Sudoku
I don't know if Carwyn Jones is any good at Sudoku but the negotiations around whether the Assembly vote on February 9th is the formal trigger for a referendum on further powers are looking more and more like one of those number puzzles that is MODERATE at the very least, if not HARD.
The solution is the easy bit. We know that already - the 40 or more votes by AMs needed to pass the trigger resolution. Getting to that 40+ is the difficult bit. Why, you ask, when all four parties are in favour of a referendum before the next Assembly elections in May 2011? Well the key to the current difficulty lies in one word in that question - "before". That is "before" the elections on May 5, 2011, not on election day itself, as I've blogged before. (5th. 5th. Keep typing 6th when I mean 5th.)
Whichever way you do the number puzzle you can't, as things stand, get to 40 with just Labour and Plaid AMs. Two Labour AMs are on long-term sick leave. Standing Orders prevent the Plaid Llywydd and Labour Dirprwy Lywydd from voting in a trigger resolution. This leaves 36 votes - but only assuming every other government AM is present, correct and votes in favour. A bit of an assumption I'd say.
So where are we now? Well the voices that were pessimistic about February 9th being a trigger resolution are now stating confidently - a trigger it will be. Yes, I've seen the reports of potentially terminal tensions within the coalition. They feel overstated to me. The two are pulling in the same direction on this but let's be clear: it is far from a done deal. The votes of the opposition parties are still needed.
The Conservatives have stated their position firmly and unequivocally. They want a public or private assurance, a letter in Nick Bourne's back pocket as he put it yesterday, which contains a promise that the Assembly Government won't hold the referendum on May 5th next year. Once that's in the bag, the Tories will vote en bloc for the trigger. But both the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister are deeply reluctant to do this. No politician wants to tie his own hands if they can possibly avoid it. It also makes a mockery of the "keeping all options open" mantra that both Carwyn Jones and Ieuan Wyn Jones have adopted.
Without the assurance on the date will the Tories lend their votes to a trigger motion? It's a huge call, one of the biggest for Mr Bourne as Conservative leader.
Don't underestimate the lingering legacy of the 1997 No campaign. The story of the last decade has been a slow - and sometimes painful - transformation of the party's image as ardent anti-devolutionist to pragmatic pro-devolutionists. "Welshing-up" hasn't been without its bust-ups within the party but the job is done. Why shatter that with a vote or even an abstention that would allow their opponents to portray them as wanting to hold Wales back ... again? You can hear it now: those Tories want you to think they've changed but guess what, when it comes to it they haven't.
At the same time,don't underestimate the deep unease the Tories feel about fighting a referendum campaign on further powers in tandem with an Assembly election campaign. As one despairing Tory AM said in the tearoom this week, how can I tell my local activists to go out and knock lumps out of Labour one day when I'm smiling with them on a platform for further powers the next?
The Liberal Democrats share this unease. They too want the same firm assurances on the date but there's just a sense that it's not quite the deal breaker that it is for the Tories.
The tactic being adopted by the Assembly Government in relation to the opposition parties on this appears to be one of divide and rule. The two opposition leaders have been seen separately by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister to canvass their views. Both, I gather, delivered similar messages - rule out May 5, 2011 and all will be well.
Neither got that assurance.
The question is this: if and when it comes to the crunch will the two stand together? They are in a kind of prisoner's dilemma where as long as they're united they have (in theory at least) the power to get what they want but if one side changes its view the other is left exposed.
The Liberal Democrats have seen another backstop. The Order which will be drawn up as a result of the trigger and enables the referendum to take place will have to have a date written into it.
It also needs the approval of 40 AMs, just like the trigger. So if the Order has May 5th on it the opposition could withhold their votes at that point. But that would be another huge call to make and without the political cover provided by a prior assurance from Carwyn Jones that May is off the agenda, it simply shunts the prisoner's dilemma 120 days down the track.
