Item 1: Minutes of the previous meeting and matters arising

1.1 Cabinet approved the minutes of the previous meeting.

Matters arising - Christmas Cards

1.2 The First Minister indicated that, although he was retiring in December, he believed it would be appropriate to send Christmas cards just before stepping down.

And thus do great empires fade away.

Mind you he'll be more than happy to read that 91% of AMs questioned by Ipsos Mori disagreed that free bus travel for pensioners in Wales should be restricted for pensioners with below average incomes. His should be quite safe ... for now.

A few weeks ago a YouGov poll asked this question and got these answers:

If there were to be a referendum tomorrow on giving the National Assembly for Wales full law-making powers how would you vote?

42% would vote Yes
37% would vote No
6% wouldn't vote
15% don't know

A 5% margin in favour of yes over no. I've heard a reliable whisper that they'd had a dry run on this poll as the new polling company on the Welsh block and in that one too, the margin was exactly the same: 5%.

The Convention's own opinion poll made public yesterday asked this question and got these answers:

If there were to be a referendum tomorrow on giving the National Assembly for Wales full law-making powers in these areas, how would you vote?

47% were in favour
37% against
13% didn't know
3% either wouldn't vote or offer an answer.

A margin of 10%: the kind of result that makes politicians sweat because it neither tells them what they want to hear, nor what they don't want to hear. What it tells them is that the decision is theirs.

Then last night ITV Wales revealed the results of their YouGov poll. They asked:

If there were to be a referendum tomorrow on giving the National Assembly for Wales increased law-making powers, how would you vote? Note 'increased' not 'full'.

51% said they would vote yes
30% would vote no
6% wouldn't vote
14% didn't know

A 21% margin in favour of a yes vote? Confused? Does the distinction between 'increased' (a bit more) and 'full' (mmm, sounds a bit like independece) explain such a vast difference?

I don't know enough about variations in methodology to draw any conclusions from such a variation in results. Perhaps you do.

My own caught-in-the-lift poll tells me that head of the Wales Governance Unit, Richard Wyn Jones, doesn't think there'll be a referendum on or before 2011. The look on Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas' face says that he does. That makes Prof, no, PO, yes. Oh and the man who got off on the third floor (heading towards the Tory offices) was adamant the Prof was wrong. There will be a referendum, next Autumn. He winked.

Ah the applicance of science ...

While I'm at it, the results of another poll - a survey of AMs that's done regularly by Ipsos MORI.

One result will probably be framed by the Hartan Army by the end of the day and will be pinned to the dart-boards of every Carwynista and Lewisista in town.

30 AMs from all four parties were asked who is the most impressive Assembly Member of any party at the moment?

Edwina Hart got 25% of the vote.
Rhodri Morgan got 22%.

Message? Edwina Hart has fans across the political divide.

Coming closest to those two? Plaid's Rural Affairs Minister Elin Jones with 12%.

Both Carwyn Jones and Huw Lewis got 5% - more than Plaid leader Ieuan Wyn Jones, and Conservative leader Nick Bourne who were both on 4%. There were no votes for the Liberal Democrat leader.

Five Lib Dem AMs were questioned: five out of six.

I think we can work out which one wasn't.

The gist of it? Go for it, though we don't guarantee you'll win it.

It cost £1.3million, is 132 pages long in each language and is not the "fuzzy" piece of work Sir Emyr Jones Parry thought you and I expected of him. The All Wales Convention comes to the unequivocal conclusion that, based on what ordinary people and institutions have said in their evidence, based on "impartial and carefully prepared scrutiny of what we heard", adopting a system where the National Assembly can make its own laws without having to refer to Westminster would be more efficient and clearer than the current system. More importantly, the evidence says that is what people want.

Ideally the Convention says a vote on holding a referendum would be held before June 2010 so that the referendum itself can be held - and won or lost - before the next Assembly Election.

And here comes the 1.3 million pound question. Does the Convention think that referendum would be won? I'll quote the crucial passage from the report: "Our judgement is that a "yes" vote in a referendum is obtainable, but the evidence we have collected underlines that there can be no certainty about this".

