"Serious risks", serious reading
There are some who read this blog who are of the firm view that writing anything about a referendum on the future powers of the Assembly, let alone when that referendum might be held and what the question might be, is an utter waste of time.
If you're one of them, give up now. Look away.
I'll write another blog entry later, I hope, on another issue that galvanises some and switches others right off. Should the report of proceedings in the chamber be entirely bilingual or not? The answer, according to an independent review panel formed to answer just that question, is 'no'. That'll explain why the Presiding Officer was so jovial yesterday.
But back to the referendum and whether holding it in the Autumn is still an option or not. You might not give two hoots as to whether that option is still open or not. But bear in mind that a few months ago, Plaid Cymru were so adamant it should remain an option that they threatened to walk out of the coalition over it. Politically then, as far as trust between coalition partners is concerned, it certainly did matter rather a lot.
So: yesterday, I understand, a letter was sent by the Electoral Commission to Cheryl Gillan, saying that they will require a 10 week period of consultation before they can give a considered opinion on the question to be asked in the referendum. Without this, they said, there are "serious risks to the successful conduct of the referendum."
It's curtains, then for a vote in the Autumn.
I've drawn parallels with the climactic scene in Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs before, where virtually all the characters end up pointing guns at each others' heads simultaneously. This is going to be a sequel where they all pull the trigger. It's going to be messy and unpleasant.
So as a pre-emptive strike, here's some background, much of which is likely to be lost in the recriminations.
Following the trigger vote in the Assembly in February, the First Minister wrote his formal letter to the Wales Office. It took him 10 days. The law says he had to do it "as soon as reasonably practicable." It was a few paragraphs long. He'd argue he had to get those few paragraphs right. Nick Bourne would argue he wasted valuable time. I'll leave it to you to make up your own minds on that one.
Once the former Welsh Secretary Peter Hain received the letter, he got the ball rolling. It's clear substantive work was done on the Order. A project board was established, with representatives from the Assembly Government, the Wales Office and the Electoral Commission to work on the administration needed to put the Order together - with two key exceptions. Firstly, the board didn't consider the date. Fair enough. It's the job of the senior politicians to make that call. There was also no consideration whatsoever of the question to be asked and this is where the difficulties start.
The Electoral Commission have a role, enshrined in law, to give a detailed view on the intelligibility and fairness of questions asked of the people in a referendum. This makes perfect sense. It stops politicians cooking up a question that leans towards their favoured outcome, or blinds the voters with complicated technical propositions.
In November 2009 the Commission published guidelines on their process for "road testing" a referendum question, which includes extensive focus groups, asking for advice from experts and so on. The timescale for this was crystal clear: ten weeks, based on getting two weeks notice that the exact question was on its way.
This point, I understand, was made equally crystal clear to members of the project board. But it's this timescale that's going to be at the heart of the row about to ensue.
At the lobby briefing for journalists yesterday, the First Minister Carwyn Jones repeated the mantra that "all options" for a date for the referendum remain open. He said he saw no reason why the Order shouldn't be laid before Parliament "by the middle of next month".
Really, we asked? We can see why you're going to stick to that line First Minister, in the name of sticking it to the Tories now that they're in power in Westminster but ... really? The second mantra was trotted out - "the timescale is tight but doable".
Now technically, the new Secretary of State could lay the order in Parliament by June 17th, the 120 day deadline since the Wales Office received the First Minister's letter. If the Electoral Commission was asked for its assessment of the question in a three week timescale, rather than a ten week one, it would make a formal response. This would satisfy the legal need for consultation by the Secretary of State.
Bingo. There you have your "tight but doable". But everyone knows it cannot work like that.
If it did, it's clear the Commission's response would come with significant caveats, making it clear they felt they hadn't had sufficient time to come to a proper view and could therefore not vouch fully for the intelligibility of the question. Critically, a report of this response has to be laid before Parliament and the Assembly at the same time as the Order. No Secretary of State in her right mind could possibly ask for a vote in favour when that response contains words like "serious risks to the successful conduct of the referendum".
So how did we end up here?