If the Liberal Democrats decide they'll go ahead and vote for the trigger without any assurance on dates, then it would be possible to get to 40 but not by much. And - dear readers who've stuck with this so far - that is why a plan is afoot to try and suspend Standing Orders in order to allow the Presiding Officer and his Deputy to vote on the trigger resolution, boosting the government vote by two. Not enough to get to 40 without the Lib Dems but a useful insurance policy against any government votes going awry on February 9th.
The meeting rooms of Cardiff Bay are busy this week. Perhaps the real name of the game isn't Sudoku at all but brinkmanship. The motion has to be published by February 2nd, next Tuesday.
A lot of people have a lot riding on what's in it.
I'm Betsan Powys, BBC Wales' political editor. I'll be blogging the inside track on 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~13~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
853472169
271968435
649135278
915247683
386591724
427386951
592613847
138724596
764859312
Is there a prize?
Complain about this comment
... suspend Standing Orders ....
... sounds democratic, I can see the banners ...
If they suspended suspend Standing Orders to .... get the vote,
will they take us to independence .... without that vote?
Complain about this comment
My #2 should read ...
If they suspended Standing Orders to .... get the vote,
will they take us to independence .... without that vote?
Complain about this comment
I'm not quite sure about the logic here, Betsan. The draft Referendum Order (a simpler way of saying "draft of the statutory instrument containing the Order in Council") must include the date and the wording of the question. So the Tories surely don't need any sort of "back pocket" assurances. If 9 February is the trigger vote, the draft RO that they vote to approve will include the date.
If the date is right (and I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be October) it will get Tory and LibDem support. Labour's internal battles have been about the principle of the referendum being held by 2011 as opposed to some dim and distant time in the future ... not about whether it is held in October, March or May. But—for what it's worth—Peter Hain is vehemently opposed to it being held on the same day as the Assembly elections too. So what's for the Tories or LibDems to worry about?
The only thing that might make an October referendum awkward would be a hung Parliament from which it proved impossible to form a stable UK government. That would make October 2010 a prime date for a further Westminster election. But the GoWA allows for the date of our referendum to be changed by the Sectretary of State with the agreement of the Welsh Ministers. So again, no problem.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations on your use of the prisoners' dilemma to illuminate a practical political issue - we don't see that very often on BBC websites. You could have added that the PD model suggests that unless other factors intervene, the 'prisoners' will maximise their own narrow self interest, though the best result collectively would be for them to trust one another.
In other words, one or other will agree without getting assurances on the date. If the other thinks that is likely to happen, they also will give in. The Prisoners are in an asymmetric relationship; they're not the ones with the power, and they suffer for it.
Complain about this comment
The Labour and Plaid bedmates in the assembly need 40 of the 60 available votes in order to pass the 'trigger' resolution.In spite of the arrogant Pontcanna/Welsh media crachach doing its best to whip up some tension in the vote, such is the sheeplike mentality of the appalling 'assembly 60', a virtually unopposed vote can be expected with just a tiny number of them voting against.
Strange that a 40 vote 'safety net' is required on this vote when no such 'safety net' was required in the much more important Devolution referendum. Votes on important constitutional changes should always be seen to be won by a healthy majority. Anything other than that ensures that a large number, quite possibly a majority, will forever hold an extremely close result in contempt, and never accept what they consider to be a manipulated vote.
Maybe that fact, amongst others, helps explain the distaste and contempt for this tinpot assembly by so many fairminded Welsh citizens.
Complain about this comment
To suspend Standing Orders in order to ensure sufficient support for a vote on a Constitutional matter, is stooping pretty low.
Even to consider this action the integrity of the people who make up the leadership of the Assembly Government must be called into question.
Why the are the Welsh media not up arms.
It must be hoped that the incoming Government, after the Election, takes note of what is happening, recognises that the GoWa is flawed, and the new Secretary of State takes the appropriate action.
We may even get a Referendum worded to give the people of Wales a proper choice.
Complain about this comment
Thanks for the lengthened version, Betsan. And just to clarify, the lack of logic was not directed at you, but at the position of the Tories.
But from what you've said, the logic now seems to be even more convoluted. "Trigger" is hardly a precise term, but you seem to be saying that the trigger is something separate from the vote to pass the draft RO. I have always understood that the trigger is the vote to pass the draft RO.