I'm not bound by diplomatic language so let me sum it up like this: the current system is pretty messed up if not entirely broken. You do want to fix it but we can't guarantee that if you were asked to vote on it, enough of you would turn out and enough of you would say 'yes.'

The sum of its parts

At the embargoed briefing, a brisk Sir Emyr and his team kept suspense to a minimum. The All Wales Convention makes "an unequivocal recommendation for the merits of Part 4". Stay with me. I'll explain. This - every 'part' in all its glory - is important.

The current system where the Assembly must first get the nod from Westminster before it gets extra powers came about thanks to the Government of Wales Act. If there's a referendum held and won, then technically we would be moving on to Part 4 of the Government of Wales Act.

There would be "substantial advantages" to doing that according to the Convention.

Why?

An interesting point to kick off: as things are now more powers are devolved to the Assembly via framework powers - in other words hitching a lift with a passing piece of UK-wide legislation - than via the infamous LCOs. That route of devolving power isn't open to scrutiny by the Assembly. Powers are devolved based on the say-so and the whim of ministers based in London and are exposed to next to no public debate.

Contrast that with the LCO system where pretty limited powers are devolved only after a great deal of scrutiny and debate.

Sir Emyr had our attention. On he went.

If full law-making powers were devolved then it would be much easier to legislate strategically. With the LCO system, that's not possible. On big things like climate change that affect half a dozen policy areas, you can think strategically if you start with the powers you need and a blank piece of paper. If you start with a long and complex list of bids for power from another institution that you're not even sure you're going to get, you can't.

Laws, in the end, must be accessible and capable of being implemented. Granting full law-making powers comes closer to achieving that than the current system.

The system by which laws are made should be transparent and understood by the ordinary people of Wales. Mrs Edwards from Pontypridd and Mrs Jones from Bonymaen were invoked. Conclusion? They don't understand how their Assembly gets its powers and therefore, makes laws. In a democracy, it's vital they do understand. Granting full law-making powers comes closer to achieving that than the current system.

Do the ordinary people of the UK I asked - I was thinking Mrs Wilson from Portsmouth - really understand the system of law-making in Westminster, an argument put forward regularly by the Secretary of State for Wales. Maybe not came the response but do you draw much comfort from that? The glint in the eyes turned steely.

There should be one place where the law of Wales is available and under the current system, there is not.

"A great fog"

There was, he said, "a great fog out there, a lack of understanding." In a democracy, that was no good at all.

Could the current number of Assembly Members - 60 - handle the enhanced powers? Yes, though adding to that number in future isn't ruled out.

So on what had the Convention based the 'yes vote obtainable' conclusion? On the evidence heard and on the polling evidence too. Their own poll suggested 47% would vote yes, 37% would vote no. That leaves 16% undecided or saying they wouldn't vote.

And there you have it: the 'winnable but no guarantee of winning' formula we've come to know so well over the past few months.

Then came the equivalent of the Big If. Many factors would impact on the result of a referendum - perceptions of nationhood, how the Welsh Assembly Government has performed, attitudes to Scotland and so on. Popularity of the campaign leader seemed fairly near the top of the list. The clear implication? Use Rhodri Morgan.

As expected then, no guarantees that a referendum, if held, would be won.

How much would holding a vote cost? "The closest comparator would be the recent European elections - the costs in Wales for holding this election in June 2009 (counting officer fees) came to approximately £4.9m. Campaigning costs? £100,000 per campaign -Yes and No.

There is a lot more in the 132 pages that deserves scrutiny. Turn to p.26 for a stab at how much the current system costs, p.100 for a clear marker that says governing by restrictions and exceptions - you can have this bit of power but not that - is not a reasonable way forward. If there's a 'yes' vote, any changes to the list of the areas where power is devolved "should reflect the legitimacy which the National Assembly for Wales would have been given in that referendum".

