK content, followed by the remainder of the show being devoted entirely to a similar question and answer session with Ieuan Wyn Jones in Wales and Alex Salmond in Scotland. I would even be prepared to see the compromise of this being a 45 minute session, so that the Politics show would fit into its usual 60 minute slot. Viewers in England would have a mix of regional or England-only content during this time.

It is a practical and easily implemented solution that will give Plaid Cymru and the SNP the same exposure in Wales and Scotland as the other three parties get. No special favours, just simple equality of treatment. And it would of course not be confined to Welsh and Scottish issues, since both parties have policies for the UK as a whole. In Plaid's case pensions and the treatment of our service personnel after they leave the forces; for the SNP immigration and nuclear arms; and for both parties issues such as Britain's transport infrastructure ... though of course the actual questions would be posed by those invited to participate.

No, this doesn't solve the problem of the BBC/ITV/Sky debates between the three other party leaders. But why should the BBC—who after all have a special duty of balance—repeat the same mistake again?

We understand that a question sent in to yesterday's Swansea Sound phone-in asked studio guest Chris Holley whether Swansea Council would be issuing an apology for the deaths of three children who died whilst in the care of the local authority. The official reports on the actual circumstances of each case will be published this coming Friday as a batch job - an action that has caused considerable concerns among social care professionals elsewhere in Wales.

As expected, the Lib Dem leader side-stepped the awkward issue and came up with something inane about any comment being 'premature' at this stage - which is more than a bit ironic since one of the serious case reviews involved has reportedly been available since 2007.

A further query posed was whether he felt it was appropriate for the Swansea Safeguarding Childen Board, which will publish reports & recommendations arising out of the three deaths, to be chaired by the city's own director of social services. The reason for the question is because teh second job requires him to objectively put together an explanation for what is understood to be a catalogue of departmental failings. He also has to come to a conclusion over who was at fault and  if there are now sufficient proven controls & enough trained staff in place to prevent a repetition of these tragedies. This potential conflict in roles was greeted by the same mumbled evasions from Holley - and not pursued by the show's ever-amenable host.

But the main unanswered question for many is just how much leading political post-holders (past and present) knew about these horrific cases and if they have been in any way party to shabby arrangements that have introduced delays in the publication of hugely critical reports until just a few days before Assembly inspectors are scheduled to give their feedback on improvements.