The Commission's ten week timescale has been known since November 2009. Copies of their guidelines were sent to Peter Hain, to Cheryl Gillan as Shadow Welsh Secretary, to the then First Minister Rhodri Morgan, to the Welsh party leaders and to Carwyn Jones when he became First Minister. It's also been abundantly clear that for the Autumn referendum to happen, the Order would need to get through Parliament before the summer.
The Welsh political establishment have known for some considerable time, then, what we are dealing with here - or should have done. And yet, trust me, it feels very much as though we're about to see a particularly vicious bout of infighting between parties and between governments.
It's most certainly not for me to referee what's about to happen. But it is up to those of us paid to watch what's going on to point out that fundamentally and factually, it's the fact that the referendum question wasn't addressed in the months before the General Election that is at the root of where we are now. The then Secretary of State makes the point that he couldn't have got on with considering the question because it wouldn't have been at all appropriate for him to do so during the period of purdah before a General Election. The Electoral Commission wouldn't have thought it appropriate and no-one in the Assembly Government has suggested that analysis is wrong.
Still, the fact remains that with no wording in the offing, no Secretary of State could now deliver an Autumn referendum.
There are other questions about how far both parties in the Assembly government accepted a timescale that has been proven to be impossible and why they continued with the "all options open" mantra when it was well past its sell by date some time ago.
It might also be worth asking why the First Minister has written to the new Secretary of State formally requesting an Autumn referendum when he didn't, to my knowledge, make that request of her predecessor?
Pressed on who is responsible for the current situation an Assembly Government source came up with: "it's the responsibility of the current Secretary of State to get this through. We look forward to her excuses."
Was there the slightest hint of a smile there too?
I'm Betsan Powys, BBC Wales' political editor. I'll be blogging the inside track on 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~12~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
We ended up in this mess because neither Labour nor Conservatives are serious about the referendum and greater powers for the Assembly. In this respect there's no difference between Hain and Gillan.
Complain about this comment
perhaps you could write a blog about the latest you know on this too Betsan:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/8689478.stm
has it even been discussed down in the bay or are they just going to brush it under the carpet and hope the welsh public dont hear about it? This is directly their responsibility is it not?!? Perhaps this could be seen as relevant before we enter into another 100 post plus discussion on when the referendum will be. Pretty clear from the above link that they are not up to the task with the powers they've already got.
As for the iminent blog entry on whether assembly proceedings should be recorded bilingually or simply a 24 hour translation service provided on request (as is the case now)..... well I think we only need to look at the reaction of Dafydd Ellis Thomas!
When the former director of the Welsh Language board who's wife is also head of translation sevices at the Welsh Assembly (yes it really is a close-nit family down there in the bay) thinks it is not a good idea... well i think its fair to say it's a very wasteful and unwarranted idea. If anyone is fervent enough to argue against that conclusion then good luck to them but they might want to take a look in the mirror and question just what level of fanaticism has consumed them to the point where the former head of the Welsh language board's view is not 'promotive' enough of the Welsh language.
Complain about this comment
Why in heavens name are we bothering with a referendum.
Scotland, N Ireland and London get more powers offered up on a plate. We have to jump through hoops.
All political parties in Wales (apart from UKIP)call for more powers for the Assembly. Most people I speak to think the present arrangements are unworkable and the machine needs fixing. Why can't politicians at both ends of the M4 just devolve the powers and get on with it.
At least we would not have to watch their tedious petty manoeuvrings nor have to follow a bickering political campaign which will leave us all even more confused than we are today.
Why not transfer powers now and postpone a referendum until 2015 when we can all judge whether the additional powers have been a success or not.
A daft idea? Not half as daft as some of the postings on this blog.
Complain about this comment
well bochgoch,
after a resounding NO in 1979 and 50.1% of a paltry 50% turnout saying yes in 1997 I'd thank your lucky stars there is the possibility of a referendum offering WAG more powers on the table at all.
If we would have had the same margin of confidence/error and turnout rules applied to the 1997 as they would in any other country save Zimbabwe then there would be no Assembly at all!
Make no mistake... if we had the same rules applied as Scotland then there would be no Welsh assembly based on the 1997 result!