Will the report change the minds of those who believe a referendum would be lost?

Unlikely.

Will Peter Hain continue to believe that holding a referendum soon would be a show of "bad faith to Parliament" and that Parliament wouldn't agree "to trigger a referendum before of during 2011" anyway?

Probably.

Will the report put considerable pressure on Rhodri Morgan's successor?

Definitely.

Scroll to 0:46 minutes in.

While you're on tenterhooks and the clock ticks too slowly as you await Sir Emyr's report, here are another couple of links to keep you occupied.

Sexism and the leadership debate under the microscope at Wales Home and a blog called Devoution Matters that will appeal to those who think that ... well I suppose that devolution matters.

This morning Nick Bourne, the Conservative leader, was "looking forward" to reading the report.

Jane Hutt, the Education Minister was simply "awaiting it" - a neat distinction between the language of government and opposition.

The Convention's report will be made public at midnight. There will be some official responses tomorrow but expect little more than the photo opportunity equivalent, a sort of thank-you-for-the-hard-work and we'll-consider-it response. I imagine some will even steer clear of welcoming it. It's publication will be marked and no more.

There'll be a statement from Rhodri Morgan next Tuesday. The Tory leader was quick to "understand" if the First Minister would want to leave any meaningful debate until a new First Minister is in place. In fact he was pretty clear that for any debate to be meaningful, it would have to be led by the new First Minister.

That takes us into 2010, the stockings long-since opened and packed away, the tree taken to a council recycyling site.

But hang about: just hover over next week. On Wednesday the Welsh Secretary Peter Hain will be in Cardiff Bay to address Assembly Members. He'll be making a statement on the Queen's Speech before it's debated by AMs. While he's here it's hard to imagine he won't have something to say about the way the current legislative process is working, Sir Emyr's report and the timing of a referendum.

He has made his views entirely clear already. If you want to read the speech he gave in Cardiff some weeks ago in full, then here it is. His political detractors portray him as anti-devolutionary, keen to protect alleged whispered pledges to Labour MPs at the time of the coalition deal that though a referendum "on or before 2011" was part of the deal, it would never happen. It would never wash with the public. How can the architect of this current system accept, they say, that it is broken and does need fixing?

Mr Hain would of course argue that what he's doing is something far simpler. He's doing as others have been telling me over the past few weeks I should be doing, others involved in the election of a new Labour leader and First Minister - following the numbers. Look at opinion polls, look at the gap between those who say they'd vote 'yes' in a referendum and those who'd vote 'no' and consider the gap. 5%, 6%, 7%? No more and not enough. Think timing. Think likelihood of winning.

Granted, ask the public a question in terms of a kind of parity with Scotland and the figures the pollsters gather shoot up. The gap opens, is gaping wide. But while a Yes campaign might be fought on those terms, the question would never be put in those terms. So again, follow the numbers: 5% ... 6% ... 7%.

Let's wait and see what Mr Morgan and Mr Hain add to the debate next Tuesday and Wednesday.

In the meantime: the report itself. It'll be yours to read online come the morning. I'll be typing 'if' into the word search box - a pretty big 'if'. I'm guessing like everyone else that there'll be sections that push the boundaries of the Covention's remit, sections that don't offer firm recommendations but concentrate on the evidence gathered.

I imagine they'll discuss numbers of AMs. They'll discuss the evidence put to them that Wales ought to follow the Scottish model in that everything ought to be devolved other than the areas listed as reserved. A recommendation to that effect though? That would indeed take a pretty hefty "measure of boldness".

I'll be looking out for a line that says something along the lines of "If a Welsh referendum is fought on the issue, the Convention believes the evidence suggests it could be won".

If the referendum is fought on the issue? Which referendum can you think of that was fought on the issue, that was a straightforward answer to the straightforward question put on the ballot paper? Which referendum result can you think of that wasn't affected by the popularity of the government, how much money was in people's pockets, how secure their job was, how the weather turned out?

If it's there (an if in itself) than it's a pretty big if.