The Strike - BA v UNITE .What is going on with this one? Why is a union that is the biggest Labour supporter trying to scupper them so close to an election. It's difficult to unravel what is really going on, on this one. Is it about numbers of crew, is it about pay, and is it just about killing off one of the few British Brands left. I read that Lord Adonis has had a go and has come out with strong words about the proposed action, good for him. I am all for workers rights and conditions, but by all accounts the BA cabin staff are amongst the best paid ,if not the best paid in Europe and BA staffing levels are excellent in comparison gain. So why disrupt families again, why cause hell and havoc when there should be some consideration to the people at the sharp end of this who cannot do anything but sit and hope to get away on their flights.
Childcare - Barnardos Cymru said 84% of young mothers in Wales were not in education, employment or training (so-called Neets), compared with about 10% of 16 to 18-year-olds generally. It said too many resigned themselves to a life on benefits because of the barriers they face in getting back into education. One of those barriers flagged up is childcare. WAG has come out strongly in defence of childcare availability. But it really does depend what childcare you are talking about. There is still a lack of after school provision for older children and even less for children with special needs or disabilities. The onus though is very much on the Local Authorities to know the gaps and to plug them - check the Childcare Act 2006 .This is now a statutory requirement. So why isn't it being flagged up by Barnardos to the various local authorities? That may be of more benefit to the young women.
The economy - "GDP figures are skewed by commuters, who add prosperity to areas like Cardiff, while their economic input is not counted in their home towns, which might lie in areas covered by the highest level of European finding". So says our First Minister, defending Nick Bourne's damning attack on the state of Wales in economic terms. Nick says "The degree of complacency we are witnessing from senior Labour figures about our economic plight should anger people across Wales. "Under Labour, Wales has become the poorest part of the United Kingdom. "We have the highest unemployment rate of any UK nation - and higher than countries like Bulgaria, Romania and Slovenia. "Ninety-six thousand children are living in severe poverty, with one in three classified as living in poverty overall. "The fall in Welsh exports last year was twice that of the devolved nations and English regions combined. "Businesses are closing, we have high levels of worklessness and investment is drying up. Has Mr Bourne just woken up to all of this -it's about time we had some challenge from the Blue corner. So poorer areas are subsidising the rich ones then First Minister, hmmm. May be all parties need to stop throwing figures around and actually look at what those figures mean. Its people -with no jobs, bad housing, bad health, no aspirations, lack of services and lack of faith in what you lot in the Bay are doing about it. If you really think that there is prosperity you should see the shops that are closed, the services being moved out , the queues at the dole offices and the numbers of people who are hoping they can hang on to their homes for another year.
The South Wales Chamber of Commerce has put in place six people to drive its National Recovery Plan forward, in which it provides recommendations for the Assembly Government and the private sector to ramp up growth in the economy. The group comprises Terry Hicks, managing director of Hicks Logistics; Paul Ragan, director of Collateral Thinking; Matthew Prosser, commercial director of Severnside Recycling; Richard Matthews, managing director of Freshbaked; Brian Morgan, professor at Cardiff School of Management; and Stuart Taylor, vice president of the chamber and head of external relations Wales for the Royal Mail. David Russ, managing director of the chamber, said: "The group will have approximately two months to develop a plan and begin the delivery process for an immediate reaction following the upturn of the recession. They highlight the need to/for
• Develop a Welsh export strategy.
• Build on "our strengths in services and new manufacturing activity".
• Ring fence a percentage of public procurement spend to be reserved for small business contracts.
• Refocus from the Assembly Government on its infrastructure policy and investment.
• Efforts being focused on Wales' north-south transport network, it wants east-west rail and road links to be improved to strengthen trade with the rest of the UK.
• An improved planning system that is "simpler, faster, more transparent and more alert to local economic needs".
• It also warns that "Wales is slowly falling blow the radar of modern transport infrastructure" with no proposals for a high speed rail route to South Wales.
All good stuff lets see if we can get it agreed and underway soonest.

Trevor McDonald's documentary on the last few weeks around David Cameron was always billed as that; a documentary. It was never going to be an in depth account on policy or interrogating his beliefs and rightly so, that's what the TV debates are for.

Labour tweeters are up in arms (as always) that Trevor McDonald gave Dave an easy ride – nonsense! He was there to document Dave's private life and what he did on a day-to-day basis. He did that and because he wasn't harsh on Cameron, he was apparently ‘brown nosing him'.

The show itself was fantastic, I've always been unsure as to how genuine David Cameron was and this has proved he is the real thing. This man cares about politics, cares about Britain and is determined to win the next election, saving the country from this disastrous Labour government.

The reliably pathetic Labour tweeter, @BevaniteEllie proclaimed that she wasn't going to watch it as she'd been YouTubing Obama all evening and felt it would be depressing. However she managed to re-tweet fellow Labour hacks' comments that they were splurging out left, right and centre about how terrible David Cameron is and how Trevor McDonald has lost all his journalistic credibility by doing such a show. A note to those people: grow up.

When Piers Morgan interviewed Gordon Brown it was billed as a scrutinisation of the Prime Minister. Instead it was a Brown-nosing love-in. At least Trevor McDonald challenged David Cameron with the fox-hunting, Bullingdon Club and Eton questions. A lot more pressing than Piers. But like I said, this was advertised as a documentary, it wasn't masqueraded as an interrogating interview like the Piers Morgan Show.

That reminds me, I have some good news for you all tomorrow.

Jeremy Clarkson has come out with some brilliant quotes before but this one really did make me chuckle.

Nought to 60, for instance takes more than 10 seconds and that makes it slower than a 1.8 litre Kia Shuma. Which in turn is slower than an asthmatic pensioner running across a ploughed field in muddy wellies.

Reviewing the Peugeot 307cc in The Times.

A great election poster to fit in with the final day of Crufts today.