Still shouldnt be a problem so long as Welsh people think that the WAG has provided value for money and performed well since its dodgy inception. If they do they'll vote resoundingly for more powers. Should you be worried? well with every measurable indicator showing that we've fallen further behind the rest of the UK since 1997 and the evidence all around for people to see... yeah you probably should be!
Complain about this comment
#3 - Scotland, N Ireland and London get more powers offered up on a plate. We have to jump through hoops.
Scotland are only getting offered them to try and dilute the valid concerns about the UK Government's mandate in Scotland (Only a fifth of Scotland's seats between them, and both came behind Labour and the SNP in the popular vote). The hope is that by implementing the Calman Commission proposals, people will be unable to say the Con-Dems don't care about Scotland, as well as dampening calls for full fiscal independence in the run up to the next big issue in Scotland - the referendum bill. Since Welsh nationalism seems to focus more on increased powers rather than full independence at this stage, then there is less at stake by denying Wales more powers.
It is certainly strange that a referendum is still on the cards for Wales though - the SNP are just waiting for the Welsh to get their referendum, so that the Unionist parties in Scotland cannot possibly deny Scotland the chance to have its own referendum without showing them up for being the massive hypocrites they truly are. They'd be safer just implementing the extra powers.
Incidentally, the Calman Commission proposals for Scotland are pityful.
Complain about this comment
I don't care when they hold the referendum. Is there any hurry about legislative powers? What is the urgent measure just waiting to be passed? But I do care about education in Wales. The report that comeoffit (#2) refers to was commissioned by the Assembly government. No Assembly government, no report and comeoffit, like the rest of us, would be none the wiser about the situation. By publishing it the Minister has put himself on the spot to improve the situation. If he succeeds I hope comeoffit gives him credit; if he fails we can all vote for someone else.
Complain about this comment
I think that a "project board" that wasn't allowed to consider the only questions that need to be resolved in the Referendum Order (i.e. the wording of the question and the date ... since the minimum Referendum Period is something already laid out in the PPERA) doesn't actually constitute "substantive work" at all, Betsan.
If Labour had been serious about an Autumn referendum, the proposed question (or even a set of alternatives) should have been given to the Electoral Commission for comment in February. I am sure the EC would not have considered it inappropriate to do their work because of the general election. Their eight weeks work (the additional two weeks is the period of notice) would have been complete well within the 120 day period, so that the eventual wording of the question in the draft Referendum Order that the SoSW lays before Parliament could reflect their comments. The RO could then have been passed before the summer recess.
-
By not acting in a timely fashion, Peter Hain made sure the referendum could not be held in October 2010. It would be entirely unfair to now blame the Tories for not being able to deliver an October referendum. As I explained here it is for all practical purposes completely impossible to get an October referendum now. Carwyn Jones' letter is nothing but a cheap, hollow potshot.
-
Because of the delay by Peter Hain, things now have to be handled in a slightly different way. The new SoSW can't wait until the EC has given it's advice before laying the draft RO because there isn't time. If she insisted on getting that advice beforehand she would have to refuse the request now, and that would mean the whole process would need to start again with a fresh vote in the Senedd and a fresh request from the First MInister.
But she can do it this way. She can propose a set of words in the draft Referendum Order she lays before Parliament which has not yet been commented on by the Electoral Commission. The wording can be then be amended (if necessary) as the RO goes through Westminster, in exactly the same way as LCOs can be and are amended. But the EC's advice will not be received before the start of the summer recess in mid-July, and therefore the RO cannot be approved until the recess comes to an end in October. There must then be a minimum Referendum Period of ten weeks before the poll itself.
In short, we cannot now have a referendum in October—and we would not want a referendum in winter—so March is the earliest practical date on which it can be held. I think 31 March 2011 is the best choice left open to us.
MH @ Syniadau
Complain about this comment
Re 4
comeoffit,
"If we would have had the same margin of confidence/error and turnout rules applied to the 1997 as they would in any other country save Zimbabwe then there would be no Assembly at all!"
- Justify that comments with facts.