If you want to see an Assembly with full law-making powers, Assembly Members able to get on with law-making without reference to parliament - then enjoy the moment. If you're a True Wales supporter, brush off those press releases accusing the Convention of being no more than a taxpayer funded Yes campaign.

But on both sides of the fence, beware the 'if'.

Type in Cardiff Bay.

Zoom in on Ty Hywel - the red-brick building behind the Senedd that houses AMs' offices - and this is what you get.

Does the Tory AM for Cardiff North, Jonathan Morgan, never go home?

Or has someone forgotten to let us know that the building has been renamed yet again - this time in his honour?

He used the phrase again in the interview he did after the launch and at a guess, he's used it at least twice a day since then. It is his pitch: that as a Welsh speaker with a broad appeal across the party, he is the right man to take over Rhodri Morgan's job and position in the party and in the country.

What does he mean by "the whole of Wales?" From the outset I think we - and certainly his opponents in the race - took him to mean North and South but in particular the Welsh-speaking bits of the country along with the non-Welsh speaking parts. He would thrust home his appeal in those areas "West of the Loughor and the Clwyd" as Rhodri Morgan once put it, where the language is as its strongest and where Labour has been made to suffer at the polls but he wouldn't play into the hands of those who feared he was a bit too friendly with Plaid.

He'd be like Rhodri Morgan - able to speak Welsh but not about to thrust it down your throat.

So when Edwina Hart tells tonight's edition of Y Byd ar Bedwar that it's wrong to say the next First Minister should be a Welsh speaker, that she's "no less Welsh than anybody that speaks Welsh" and that she'd "also find it very useful if I could speak some other languages like Bengali or Chinese when I'm in the Swansea community" what is she doing?

Is she being crass and insensitive, intentionally alienating Welsh speakers as supporters of the language have already suggested?

Is she making a political calculation that Welsh speakers with a vote will give it to Carwyn Jones and that she needs her own USP on this issue for her own party - in other words, he'll be soft on the language, you bet I won't be? A political calculation at work.

Is she displaying enough chips on her shoulder to feed a bio-mass power station for a whole year?

Her Plaid supporters - and she has plenty - talk about her action on the ground in her constituency, promoting Welsh medium education. Take heed of what she does, not what she says ... The Presiding Officer is one. I talked to others at the weekend at a festival in Newport that, how shall I put it, tends to attract more Plaid-leaning supporters than any other party. Of those I spoke to, every single one wanted Edwina Hart to win.

So which one is it?

None of the above, say her supporters. She is simply saying it as it is and appealing, wait for it, to the whole of Wales.

In this 'whole of Wales' what she's saying is common sense - "unexceptional and unexceptionable" as a supporter put it to me this morning. A reference in your manifesto to a fear that Welsh-medium schools could turn into "the exclusive preserve of a self-appointed minority" isn't read with raised eyebrows and as unnecessarily hostile. It's read as a reasonable desire for the Welsh language to be regarded as a language for everybody.

In this 'whole of Wales' Edwina Hart gets a nod for recognising that Wales is a diverse nation. After all, says one Hart supporter, hasn't Rhodri Morgan talked about "the whole of Wales" in the past in terms of it being ethnically diverse? (He has talked about a fear that closing an English-medium school to make way for a Welsh-medium one would be ethnically-polarising) And the out-going First Minister has said himself it's not essential that his successor speaks Welsh.

Where does all of this leave Huw Lewis? It leaves him with an opportunity to show he knows how sensitive the question is ... and keeping his head down in his Open University Welsh grammar text books.

What if Sir Emyr Jones Parry and his Convention report puts Rhodri Morgan, puts his successor and his Deputy, Ieuan Wyn Jones in a position where they will want to hold a referendum any time soon?

What should the campaigns, both Yes and No, hone in on? How should they sell their message? Where should they pitch it?

They worked hand in hand with Rachel Banner from True Wales and Cynog Dafis of Tomorrow's Wales and came up with these slogans and these posters.

