It would have been n pertinent speech. Where Peter outlays much of the types of problems the Bed Room Tax amongst the disabled
However it is not his speech that never was that is interesting .
It is the reason he claims why he wasn't called.
Because he starts his post with....
"OK this post is quite self-indulgent but as I had written the speech anyway and as the Chair of the debate on 'Making housing benefit work for tenants in social housing' and her aide deemed that they did not want a Welsh voice, I did not see the point in wasting it:A Welsh voice not wanted?
If this true, I think we need an explanation .
Perhaps this Chair and her aide thought Housing Benefit was a devolved issue
But if I was a Liberal Democrat . I would/t be just posting "What I would have said if I had been called in the "bedroom tax" debate".
I would have been calling fo a point of order and demanding a apology
It seems that the Li Dems only want to here from La Pasionaria as a Welsh voice at their conference.
If this is a example of how federalism which she argued for in the debate on the constitutional agenda.. them may be she should talk to her own party....
“Our mantra of being stronger together in the European Union applies equally, if not more, for the union of the four nations that make up the United Kingdom."
We can only wait to see if the Lib Dm leadership will react to Peters claim that they "don't want a Welsh Voice" on issue that affects Wales deeply.