Hat-tip to @jazzifull

My blog is one year old today. Many thanks to all those who have looked and commented. I am sure that the unscrupulous regime at Carmarthenshire's County Hall will provide plenty for me to write about over the forthcoming year.

The Government's White Paper on a high speed rail network is very welcome in this sense: it is a reflexion of the fact that Labour has grasped the need to develop a high speed rail network in Britain. It is hard to believe just how much their policy in this area has changed in the short time since Andrew Adonis became transport secretary. There might be plenty to argue about over the details of the route—particularly with regard to Heathrow—and the eventual extent of the network, but both Labour and the Tories are now in agreement on the principle of a high speed rail network in Britain, and this means that it should go ahead. Gwell hwyr na hwyrach.

-

However, as I read the stories the day after, it seems that politics has got the better of facts. We have the Tories claiming that "their" plan always included Heathrow, which it didn't, and Peter Hain claiming that the HS2 plan will benefit Wales, which it won't. But what else would we expect at election time? I'd prefer to look at things as objectively as I can ... so find a comfy chair.

-

There is a wealth of detail about the Government's proposal (and it should be noted that High Speed Two Ltd is a company that was set up by the government, rather than a disinterested body) on this page. So on the basis that a picture paints a thousand words, this map shows the essence of the proposal.

     

In some ways it is similar to the Bow Group (a Tory think-tank) proposal that Penddu highlighted in this post a few weeks ago (please take time to read it). But the most obvious difference is where the line splits to go to either north west England and Glasgow, or to north east England and Edinburgh. In this respect I think the HS2 proposal is better than that of the Bow Group. As I mentioned at the time, I think the more convoluted route to Leeds was a legacy from the original Tory proposal that they can't quite bring themselves to ditch. Certainly it is important that Leeds is on the network, but branching just north of Birmingham brings the east Midlands and Sheffield directly onto the main route.

However what matters much more is the way that the HS2 proposal treats Heathrow. The crucial difference between the two is that the Bow Group have taken on board the idea of creating a Heathrow Hub. This is an idea first put forward by Arup, and it makes Heathrow a key part of an integrated transport network. The HS2 proposal leaves Heathrow as a spur off the high speed rail network, rather than part of the network itself.

     

     

As we can see, the HS2 proposal centres on a Crossrail Interchange (I'll call it the CRI) which serves a number of useful purposes. But in functional terms it is really doing what the Heathrow Hub itself would do ... but in the wrong place.

The crucial difference is that the CRI is in London, so if people use that interchange, they then have to travel into London and then back out of London to get to Heathrow. They reckon the journey time will be 11 minutes, but the fact is that the current journey from Paddington to Heathrow via the Heathrow Express only takes 15 minutes. That's hardly any saving. On top of that Heathrow itself comprises a number of isolated terminals (Central, Terminal 4, Terminal 5 ... and maybe a Terminal 6 if a third runway is built) and no train station can ever serve all of those. Therefore what is needed is a local terminal interchange service which can take in all of those ... and in so doing also include the major rail lines, as well as a bus station and car parking. This is exactly what Arup are proposing.

By including the Great Western Line, it means that people coming to the airport from south Wales, Bristol and Bath, Cheltenham and Gloucester, south west England and Cornwall can get directly to the airport hub, rather than first having to go into London. This is a good thing, and in theory this could be done whether or not the high speed line went through it.

But the advantage of routing the high speed rail link through the Heathrow Hub is that people from the midlands and north of England can also get to Heathrow without first going into London, and can equally use it as an interchange to get to south Wales and south West England without first going into London. It is also very doubtful whether the cost of the Heathrow Hub could be justified unless the high speed line went through it. This is why routing it through the Heathrow Hub is so important to Wales.

-

The Bow Group see this clearly. As they themselves say, this holistic way of thinking is of the same sort displayed by Michael Heseltine in deciding the route of HS1 - the link from the Channel Tunnel to London. Coming into London from the east rather than the south (as had been proposed by the rail industry) regenerated a whole swathe of what we now call the Thames Gateway ... and the fact that the route was a few kilometres longer didn't matter. It is the same with this proposal by HS2: they are looking at it predominantly from a rail point of view rather than as an integrated transport solution.

Ironically, the HS2 proposal does work around Birmingham, because it makes Birmingham Airport the interchange hub between the new HS line, normal rail services, the airport and the motorway network. All that is necessary is for them to apply the same logic to London's main airport, the normal rails service on the GWR, and the M4.

     

And I think that HS2 probably realize this. Why else would we see the rather pathetic "loop" to Heathrow on the map above? And what else could explain this statement:

The question is whether there is a case for an additional station at the site of Heathrow itself. HS2 Ltd, after thorough analysis, advise that the business case for such an additional station appears weak, given the estimated cost of at least £2 billion for the additional tunnelling required to serve the site. Furthermore, Heathrow is not a single place; it is an airport with three widely dispersed terminal centres.

However, I am conscious that, as foreshadowed in the Government's January 2009 decision on adding capacity at Heathrow, there may be a strategic case for a high speed station at Heathrow, particularly in the light of that planned expansion. I have therefore appointed Lord Mawhinney, a former Transport Secretary, to advise on the best way forward, having fully engaged with all interested parties. A complex decision of this nature should not be taken in a knee-jerk fashion, but after a full analysis of the facts and options.

Source

Andrew Adonis at least recognizes where the HS2 scheme is weakest. But I would suggest that if he thinks more clearly, the problem becomes much easier to solve. If the route is taken through Heathrow, as the Bow Group proposes, it will not involve having to build an additional station. If there were a Heathrow Hub, there would be no need for the CRI. It would do everything that the CRI is intended to do, but better. Secondly, Lord Adonis is wrong to suggest that it requires an additional £2bn for tunnelling ... that would only be required if the station were under Heathrow.

The most critical aspect is that of "dispersion", namely that rather than discharge all passengers at the terminal station (Euston) from which they would then have to flood onto the underground to get to various parts of London, an across-the-platform interchange to Crossrail will allow people to go directly to half a dozen points in London. But Crossrail is already set to go through the Heathrow Hub anyway, so it will provide exactly the same "dispersion" that the CRI will provide.

The CRI is intended to be at Old Oak Common in west London, just three miles from Paddington, which is currently the depot for the Eurostar fleet. There is a consensus that the terminal should be at Euston, and this will involve tunnelling between them, and to connect to the HS1 line into St Pancras. The tunnelling is a major cost, but it is common to both schemes. So it is then a question of which route the line follows from there. The HS2 proposal uses the Central Line corridor, the Heathrow Hub proposal uses the Great Western corridor ... both are equally feasible and neither involves major works. The difference in the length of the two routes would be less than a kilometre.

     

But the biggest difference is that the CRI at Old Oak Common could only ever be a rail solution. There is no way that i

We believe an effective way to tackly the financial crisis and preserve our environment is by going green, thereby strengthening the economy, creating new jobs through investing in new green energy industries and improving the quality of people's lives.
We will roll out energy efficient smart meters to all households within five years and insulate all of Britain's homes to a decent standard within 10 years. We will immediately raise the requirements of Building Regulations to ensure that all new homes are energy efficient and use 'Green Loans' to encourage people to invest in home energy efficiency and micro-renewables.
Both Labour and Conservatives support the construction of new nuclear power stations. More nuclear power will soak up subsidy, centralise energy production and hinder development of Britain's vast renewable resources. Nuclear has a dirty legacy and increases global security risks. We oppose construction of further nuclear power stations.
Liberal Democrats will drive a massive programme of investment in renewable energy sources such as wind, wave and solar. We will also transform the National Grid into a smart decentralised grid which will respond dynamically to the changing patterns of energy demand. Smart metering and guaranteed prices will unlock the potential of local and community energy generation, giving people control over the energy they use.
We will invest now in the green technologies of the future delivering hundreds of thousands of new and better jobs in the years to come. A zero-carbon Britain will also be energy secure, with action at the EU level, to deliver an energy independent Europe breaking our current dependence on fossil fuels.
We will prioritise achieving a global agreement providing leadership for an international framework that will enable each country to manage a transition to a low-carbon economy. We will help developing countries to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

Liberal Democrat cities are at the forefront of building a sustainable Britain. Last year six Liberal Democrat cities were amongst the top ten table of sustainable cities.
Liberal Democrat controlled Newcastle and Bristol came in 1st and 2nd respectively, the other four were Cardiff, Edinburgh, Leeds and Sheffield.