The art work will be there for all to see on Sunday's Politics Show along with the thinking behind it.

Whether there's any imminent use for it all? We'll get the biggest clue yet on Wednesday.

The day started with opinions - the view in the Bay on who'd come out best and worst of the hustings, recorded the previous night. Had Carwyn Jones been almost too polished and at home? Had Huw Lewis pitched his message right? Edwina Hart's style of engagement came over - would people love it or loathe it?

No knock-out blows but surprising views from some senior corners on who'd made the most of their moment and won on points.

An enterprising comparison from one of those who was there.

It's not fair to condemn Carwyn Jones for years for being lazy, then condemn him equally for being too assured, he said. Not fair. He's stand-out in this sort of public forum and a First Minister needs to give assured performances. Condemning him on both counts makes him the Danyl Johnson of the Labour leadership race. If you've just said WHO very loudly, then apologies. In fact apologies to anyone who doesn't spend their Saturday nights watching the X Factor and for whom Edwina Hart as Miss Frank as Huw Lewis as Jo McElderry means nothing at all. Yes, I know Miss Frank's out already but so is just about every other girl in the competition apparently so his choice was rather limited.

Don't worry. Bad comparison, getting worse, ends there.

If you have a view on the hustings, ring the Radio Wales lunchtime phone-in. The number is 03700 100 110. I'll be there.

The day ended, by the way, with more opinions. I did the school run on the 606 bus with a bunch of kind and lively pupils from Fitzalan who helped illustrate what sort of powers the Assembly currently has and would have if a referendum were held and won. They were intrigued by the whole process of recording, rather less so by the debate around powers.

I doubt whether Dave the driver cared very much either way by the end of the journey.

Who's got it right? Who's got it wrong? Who - perhaps most significantly - has got 'it'?

And just who are those out-of-focus AMs having a quiet cuppa and a chat in the tea-room behind them?

The job interview is drawing to a close. So far, you've done ok. You've answered all the questions put to you. You've not put your foot in it. You're not sure if you've outshone the others going for it but you've shown you know what is required to do the job and you've set out why you reckon you could do it well.

Then comes the final, throwaway question from them: Why do you want this job?

Edwina Hart, Carwyn Jones and Huw Lewis might be thinking just that this morning. First comes the news of the fire that will greet their baptism as Wales' brand new First Minister. It'll come in the form of the UK governmen'ts pre-budget report which will be delivered in parliament at 1230 GMT on Dec 9. The new Welsh Labour leader will have been in the job for around 24 hours before the Chancellor delivers "an update on public finances" - in other words, before they discover just how tough things are going to get.

Welcome to the job First Minister.

Their first challenge? To look at the unemployment figures relased today and respond in any other way than putting their head in their hands and wail. In Wales the number of people unemployed grew by 14,000 to 125,000 between July and September.

In the North East, in Yorkshire/Humber, in the West Midlands, the numbers went down.

In London, the North West, in the East Midlands, in the South East, the South West, they went up. They went up in Scotland and Northern Ireland by 4,000 - to 7.2% - but nowhere did they go up as much as in Wales. Here they went up by 14,000 - to 8.7%. In pure numerical terms, that's almost twice the rise of any other region in the UK.

There will be any number of stories hidden here - trends that are going up, not down, trends that are increasing but increasing more slowly than they might. But the bottom line is there for all to see. The same goes for the enormity of the challenge for the Assembly Government and its new leader.

Ah and then there'll be the All Wales Convention which reports next Wednesday. It'll be sitting in that handover pack Rhodri Morgan leaves on his desk for the next imcumbent of his office. To what extent he'll have left the decision for them to take, we'll have to wait and see but as the outgoing leader put it to journalists recently, if his successor doesn't want to make the decision, they shouldn't want the job in the first place.

So Mrs Hart, Mr Jones, Mr Lewis: why DO you want the job?