Complain about this comment
2. Thanks for link which was very informative,but comes as no surprise to anybody who has remote understanding of how things work in King Rhodri's neck of the wood. If you extrapolate the findings in the report on education to all other "services" provided by central government in Caerdydd or their agents ie. local authorities its no wonder that actual services are deteriorating at such a pace. The real question is why it has taken the AM's so long to get a grip on whats happening in reality,rather than "worrying" about more powers for a totally devaulued and redundant centralizing body in bay of irrelevance. As the report stated why do you need 22 Directors of Education,plus hordes of policy advisers,plus back up staff when all the real decisions are made in Caerdydd with the "enforcers" to bring any miscreants into line. If the policy makers in Caerdydd believe in democracy why cannot different "systems",i.e selction at 11 be tried to see if the bright children from poorer backgrounds to proceed at higher rates to proper universities,i.e Russell Group.The real cuts that are coming need not to be total "disaster" as with better management/vision more can be obtained out of lesser funds,rather than whats happening at present. On my favourite subject "grass-cutting" out side my house it is now carried out from Barry,some 22 miles away by huge vehicel/cutting machines and a "workforce" that have no professionalism whatsoever. It could be done at third of costs by local small contractors who live in village by what of competive tender with professional standards required. With regard to the original post by BP who in real world cares,however it does seem to exercise the mind of BBC CYMRU to great extent,along with the NATS who are in reality a bunch of dreamers/fantasists who have a completely miunderstanding of what welsh people need from public services. Hopefully our Prime Ministers ideas on public,rather than political devolution is the way forward and not more powers for third raters who could'nt run a pub in hot weather.!!!
Complain about this comment
As an English man from Yorkshire told me while on holiday in Mid Wales last week.
I don't want to see the break up of England except perhaps for Northern Ireland which is a special case.
Seems like it may be the same thinking for Westminster politicians.
Make such a mess that it will just drag on and on. Either they are all totally incompetent or we are all so gullible.
Oh and my new English friend also said he didn't like the Welsh language because it sounded like grating gears and we also had the old cliché of Welsh speaking people in a Pub.
But he has learned French and German to a very high standard and he thought that was great. Notice, not grating.
Needless to say he didn't stay my friend for long.
Complain about this comment
#7 MH
Your understanding - that it's possible to amend the wording of the question once the Order has been laid - is different to mine. For what it's worth I asked just that question the other day and this is the answer I got:
"The text of a draft Order can't be amended between being laid and being made - there is no amending process. If there were second thoughts about anything that was in the Order (such as the question) then the draft Order would need to be withdrawn and an amended draft laid (if the draft hadn't yet been approved). Alternatively, if the Order had been made, it could be amended by an amending Order. But in every case the text of the Order which eventually takes effect will have had to have been approved by all 3 chambers (Assembly, House of Lords and House of Commons) (and by a 2/3 majority of all AMs in the case of the Assembly)".
But either way, we're in agreement that the Autumn is not an option.
Complain about this comment
I find it strange that Hain offered purdah as an excuse as he and other Labour ministers were offering all sorts of new initiatives and announcements in the run up to the final days of the election campaign, way pass the 6th of April when election was called.
Complain about this comment
Thank you Betsan for separating the process from the politics, - and a great insight into the politics.
MH - good post - agree - March - it may well end up on the same day as the Assembly Election.
Recent precedent suggests a low turnout, certainly less than 50%, seems Wales has little interest in the machinations of the Assembly.
Perhaps holding the referendum with the Election will pull in the vote.
Listening to the various politico's and commentators there seems to be concern, a need for haste.
Certainly in the wider political scene the tide of opinion is turning, for the moment, pragmatism and reality have replaced the socialist chimera.
Perhaps our Welsh politicos sense the same tide is moving against their aspirations.
Will Wales vote with its head or its heart.
Complain about this comment
After disembarking just this afternoon from the splendid Mont St. Michel, and driving from Portsmouth to the heaven that is Cardiff (which has a new Tory MP I notice, replacing our 'Julie') How pleasant it is to see so much thought being given to the next referendum.