But if we are now going to understand the trigger vote as being something that only leads up to the vote to pass the draft RO, then such a vote would not require a two-thirds majority. There is only one vote that requires it.
The bottom line is quite simple. If the vote taken on 9 February is not the final, two-thirds vote required to pass the draft RO through to the Secretary of State to lay before Parliament, then it will be too late to get it through Parliament before the Westminster election. That will have serious consequences for the future of the One Wales government.
So Labour need to get their act together to ensure that what is published on 2 February results in the vote on 9 February being the actual trigger vote rather than just a "cock-the-trigger" vote. If Peter Hain manages to succeed in putting the referendum off, Carwyn will be a lame duck First Minister within a few weeks of getting the job. Lame ducks do swim in circles ... they go round and round and end up going nowhere. In fact, if he fails to deliver there's a good chance that he may not be First Minister at all.
Complain about this comment
Re:
"that is why a plan is afoot to try and suspend Standing Orders in order to allow the Presiding Officer and his Deputy to vote on the trigger resolution, boosting the government vote by two."
So what else is being suspended, concealed or due process perverted to create the conditions not only to trigger the referendum but to secure the conditions for a yes vote.
How do you expect others to play it by the rules when those who run the country set this sort of example.
Worse still what would they do if they had more power.
Complain about this comment
Remind me Betsan (I don't have my copy of GOWA 06 to hand) - is the legal requirement 40 votes or two-thirds of Assembly Members? If the latter, is it two-thirds of all AMs or two-thirds of those voting?
Complain about this comment
"the Plaid Llywydd and Labour Dirprwy Lywydd from"
??? Nope... not a clue! Anybody? Obviously this is Cymro politico speak only accesible to those indoctrined on the welshification gravy train... not intended for the rest of us.
Adiitionally I was expecting to see something about Plaid's threats of leaving the coalition on Betsan's blog today. Still it is about the 5th time theyve made such threats since last summer so its hardly news.
Complain about this comment
There is an overwhelming majority in the National Assembly for a referendum - and at the earliest opportunity, which appears to be October 2010. Standing orders are there to protect the rights of members, if they are virtually unanimous on the desirability of a referendum and the only argument is October or May 2011 then I don't think there is any breach of rights to suspend standing orders to allow the Presiding Officer and Deputy Presiding Officer to vote. Plus suspending standing orders is a very public fact, so nothing hidden. I thought the anti devolution people here wanted an early vote anyway - so what is the fuss about?
Oh and Comeoffit, grow up you know exactly what is being talked about - take your paranoia elsewhere its getting very boring.
Complain about this comment
#10 Ty Du
It's 40 AMs - in other words, two thirds of the entire body of Assembly Members, not of voting on the day.
MH # 4 + 8
I'm going to tread carefully here because you're usually pretty spot on in terms of the ins and outs of this sort of thing ...
But this is what I understand:
Under the GOWA what we have as far as the Assembly is concerned is a two stage process. The first is a simple trigger resolution (or not quite so simple if you're the WAG at the moment but let's leave that to one side for now.) The trigger vote must be passed by 40 AMs. All this does is empower the First Minister to write to the Secretary of State to ask him, or her, to draw up the Order in Council that will enable the referendum to take place. It's the starting gun on the 120 day deadline for this to happen. It can't contain any sort of date or detail relating to the referendum.
There will then be a second vote in the Assembly once the SoS publishes the order. This also needs to be passed by 40 AMs. This will contain all the details relating to the referendum, including the question, funding details and - critically - the date of the vote. This is why the opposition parties do have another back-stop as regards the date. The question is whether either could bring themselves to effectively scupper a referendum this far down the track.
Complain about this comment
I tend to agree with the Tories on this one, a vote on the same day as an Assembly election is not desirable as it confligates two separate votes. If that is the only day I'd go with it, but prefer not.