UPDATE: The Assembly Government have commented, though not on the unemployment figures as they have for the past few months. They've commented solely on the claimant count. That shows a smaller increase than in recent months, despite the big rise in unemployment figures. This is what they're calling "encouraging to note":

"Whilst it is important not to read too much into a single months figures, it is encouraging to note that the claimant count level in Wales has continued its downward trend. During the early stages of the global downturn, the claimant count was rising by around 4,000 per month - tailing off to around 1,000 per month during the summer. Today's rise of 300 - the smallest increase since the start of the recession - is an indication that the recession could be bottoming out, although we are not at all complacent and will continue to fight for every job and to maintain the skills of our workforce."

UPDATE

Come off it, we said. What about the unemployment figures?

"It is disappointing that the latest figures show a quarterly rise in ILO unemployment for Wales. This does not however reflect the position over the year (a comparison recommended by the ONS to remove some of the volatility in quarterly figures). In addition, the level of ILO unemployment does not take into account any changes in economic inactivity - a historically important indicator for the Welsh economy. The employment rate for Wales over the year (taking into account unemployment and inactivity levels) shows one of the lowest falls when compared to the rest of the UK - with Wales outperforming London, the South East, Scotland and Northern Ireland (amongst others)."

Near the top too would have been a question or two about Carwyn Jones, the Counsel General's views on the future direction of public services in Wales and the response of the Finance Minister and the Health Minister to those views.

In the event, there was little point raising either issue. There was no government minister there to take our questions. A first - out of fairness, let me make that much clear. The Chief Medical Officer, who did step up to the mark, was informative about swine flu ("the WAG has followed a pathway that we are proud of") but not in a position to give the goverment's response to much of anything else. Why would he? He's the CMO stupid.

So why was he standing in for a government minister?

Was there a particular minister who wanted to avoid the lobby this week? Or was there a cabinet hair-washing session happening upstairs?

Let's hope this first is also a last.

So back to nuclear, specifically a new nuclear power station on Anglesey - Wylfa B. We know where this First Minister and his government stand on nuclear power in Wales. Rhodri Morgan was interviewed yesterday and re-iterated the official government line: "We remain of the view that the high level of interest in exploiting the huge potential for renewable energy obviates the need for new nuclear in Wales".

"Obviates". That's clear enough. We don't believe it's needed. We don't want it.

The Assembly Government doesn't get to make the decision but wants public hearings before any new nuclear build on the Wylfa site.

The Assembly Government is concerned about waste: "it remains our intention to protect people in Wales in terms of hazardous waste".

The Plaid Deputy First Minister does want Wylfa B of course but only when he's wearing his hat as the local Assembly Member. His government is opposed to it. His party is opposed to it but the Anglesey AM is pleased that "the UK government has stated its position in terms of nuclear energy".

So what about the three would-be First Ministers? My colleague Iolo ap Dafydd, the Environment Correspondent, was bang on with his timing yesterday when he considered the candidates' view on energy and environmental matters.

Let's hone in on the one candidate whose views are, we know already, in contradiction to the current government policy.

A few weeks ago Carwyn Jones said was it was "time to get real on climate change". A robust start. He went on. "I believe nuclear power will form part of Wales' low carbon response to the serious challenges we face in the years to come. "

Will form.

His views are perfectly clear and in contradiction to the current First Minister and the current Welsh Assembly Government. He supports nuclear as part of the Welsh energy mix as long as the waste question is dealt with.

So a straightforward question then: if Carwyn Jones is elected Labour leader on December 1st and becomes First Minister on December 8th, what will the Welsh government's policy on nuclear energy be by December 9th?

A finger is decisively pointed at the paragraph above: " .. nuclear power will form part of Wales' low carbon response to the serious challenges we face in the years to come". How it's implemented, how it's articulated? That'll be up to the government - which is a coalition after all - to work out.

"Can't see the Deputy First Minister complaining too loudly though, can you?" asks one who clearly has it all worked out.

But just hang on. Let's hone in another of the leadership candidates - Edwina Hart. In her manifesto she states that as "to sources of energy, I have always taken the view that, where nuclear power is concerned, only the highest degree of scepticism is sensible. We must never forget that the safety issues which come with nuclear power are not simply ones for the present generation but for the future".

Does that sound like she supports Wylfa B? No, it doesn't. But she does. She does as long as the waste question is solved and is rather more sceptical that can be done than her fellow leadership candidate, Carwyn Jones. But Edwina Hart supports Wylfa B.

And Huw Lewis? He too supports Wylfa B. It's a community that's used to nuclear goes the argument. It's a community desperate for jobs. It's a distinct case.

So there's the hat-trick. All three candidates on the record as supporting Wylfa B, unlike Rhodri Morgan.

The leader of the opposition has clearly worked out that here may be an Achilles' heel for the Assembly Government. Nick Bourne went big on the nuclear issue at FMQs. Where does the government stand on Wylfa B, he asked repeatedly?

Rhodri Morgan's response - "There was a lengthy discussion in Cabinet yesterday, and there has been no development of our policy."

That discussion was chaired of course, by a First Minister who is against new nuclear in Wales. Naturally no "development" of the policy, no going on the record in favour of Wylfa B.

But what would be the outcome of the same discussion in January next year chaired by a First Minister who IS on record as being in favour of Wylfa B?

Would collective cabinet responsibility mean that someone like current Environment Minister Jane Davidson, a leading supporter of Carwyn Jones as it happens, would be expected to go in front of the cameras and make a vigorous argument in favour of Wylfa B? And would she?

If you've ever wondered what happened to the website that hosted this then read on.

Aneurin Glyndwr was launched by Welsh Labour with the aim, according to Peter Hain, of building "a network of progressive people who are interested in politics, but are not obsessed with it".

The author of the now infamous parody of Tom Jones' Delilah - though not the voice that belted it out - was Eluned Morgan, now former MEP. "We in Welsh Labour" she said "have passion and energy and with initiatives like Aneurin Glyndwr we will take on and expose the hollow rhetoric and opportunism of the Tories, nationalists and Liberal Democrats in Wales."

Well it seemed to be resting (reasting? spellechecker anyone?), then seemed definitely deceased. Now it's become "an online resource for Labour party members in Wales."

Before those members sign up and take everything that is on it as gospel, they might like to point out that whoever's in charge needs a spellchecker - urgently.

Monday evening? Must be Swansea and the latest official debate organised by the Labour party.

The three hopefuls have already faced official hustings in Rhyl, Narberth and Newport. On Thursday it's Cardiff and the final chance for Labour members with a polling card/s in their pocket to make up their minds. Who should take over from Rhodri Morgan?

People are waking up to Huw Lewis as a man with ideas that can't be ignored say his fans, especially young voters. He's not persuading people he can deliver, so can't be trusted with a vote in such a crucial election, say his detractors.

Edwina Hart's fans say she cuts a swathe through the two men and comes across as a real person. Her critics say she's abrasive and then some, calling big business "our class enemy", the Western Mail a "Tory rag" and claiming BBC Wales is "run by Plaid Cymru".

Carwyn Jones has been coming across as assured and charismatic, say his supporters; another bland politician in a suit say his detractors.

Which prominent Labour politician is seen glad-handing which candidate is noted, analysed and put out there for commentators to think on. Which prominent Labour politician is seen resolutely avoiding glad-handing which candidate is put out there even more quickly. You and I, though, are not there to witness it all unfolding.

The three candidates have already debated online - take a look if you haven't already yet seen it.

But later this week the ante will be, as they say, well and truly upped. The three leadership candidates will not only answer questions in front of an audience; they'll face the cameras too which means you can make up your own minds whether the seemingly unshakeable bland/abrasive/inexperienced tags are out of date, were never in date or are absolutely on the money.

The BBC leadership hustings will be broadcast in the Dragon's Eye slot on Thursday at 10.30pm. If you want to contribute a question via Email, then do. Send it to debatewales@bbc.co.uk.

Yesterday the Carwyn Jones campaign put out a press release to be made public this morning. "TIME TO LEAD - POWER MEANS RESPONSIBILITY" said the headline. So far, so the usual attempt at the weekend to look full of ideas and get reported. But hang on and read on.

"Carwyn is the only candidate in the election to link constitutional reform directly to improvements in public service delivery, saying the people of Wales may want more devolution but they also want politicians to do better when it comes to improving their services".

Who's the Minister in charge of public service delivery? Who rarely has a conversation that doesn't, at some point, contain the words "public service delivery?" Ah yes, of course, the man who is also the real power behind Edwina Hart's campaign.

Keep reading.

"Our current structures of governance in the public service - in local authorities and health services for example - must be platforms for delivery, not stand-alone empires. Otherwise the people will demand more radical change."

The structures of governance in the health service? Another direct hit. Followed by this line:

"Carwyn is set to challenge current Welsh Assembly Government thinking on public service delivery".

In other words Carwyn Jones is set to challenge what Andrew Davies and the Welsh Assembly Government - in other words the Cabinet in which he has a role - has been doing for the past few years.

There was, we gather, fury from the Finance Minister. Was there not, he wondered out loud, "such a thing as collective cabinet responsibility?" Backbench AM and leadership contender Huw Lewis can vote against the government on its plans for a badger cull but don't forget that the hand being played by Carwyn Jones is quite different.

A matter of hours later, a correction was issued. He was no longer "set to challenge current Welsh Assembly Government thinking on public service delivery" after all. Instead "Carwyn is seeking to set a new direction for future Government thinking on public service delivery." There is, of course, no difference in his plans. The sole difference is the rather smarter form of words.

But let's get back to that thought about power and responsibility and a passage in the press release that's creating waves in Plaid circles. It deserves scrutiny - I'll quote it in full.

"Labour delivered devolution. I was proud to campaign for a yes vote in 1997 as secretary of 'Bridgend Says Yes'. In the 2006 Government of Wales Act, Labour delivered the framework for the Assembly to have law-making powers if backed by the people in a referendum.

"I have always been committed to further law-making powers for Wales.

"I am totally committed to what was agreed in 'One Wales' but that should in no way preclude my responsibility, if elected Leader, to consult within the wider Party on the findings and recommendations of the All Wales Convention.

"But consideration of the Convention's report must not be a matter solely for AMs to decide - it must involve the entire Labour movement in Wales, AMs, MPs, grassroots members and trade unions.

"I will campaign for a Yes vote when the referendum is called, but we need a united Labour Party for a victory."

So have we been asking the wrong question? I've not been alone in wondering which First Minister would take a decision on whether to go for a referendum or not - the outgoing one or the brand new one? Carwyn Jones seems to be saying here that if he's elected, it will be neither. The decision will be in the hands of the Labour movement in Wales.

How would it be involved? By which mechansim? A re-run of the Special Conference that gave its blessing to the coalition and its current policy on a referendum? He doesn't say but here it is, a cast iron guarantee - to use the language of the moment - that the decision won't simply be made by the new First Minister and the Labour group in the National Assembly.

Edwina Hart says Carwyn Jones has been peeking at her hymn sheet:

"I have made it quite clear at hustings meetings during the campaign that I would want to consult the party about the referendum process once we knew the outcome of the All Wales Convention. I have also made it clear that we need much wider consultaion with the party on issues generally. Clearly Carwyn is in agreement with me."

And Huw Lewis? His priority, he makes clear, is taking on the Tories at the General Election, no matter what the Convention says about a referendum.

But look at this:

"With regards to involving the entire Labour family in any referendum campaign, of course. Unity of purpose is paramount to the Labour movement - but it is my recollection that a decision has been made on this, involving all sections of the party and affiliates, at the time of the special conference."

There are senior Plaid voices now saying exactly the same thing and in no uncertain terms - that the deal on where the parties stood on a referendum was signed, sealed and delivered back in 2007.

Walking away from that agreement could be, in the words of one Plaid voice, "a deal-breaker".