We have always promoted sustainability and environmental protection long before the other parties cynically picked it up to attract votes and will continue to do so.

I personally have worked voluntarily across North Wales for many years to support and improve our countryside and am comitted to continue whatever the outcome of the general election.

Preserving and repairing the environment is something I am passionate about. Serious damage has already been done that will have consequences that will continue for hundreds of years ahead. Inaction is inconcievable if we are to avoid worse case scenarios.

Members of the branch and I have conducted extensive doorstep surveys over recent weeks across the Vale of Clwyd targeting traditional Labour areas. Results are far more positive than even I had expected. We simply asked people how they are considering voting in the forthcoming election without attempting to influence their choice.

Sadly many people are completely disillusioned with politicians after events of the last few years (expenses principally) and said they weren't intending to vote at all.

Of those who expressed a preference 70% of people (many of whom were former labour supporters) said they would vote for us, 20% said they were undecided and only 10% said they were voting elswhere.

People are realising Labour have nothing to offer those on low or middle incomes and we are the only party with realistic plans to help them and make Britain a country that meets everyones needs fairly.

The Daily Mail has a fantastic story where 300 residents on an estate in Durham have hired an ex-welterweight boxer to patrol the area as police aren't doing anything. If it's calming down a confrontation or merely assisting an elderly person walking home in the evening, Francis Jones and his team will be there to help.

I wonder if this will be the start of a trend in areas where anti-social behaviour (Labour terminology for CRIME) and gangs/loitering are rife.

Hat-tip to @ByrneTofferings

I have noticed yet another planning application to vary the number of affordable homes originally agreed between a developer and the council.

In fact when the original application for the seven houses on land at Aelbryn Farm, Spring Gardens, Whitland was passed in 2008, the town council insisted that the plots are not sold to a developer and at least two of the properties are to be built as affordable housing. The two homes were then whittled down to one, and now, there are none at all.

Incidentally, a large chunk of this site is outside the development limits - usually a MAJOR problem but oddly not this time.

An agreement has been made that the developer contributes a sum of money instead to the Housing department. This will do nothing to help the young folk of Whitland. A local Councillor said "Affordable houses are not being built because the county council is getting a pay-off from the developer."

The whole matter grows stranger as I realise that the 'developer', all the way along the process is actually Carmarthenshire County Council, and this cosy agreement has been reached between three Council departments; Corporate Property, Planning and Housing.

The 'developer's' reasoning is that it is "intended that the dwellings will be of traditional design and appearance to match that of the adjacent properties, with the plots being placed on the open market and sold to private individuals. As such the applicant [the council!] feels that it would not be possible to facilitate the inclusion of an affordable unit in this instance."

In other words, we don't want 'social housing' spoiling our 'executive' development.
This is the talk of property developers maximising profit - so what are the council doing? What about their policies of 'social inclusion' and vows to provide affordable housing?

I can think of only two explanations; either

a) The council are unlawfully acting as an agent for an undisclosed construction company/property developer and pulling strings to ensure maximum profit
or
b) The Council themselves have embarked on executive style developments. This is wrong, any housing developments by the council should be either retained by the council or entirely affordable.

I think further explanation is urgently necessary, perhaps the Wales Audit Office could enquire about this peculiar situation during their investigation.

I cannot understand why the council has granted itself seven executive homes behind a trail of very cloudy paperwork, it will be very interesting to see who buys these houses in the end and for what price.

Not for the first time with this council, I smell a rat.

In the interests of plain speaking, I see the Local Government Association has published a list of 250 'banned' words, which may render many councils completely unable to express themselves, it includes such gems as; '... local strategic partnerships,, meaningful consultation, mechanisms, multi-area agreements, multi-agency, overarching, paradigm, partnership working, populace, process driven, proportionality, protocol, , rationalisation,, robust, safeguarding, scaled-back, scoping, service users, slippage, spatial, stakeholder, step change, strategic, strategic priorities, sustainable, sustainable communities , synergies, tested for soundness, thematic, tranche, transparency, vision, holistic, guidelines, framework, enhance, enabler, core principles, community engagement, area-focussed...'

Carmarthenshire's Planning documents and papers are full of such unnecessary, irritating and largely meaningless language. The drawn out process of the new Local Development Plan provides many fine examples such as; "The Pre-Deposit Preferred Strategy is an important statutory stage in the LDP process and contains the spatial strategy for Carmarthenshire. The Strategy sets out key plan issues, the vision and objectives, strategic options, key policies, suggested overall level of growth and key areas of change and protection for the County. It also identifies strategic sites which contribute to the delivery of the strategy. It is a strategic document and does not therefore include detailed policies or non strategic site specific proposals."
(Translation; a few ideas about how the county should plan for the future, but nothing decided yet...),
In fact the entire 157 page document could be accurately summarised on the back of an envelope.

It certainly deters 'community engagement', or perhaps that's the intention; at a recent council meeting concern was expressed that the Authority's complaints procedure "is so complicated that people often give up. It was also pointed out that unless a complainant actually makes it clear that they are making a complaint then it is not logged or treated as such."

I won't be giving up though.

The 'insider' is obviously unaware of the parallel world inhabited by Carmarthenshire County Council.

Council leaders to defy public-sector pay freeze with 6.5% rise

After seeing Lady Gaga last week, I knew the Tiesto gig would be a different crowd. Oh boy was I right.

I apologise that my review doesn't cover anything after the first 30 minutes of the show but we couldn't stand to be there any longer. I'm a huge fan of Tiesto's music but the atmosphere at his concert was unbearable. The indoor venue was packed to the rafters with sweaty, tracksuit-clad chavs, body building meatheads puffing away on cigarettes and old perverts eyeing up the women who wore less clothes than a Hollyoaks calender.

What separated me from the rest of the crowd was that I wasn't drunk and hadn't taken a concoction of illegal drugs before I came in.

Tiesto finally came on around 11pm, stood behind his decks and every now and again would point his finger in the air. There was no performing, no singing, it was a DJ set that could have been anyone shoving a mix CD on, a £30-a-ticket club night.

After 30 minutes I'd had enough. I think I'll stick to dancing around the bedroom in my underpants listening to the CD instead.

The Welsh Assembly Government spent more than £3.8m on external legal advice in one year, according to figures revealed yesterday.

It is absolutely astounding that the Labour-Plaid government spent nearly £4m on external legal advice last year.

At the time, the Government's chief legal adviser was Carwyn Jones, a fully-qualified barrister who is now the First Minister of Wales.

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said:

This is an astonishing bill, particularly at a time when the public
finances are severely overstretched.

The [Assembly Government] already employs internal legal advisers, which
makes it even worse that they have duplicated that cost by bringing people in
from outside as well.

An Assembly Government spokesperson said:

Our internal legal service is primarily focused on advising ministers on
the discharge of their statutory functions and on the delivery - including
drafting - of the legislative programme.

External legal advice is used to support the Assembly Government in
non-core legal areas, including commercial, property, corporate finance and
employment law.

Clearly, as a sizeable landowner, or when engaged in commercial
negotiations, it is essential that we receive suitable legal support to ensure
the best outcome for the Welsh taxpayer.

In addition, we do not employ an in-house litigation team, and therefore
need to ensure effective legal representation on issues arising from our
responsibilities as a highways authority, or to assist in the legal affairs of
the NHS - for example, when dealing with clinical negligence cases.

We have very strict rules in place to ensure such expenditure is kept to a
minimum and only incurred where absolutely necessary and with proper authorisation.

COUGH!!!

I'm sitting in the car waiting for the doors to open at the Tiesto gig. So bored I've resorted to Radio 4! It's quite good actually, will have to listen more often.

Also, I'm looking into paying for a personalised, unique webpage design. Does anyone recommend a designer?

You may recall this exchange between Bethan Jenkins and Peter Black on Twitter a few months ago.

Now, not to be left out, British politicians are getting in on the act.

Witness John Prescott vs Clwyd West's own David Jones earlier:

DavidJonesMP Just heard @johnprescott in my constituency today. Hope he comes another couple of times before polling day. Will do me no end of good.

JohnPrescott @davidjonesmp Thanks for promoting my visit. Why don't you come & debate with me & Donna Hutton in Abergele at 2.45 IF you're in your seat!

DavidJonesMP @johnprescott no, I'm actually working in Westminster. And don't you notify colleagues of visits to their constituencies?

JohnPrescott @davidjonesmp Why don't you send your mate Ashcroft? He bought the seat for you last time http://bit.ly/9Oxtvr

DavidJonesMP @johnprescott and how much is Unite bunging Labour?

DavidJonesMP @johnprescott mind you, I suppose Clwyd West's loss is Hull's gain. They must welcome the relief.

JohnPrescott Unite members pay tax in this country. Shame your fella doesn't RT @davidjonesmp

DavidJonesMP@johnprescott still I'm disappointed you didn't write to say you were coming. Haven't you got a diary secretary to do that?

Democracy at its best? Awaiting any further comebacks...

Dewi Tri


addthis_pub = 'YOUR-ACCOUNT-ID';
addthis_logo = 'http://www.addthis.com/images/yourlogo.png';
addthis_logo_background = 'EFEFFF';
addthis_logo_color = '666699';
addthis_brand = 'Politics Cymru';
addthis_options = 'favorites, email, digg, delicious, myspace, facebook, google, live, more';



src="http://s7.addthis.com/js/152/addthis_widget.js">

I knew I recognised her hair from somewhere!

Hat-tip to @TomasCooperX

We hear that the rats have been scuttling around Calamity Hall since our recent post on how Swansea Council plans to perform a bulk-briefing on three separate serious case reviews each involving a child death.

The overall impression is one of hatches getting battened down and a general distancing from anyone remotely likely to get fingered in the reports that the Swansea Safeguarding Children Board will issue next week.

As far as we can gather, no press conference and no apologies are planned - although this may change as media interest begins to stir.

Last night bloggers, prospective bloggers and a surprising amount of journalists packed into Pica Pica to watch a presentation, by @JamesCuff on blogging and then meet and chat with other like-minded individuals with a few drinks after, organised by YourCardiff.

The event was surprisingly busy, I don't think anyone organising it expected it to be that full – I arrived slightly late due to work and was crammed at the back, unable to hear much. The chat afterwards was very interesting, lots of journalists telling me all sorts. Can't remember what was said in confidence and what wasn't so I think it's best not to say anything.

All in all a great night and I'm very much looking forward to the next one. Hannah Waldram, the Guardian beatblogger videoed a short interview with myself and other bloggers/journalists which may be on the Guardian Cardiff site later. I apologise for being slightly drunk.

Picture courtesy of WelshIcons' Dom who was resident photographer for the night.

What an odd, elaborate video! From the reactions people have posted on Twitter, they seem to love it. Strange that her main fan-base is gay men and Gaga spends much of the video prancing around in nothing and snogging girls. The product placement was really irritating, I hope all music videos don't go that way – Britney's videos were awful for that.

Fantastically odd and energetic though, this is what a music video should be – elaborate and entertaining!

Back in November I posted about the launch of National Theatre Wales, but tonight the curtain rose on its first ever production:

     

     Curtains up as National Theatre Wales' first play opens

It's good to see it up and running at last, not least because it means we now have something to stand alongside and complement the Welsh language Theatr Genedlathol Cymru, set up back in 2004. If we are serious about becoming a truly bilingual nation it is important that we promote and celebrate our culture in both our languages.

I'm particularly proud that establishing an English language National Theatre for Wales was one of Plaid Cymru's manifesto pledges in the 2007 Assembly election, and that this was something that we managed to negotiate into the One Wales Agreement with Labour, who were opposed to the idea and had done nothing to set up an equivalent to Theatr Genedlathol Cymru when they were in power before ... both when in coalition with the LibDems and when in power on their own.

-

But that's enough politics. This is a taste of what to expect:

     

And there's more information about this and future productions here.

Found this brilliant advert in the ‘freebie' section

I have have this very old motorbike out my back..havent got a clue what bike it is. My partner the dumped it there and left it..I cant move it as its really heavy and all i can tell you about it is its blue and has no handle bars.
Free to anyone that wants to collect it!

Anyone know what it is?

Well! The Liberal Democrats sticking at 17% is the most important and discussed topic on Twitter in the UK. How unusual.

Don't ask my why, I've no idea!

The wacky world of political reporting in Wales has taken a jaw-dropping turn into the surreal with the news that Wales on Sunday has reached an out-of-court settlement with the BNP over a copyright infringement (of all things). Holdthefrontpage.com an on-line publication which covers events in the newspaper industry, provides the details - many thanks to the contributor who sent the link.


11th March 2010
Regional publisher pays BNP over copyright breach
A regional newspaper has paid the British National Party £259.99 in an out-of-court settlement after an infringement of copyright.

A story which appeared in Wales on Sunday last November included a photograph of the party's West Wales deputy organiser Roger Phillips.

The BNP said the picture, which was taken by a party official, was used without permission by the Trinity Mirror weekly from Mr Phillips' page on a social networking website.

The far-right group claims the money is now being used to help fund the campaign of its candidate in the Neath constituency against Welsh Secretary and veteran anti-racism campaigner Peter Hain in the upcoming general election.

The original story claimed that Mr Phillips' company Patriot Products had been forced to stop the sale 'Golly' badges with football scarves following threats from Premiership football clubs.

A media spokesman for the BNP told HTFP: "The article used a photograph taken by BNP official Clive Bennett from Swansea which was lifted without authorisation from Mr Phillips' personal Facebook account.

"After correspondence between the editor of the Wales on Sunday, Tim Gordon, and Mr Phillips, the paper decided to settle out of court and agreed to pay the amount of £259.99 as compensation.

"Mr Phillips has now used this money to partly fund a BNP candidate in the Neath seat against Peter Hain.

A Trinity Mirror spokesman said the company would not be making any comment on the story.

What the article doesn't unfortunately doesn't mention is that Phillips fled his Ammanford address after the original Golly badges story was first published and was alleged to be hiding out in a caravan somewhere in deepest Kidwelly. Photos and comment from the shy fascist were therefore hard to come by. But it just goes to show that its not just Max Mosely who can successfully screw the press after doing Nazi impressions.

Blogging evening, courtesy of YourCardiff.

Just a reminder really.  PicaPica (opposite the Millennium Stadium), 7pm tonight. There we shall drink, watch blogging presentations and chat with fellow bloggers. I believe the bloggers will be from the whole spectrum, not just politics so it should be rather interesting!

Hope to see many readers there – leave a comment if you're coming and I'll look out for you.

No crazies please.

It's been a while coming, but it looks like the new Swansea-Cork ferry is now operational.

     

Yes, it will probably do more for the economy of south west Ireland than it will do for that of Wales ... but even so it will still bring benefits to Wales. And every car or truck it takes off the roads west of Swansea will reduce pollution, make those roads that much safer to use, and reduce the need for those roads to be widened. Those are very welcome benefits.

Congratulations to those who have fought so hard to get the service reinstated. I wish the Fastnet Line every success and hope it will be a permanent part of our transport infrastructure.

The hunger strike at Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre has reached a fifth week. Solidarity demonstrations have taken place, outside the IRC itself, at Holloway Prison and around the country, now a legal challenge is being mounted. The hunger strike tactic has also spread to Harmondsworth Immigration Removal Centre. There will be a protest in support of the [...]

The Liberal Democrats have argued, and will continue to argue, for alternative means of funding higher learning institutions to meet costs without passing the bills on to our students. The amount of debt that a university student accumulates has spiralled and will continue to do so if firm opposition does not bring this trend to an end. The Liberal Democrats will scrap tuition fees for all students taking their first degree saving them over £10'000 each. This cannot happen overnight but must be introduced carefully.

We have a financially responsible plan to phase out fees over six years so that the change is affordable even in these current difficult economic times. With more students choosing higher education it is important we get this right and make our education system fair for all.