No, not the sterile old debate about 'more powers for the assembly' but the third "best of three" referendum on devolution. The mere mention of which brings out false, contrived, and obviously well rehearsed (but still decidedly nervous) sneers from the nationalist element. Yet all we ask is to decide whether or not we deserve to have our money frittered away by those inept, yet devout, wasters who spend their time "Sitting on the dock of the bay" as Mr. Redding so smoothly put it...."Sitting here wasting my time, watching the expenses rolling in"
Can anyone tell me (and quite a few others) just who decides on another referendum on devolution? For instance, just who decided on the last fiasco in 1997? Just how do the voters (remember them)get the ball rolling for the right to challenge the status quo.Is it, as many think, that referendi continue to be held until the "right" decision is squeezed out of the voters, a la the Ireland/EU debacle recently.
If so, let's all vote against further powers, safe in the knowledge that any reluctance to give the assembly clowns even more power will surely result in another...and another...and another referendum until the voters lose the will to live and a yes vote is eventually obtained by the nationalists in a 3% turnout.
Ain't democracy wonderful. Which brings us on to a referendum on Proportional Representation. A subject surely giving Plaid Cymru many sleepless nights, as it would play hell with their already pathetic showings in elections...Now that's one referendum I would certainly agree with.
Complain about this comment
Re link at 2 and comment at 9 on Education funding.
It is a commonly held belief that LEA bodies 'provide' education.
Quite plainly they do not as schools are the Education providers and the LEA is merely the channel by which some state Education funding cascades down to the actual providers.
Some advice from experienced LEA advisors, (usually ex teachers) is helpful but has to be tempered with(why are they no longer teaching?)
As we are told the PWC report suggests the 'administration'is top-heavy and because the report was commissioned directly by the Education Minister, How soon can we expect action to pass to schools the same level of pupil funding enjoyed in English schools.
Complain about this comment
#14
I think you'd find that Plaid would gain seats under PR. Labour would lose quite a few, the Tories and the Lib Dems would gain more.
There is more for us to gain as democrats, than there is to lose by a move to PR. It isn't going to happen under a unionist government, imo, ever. AV is a slight refinement of FPTP and will not result in a legislature which reflects the voting intentions of the electorate.
Despite Clegg's best intentions, I will be surprised if we end up with a fully elected second chamber by the end of this parliament. My understanding is that its an agreement to set up a committee to examine the idea.
However, if it happens, then there is the possibility of a real clash between the two houses, especially when a party in the Commons had a majority, but on a significant minority of the votes cast. In those circumstances the second chamber could claim to have a legitimate democratic right to overrule on a fundamental issue of principle.
The UK's lack of a clear constitutional framework is a real handicap when it comes to protecting the rights and liberties of its citizens from arbitrary government power.
Clegg talks of repealing legislation such as the ID Act, but cannot prevent such bills being reintroduced in the future. The constitution should rule out legislation which infringes rights and liberties, with a true supreme court empowered to strike it down. Even if there is reform, it will be temporary, as the limits of government power aren't sufficiently defined.
Even worse, the separation of powers between the executive and the legislature is weak. The Commons is easily manipulated through the use of the whips, the guillotine and patronage.
What we don't have is a discussion of these fundamental constitutional issues. The media generally ignore them as of course do the politicians. The latter will hold on to their unique level of power in the UK to the bitter end.
It will be interesting to see exactly how much 'reform' is actually achieved by the Cameron/Clegg partnership. Not a lot is my prediction.
Complain about this comment
Re 8.
- Justify that comments with facts.
Those of us writing off the cuff with feeling, wouldn't dream of poking fun at one of the opposition making a lapse of grammar or syntax.
But there are a few nats beside Foo, who have the pig ignorance to point out the errors of others. Foo plays it very very safe, confident that he cannot go wrong, with a witty pithy one liner!!! Ha ha!!!
Complain about this comment
I understand where your source is coming from, Betsan. As I see it the process is rather like an LCO. If the parliamentary committees examining it do not like what the originally laid LCO contains, a new "final" LCO reflecting their views is re-laid, which then gets passed.
My point was that the SoSW isn't forced to refuse to lay the draft Referendum Order on the grounds that she hasn't yet had comments from the EC. Because if she does refuse it, a fresh request would have to be made.