Thanks for the info Betsan. So we move it on a notch, we can move forward and delay the crunch vote for some 4 months or so
Complain about this comment
#12 I dont give a fig if you think its boring... I have absolutely no idea what those phrases mean and therefore find such terminology very excluding to both myself and the majority of the population. I believe there is another BBC Wales political blog where you can coin as many new Cymrenglish phrases as you like beacause everybody there understands both.
You may have convinced convinced yourself that Wales is a bilingual nation by spending too much time hanging out on the nationalist blogosphere... but back in reality it is not the case.
Complain about this comment
Re: *15
"comeoffit' - a quick 'google' of these words will remedy the situation. Stop whinging..
Complain about this comment
Thanks Betsan [#13]. I agree with what you say in the first of your two paragraphs, apart from the last line. As I read the Act, there is nothing to say that the resolution passed by the Assembly can't contain either the date or any detail.
It is true that it is up to the SoSW to draft the Referendum Order, and that the draft must contain the date and wording of the question (and things such as funding arrangements and the referendum period). But in all practical terms the request is not, to paraphrase: "We want a referendum, but we'll leave it entirely up to you to decide when it will be and what the wording of the question is."
Technically it is, but in practice it can't be. In much the same way as with an LCO, the Assembly doesn't simply say: "We want an LCO on housing, but we'll leave it entirely up to you to decide what it will contain." A request for an LCO has to specify what competence the Assembly wants transferred. Now, in technical terms, it is entirely up to the SoSW to decide the wording of any draft LCO he lays before Parliament, and it might not be exactly what was asked, but in practical terms it will be broadly similar (subject to the usual negotiations) otherwise the process is arbitrary and meaningless.
-
So with regard to the Referendum order, if the Welsh Government are saying that the resolution cannot contain either the date or the wording of the question, that view must be challenged. I believe such an interpretation cannot be justified from what it says in the Act itself.
-
For both the Tories and the LibDems, the date of the referendum is important. Therefore the simple way of getting them to vote for the resolution is to include the date as part of the resolution. I would include the wording of the question and other details too ( ... though it is pointless making anything more complicated than it needs to be at this stage). Including the date and details would not invalidate the resolution, nor do any harm to its progress, since the SoSW remains free to word the draft RO he lays before Parliament in whatever way he chooses ... or indeed refuse to do it at all.
It is very possible that the draft RO will be revised after having been laid before Parliament anyway, not least because of the Electoral Commission's opinion on the wording of the question; and all parties will (it is not in the Act, but it has become the established way of doing things) have their say on that and the other details through the WASC and/or the LCC (Lords Constitution Committee). In the end, hopefully, a final draft RO will be passed by both Houses at Westminster, and by the Assembly ... which will again require the votes 40 AMs.
In that regard, I'm sorry if what I said before was misleading. There will be two votes that will require approval by 40 AMs, not one. What I should have made clearer was that only one vote was needed to trigger the process. The second vote will be right at the end of the process, probably only a day or two before it goes to the Queen.
-
A bit long, but to come to your closing sentences: Yes, the final vote does give the Tories and the LibDems in the Assembly a "back stop". For that reason I can see no reason why they should not vote for the resolution on 9 February ... if indeed that is on agenda for that day, which is still in question.
However I don't think the point about the second vote being so late in the process that the Tories and LibDems would be reluctant to use it is particularly valid. There'll always be an element of brinkmanship involved, but all parties will be able make their views clear at any stage of the progress of the draft RO in Parliament. All they have to say is: "Be careful. If we disagree with the date (or anything else) we won't vote to approve the final draft."
-
But to step back and put things into a bigger perspective, all other parties in the Assembly (and Trish Law, of course) are going to be able to agree to a referendum in October. If Labour can bring themselves to agree to that date as well, the resolution can be passed unanimously. Surely that is a prize that Labour should go out of its way to achieve.
Complain about this comment
@Comeoffit 11 & 15
From one English speaker to another:
www.bbc.co.uk/wales/learnwelsh
Not political mumbo jumbo, just plain Welsh language. Give it a go, you might actually enjoy it.
Complain about this comment
Betsan:
It is not sudoku it is simple brinkmanship...Since, not many people know that outcome of the debate!
-Dennis Junior-
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS