This article appears in The Wardman Wire:
This week, Miss Wagstaff has been excited and down in the dumps at the same time, if that’s at all possible. On the one hand, she’s unwell, and on the other she has the opportunity to write a Senedd Circular post that is long overdue.
We can safely put leadership elections on the back burner for a while, the Welsh Labour leadership election has been talked to death [well, nearly!] and the Welsh Liberal Democrat election is a two-horse race that is slowly gaining momentum – and both always seem to be topical on Welsh blogs.
Plenty has happened since my last post to this column, though it appears that nothing changes when it comes to a rift between the Commons and Assembly, MPs versus AM’s in what one leading Welsh blogger has described as “…the Welsh Affairs Select Committee’s response to the housing LCO suggests that it is, illegally, attempting to make itself the Assembly's upper house.” and by another as a constitutional stand-off between the National Assembly and the Welsh Affairs Committee of the House of Commons.
You can always predict when disaster and controversy will strike at the heart of the Assembly, and it’s usually when Lord Elis-Thomas opens his bi-lingual mouth. Bi-lingual in terms of speaking - both as an Assembly Member and Presiding Officer - and occasionally mixing the two when convenient. Not this week. Though it has opened old wounds with a former adversary.
This week’s main tension comes from the to-ing and fro-ing of work by the House of Commons Welsh Affairs Select Committee and our own National Assembly. This has resulted in resident villain [usually], or as others call him, Presiding Officer Lord Elis-Thomas [Dafydd Elis-Thomas to his friends, I’m told] in having to stick his nose in where it needs to be for a change - in policing the remit of LCO's. His lordship has taken time out to write to two-time Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy, expressing concerns and accusing the Welsh Affairs Select Committee of MPs of "anti-devolution sentiment". Elis-Thomas is no stranger to offering his opinion on a whole range of ‘constitutional’ matters.
It may sound odd, but even other Assembly members have queued up behind the Presiding Officer, not just fellow Plaid members this time, and called for him to be heard as the voice of reason.
This fistfight between Commons and Assembly has happened before and was largely seen as a straight fight, with the Assembly’s proposal dumped from a great height without sound – simply no remit to turn this into law. This time it’s different.
The present bout over the Welsh Assembly Government's request for powers to legislate over the so-called right-to-buy-scheme. In short, the Welsh Ministers are asking for more than they originally sought and are being ticked off by the Welsh Affairs Select Committee. The committee’s jabbing response is one of - you do have the right to do both, but you only discussed suspension of the right-to-buy when you talked to us about it originally. Because of this we believe you should stay within the original draft.
On this occasion the common sense approach is needed as much agreed by those that generally take a step back from those MPs that it directly affects. MPs do seem to be interfering too deeply into matters concerning the remit of the WASC when it comes to dealing with LCOs. Their role as committee members is to work within the remit of the Government of Wales Act when it comes to guiding LCOs through their part of the process. Anything more, and they run the risk of being accused of standing in the way of devolution, the Assembly, sometimes their party colleagues, and what their future has in store for them.
Too much interference may stave off extinction of some of their numbers, and will – in some cases – harm their legacy as Welsh politicians. Common sense and mutual trust is a must, but sometimes hard to come by, even within members of the same party.
And finally…
A welcome back to blogging to my old friend, Matt Wardman after his short trip to Wales, where he took in the ‘To blog or not to blog’ debate. I hope it was all worthwhile after the blogging banter that arose beforehand, and that the best side won.
Since writing this article it seems that blogging won the day, although I turn my face as there was much stick for anonymous bloggers – “Not accountable? True enough. Not reliable sources? Fair enough. Malicious? Some can be. Unchristian? Now hang on ... “
I’m still not convinced that I should ‘out’ myself!
Whatever your politics, this is rocky ground for civil liberties and even worse for the institution of Parliament. 
Posts