Now it wouldn't be the end of the world if that happened, for a fresh request is easy enough to make (though a bit of a waste of time all round), but Labour in particular would jump at the chance of accusing the Tories of ill will if they took that course. "Tories refuse referendum" is exactly the sort of headline they want to see and the Tories have to avoid at all costs. Hain's final ball was a wicked yorker, but Gillan can dig it out if she doesn't panic. Carwyn's letter is nothing more than a bit of New South Wales sledging to try and get her to slash out at it and lose her wicket first ball.
The final RO (irrespective of whether it was the first or second to be laid) would, as you say, need to be approved by both Houses in Parliament and referred back to the Senedd for their final approval too. It was because of this that the Tories and LibDems in the Senedd were persuaded to vote for the original request even though it did not stipulate a date. A back stop position? That doesn't quite fit with cricketing analogy, so let's call it having someone at third man to save the boundary.
Complain about this comment
Re 17
Jac,
How the hell does that even begin to address this? -
"If we would have had the same margin of confidence/error and turnout rules applied to the 1997 as they would in any other country save Zimbabwe then there would be no Assembly at all!"
There was nothing about your strange grammar (mapexx had the same problems!!) in that particular comment, I merely asked you to justify an outrageous claim. You failed to do so, of course.
Complain about this comment
Re 8.
- Justify that comments with facts.
Sigh, I'm on about the lapse in your grammar, are you happy with the grammar of your usual brief one liners, in M 8?
Complain about this comment
Sorry I have to say I don't really see the usefulness of devolution for Scotland or Wales, I don't even see any point in seperate assemblies for both. All that I can see is an additional layer of bureaucracy, and waste of money. We need less of this across the board not more and less interferance from the nanny statesmen feeding at the trough filled up with our taxes. In this vain I also do not understand the point of the ever growing influence of the EU, and all the additional pointless MEPs feeding at an even bigger trough.
Wales, Scotland, England and to some extent Ireland deserve to celebrate their differences but the union celebrates our similarities and we are stronger for it. So why dismattle this and throw up additional barriers to return to our "small kingdon" antagonisms of several hundred years ago. Europe on the other hand is a non workable entity of an ever growing attempt to mesh disparate people into a single federal organism that has no acountability or relevance to the people of the British Isles.
Personally I'd disband both assemblies and let Wales keep the £40m per annum it costs to fund the Welsh trough, to be divied up amongst the local councils to be spent where it is needed. I'd also say UK should leave the EU and save the estimated £118 billion (yep that's right, with our subs and impact from all additional EU directives) Again I'd divide this up amongst the UK partners to be spent as needed. How would an extra £6bn to be spent in Wales help? Then recentralise our goverment, but with more powers for local councils to make the local differences. If the budgets is equal per capita for everyone in the UK is equal and everyone has equal access to education, healthcare, and policing then what is there to complain about. And we can continue to poke good natured fun at each other and measure the size of our 'manhoods' on the rugby pitch.... solution
Complain about this comment
#21 is absolutely correct to remind us that we have too many levels of government but wrong in argung for an end to devolved government and the European parliament.
The level that will go will be Westminster. Partly because an increasing number of Scots and Welsh wish it but also because the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission have already made that decision.
Complain about this comment
Re 20
So, Jac, are you likely to answer the question any time soon?
Complain about this comment
Re 21
no1important,
But it isn't a matter of 'manhoods', it's a question of nationhood.
Complain about this comment
"The level that will go will be Westminster. Partly because an increasing number of Scots and Welsh wish it"
Lol! what increasing number of Welsh?!? It's a paltry 9% of hardline parochial fanatics that has remained stagnant since the dawn of time. In fact the vote share of Plaid, the only party truly out of the 'independence' closet, appears to be falling in Wales. Could this trend and their recent 'Wales can be independent by 2020' internet campaign just be a coincidence?
Complain about this comment
Come of it, comeoffit. If you understood how the world is run you'd realise that democracy, elections and what people think they want has very little to do with it.
Most of the important decisions are rarely aired in what we like to think of as the great legislatures of the world. Politicians may be involved but it all takes place behind closed doors where our elected representatives sit down with despots, monarchs, oligarchs, financiers and the rest.
A sobering thought. But do you really think that the rich and powerful can allow the world's political direction and economic strategy to be determined by the Great Unwashed, influenced by a politician's tie, or the fact that his missus is up the stick?
Wise up, wee man.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS