David Laws why now?

I am not sure what to think about the David Laws story. I suppose that not being Gay I have no idea of his dilemma.He  claims he didn't want his friends and family to find out about his sexuality. I accept his claim. Though we have come along way over the years, and I myself have long abandoned any prejudices against Gay and Lesbian people which in my youth I might have expressed out of ignorance. This has been reflected over the years in the wider society, and we can look to the referee Nigel Owens whose sexuality no longer seems tobe an issue, and where most people’s attitude seems to be to say, “So what”.


However I doubt very much that David Laws sexuality was much of a secret in the “Westminster Village” and the fact that his partner James Laundie had formally worked as a senior Liberal Democrat researcher  for Paddy Ashdown & Charkes Kennedy and was very much in the bubble

Which leaves me to ask the questions.

• Why didn’t the Telegraph expose David Laws financial position when it exposed so many others last year?

• If they were not aware of this who leaked the story? Could it have been a Liberal Democrat, who was embarrassed by the party being linked to savage cuts via Laws’ position at the Treasury and hoped that after a reshuffle Lib-Dem ministers were in cabinet jobs which were more popular with the public.

•  Why has the right wing press backed Laws so much? Could it be that this “economic" Liberal was very much to the liking”? I doubt that they have found a new enthusiasm for privacy and Gay rights.

•  If David Laws was so concerned about his privacy why didn’t he simply not make the claim? After all £40,000 over 8 years can’t be all that much for him. 

Perhaps in time the revelation about his sexuality will lead David Laws to leave a happier life, and I am sure that he will be surprised about the reaction of his friends and family. Who will probably say something on the line “Oh come of it Dave, of course we knew.”

My objection to David Laws is that he is an "economic" Liberal who was prepared to make savage cuts on the poor of this country but I suspect his successor will be no different.

Black calling Kettle Pot.

I apologies for going over old themes; But how much longer can the Lib-Dems get away with calling other parties dishonest when it is they who are the main culprits?


Over at Subordinate Central Peter Black has been at it again in a post entitled " The Gloves come Off" he wrote

“Labour’s dishonest and vindictive campaign to discredit the Liberal Democrats for doing the responsible thing and bringing liberal policies to a stable government took a new turn today.”

He adds,

“Labour activists in seats across Wales took to posing with large “under new (Tory) management” signs in front of Lib Dem offices – and a page was apparently added to the Welsh Labour website for “confused Lib Dems” to contact Labour.”


“Any person who read the leaflets from the Liberal Democrats, whether in the last election or previous ones (or the election leaflets (Focus) which masquerade as information) must chuckle at the sheer audacity of Peter Black.

I tried to leave a comment on the site but to date it has not been published.

I referred Peter to a comment I had made about previous claims that he had made about dirty tricks in politics, and in particular their Pontypridd Candidate whose leaflet referred to Plaid as “Labour little helpers” .What is the difference with them being accused of “under new (Tory) management? and produced a very misleading and dishonest graph. (See post on May 4th)

Perhaps Peter’s reluctance to comment on this is due to the fact that these tactics were very successful there was a big swing to the Lib-Dems in Pontypridd.

I repeat: How much longer can Peter and his party get away with such hypocrisy?

Crachach?

Speaking at a conference in Cardiff University this week. Leighton Andrews said the governance of higher education had become "the last resting place of the crachach (elite)".

I am not entirely sure what Leighton, means when he refers to the crachach. Does he mean a Welsh Speaking elite or simply an elite?

If he means the latter.Then surely every University in the UK is run by elites and Welsh Universities are as nothing to those in Oxbridge. Who to this day display all the vestiges of the British class system.

If how ever he means to refer to a Welsh speaking elite he should enlarge on what he means.

Is Leighton suggesting when referring to the crachach as a quasi nationalist groupthat (as some do)  who seek to keep power in Wales via the exclusivity of the Welsh Language?

Or is he is referring to people like Prys Morgan . Born in Cardiff, the son of academic T. J. Morgan. Who studied at St John's College, Oxford, then joined the teaching staff of the University of Wales, Swansea, where his father had been a professor. Following his retirement from academic life, he became President of the National Eisteddfod of Wales at Swansea, President of the Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion, and is joint director of the Iolo Morganwg project at the Centre for Welsh and Celtic Studies in Aberystwyth. These are typical crachach credentials.  Prys Morgan has a much more famous brother “Rhodri” Leighton’s old boss in the Assembly. Indeed the last resting place of the crachach is (as it always has been) in the Unionist parties.

To my mind the Crachach refers to a Welsh elite who long ago sold out Wales for vestiges of power. If only they had used to their talents to promote the cause of Wale, they might serve some purpose  but seduced by larger more powerful forces in the UK. They simply have been content with control of a few crumbs in the shape Welsh Institutions but not really our Universities all you have to do is attend a degree ceremony, and listen to the attempts by heads of departments trying to pronounce even a short piece in Welsh, to see that the crachach in the form the Welsh language has very little sway.

Education Reform?

The Con-Lib, proposals to extend Academy status to every School in England must be of concern to us in Wales. Since both Cameron and Clegg view the National Assembly as little more than a glorified County Council they will attempt to force these measures on the government in Cardiff.
The proposal for which they are virtually following Tony Blair’s Education Reforms

On the face of it the proposals look promising but in reality they will end in extending the gap between schools whose catchments areas area those of economic decline, and those in more affluent areas.

Small wonder our Education policy has long been decided on by those who no experience of State Education, But the idea that you can open up schools to form o free market points to the new government not so much being the “Heirs of Blair” as that of Margaret Thatcher and Keith Joseph.

I have long been of the opinion that the major influence on the success Schools is the willingness of parents to participate in the School both in deed and financially. Indeed for this reason League Tables are meaningless unless it takes into account the aid parents give children out side schools in extra tuition or simply help with homework.

Indeed this is I admit partly due to the success of Welsh Language Schools where the parents are often highly active in the PTA.

But what the Con-lib government in the name of freedom and progress plan is to more or less make a school success dependent on the parent’s attitude to their children’s education. It will lead to parents being accessed on what they can give to the School both in time and financially. This will lead as to selection (although everyone will deny it)
The result over the years will be a growing gap between middle class schools where parents are vocal and able to financially aid the school, and schools which comprise of pupils whose parents do not participate at all. (Because of their own parent’s education experience) falling further and further behind and there will be no local authority to step in and try to remedy this.

Meanwhile government and free market propaganda will concentrate on the success stories and the true nature of the increasing class division that will invariably occur will be sidelined.

The Welsh Assembly must act now with positive measures to ensure these proposals are exposed for the negative and divisional reality that will ensue.

First Cut is the deepest.

The announcement that the Welsh budget will be cut by £162.5m as a part of £6.2bn spending reductions has been treated as inevitable by the media and politicians alike, but I find it incredible that the reason we are in this mess seems to have been completely forgotten.

We are here because of greedy irresponsible bankers whose speculation nearly brought their own institutions to their knees, and forced the rest of into a decade of austerity.

However the cuts are here but the problem  is that it they will force cutbacks in Assembly programmes, that in the long run will help us out of the long night that approaches . Often what looks like waste has a positive effect in another area and this does not really appear until some time after the cuts and we learn to rue our actions.

The Wales Office said recycled £24.4m savings would reduce the impact from the original £187m. So presumably some of the Target areas of waste have already been identified and cut.
Over at subordinate central  "La Pasionaria" (will someone advice her to stop looking so smug in her photos) makes the claim.

"I have been critical in the past of waste in the Welsh Government’s budget, particularly in reforming Quangos, and the Health Minister’s refusal to investigate waste that financial experts have found in the NHS. I hope that the Welsh Government will now be willing to examine cleverer, smarter ways of delivering their services.”

Kirsty Williams may have a point but she is hitting an easy target without questioning her own government’s position Yes Kirsty your governments). Peter Black also joins in, and it is clear that the Liberal Democrats are simply attempting to shift the blame from their own Con-Lib coalition in Westminster to the Welsh Assembly.

I am reminded of a Tutor of my mine, pointing out that critics of courses such as flower arranging in Adult Education Colleges, (who they claimed were not vocational) did not realize that the students who took such courses would often join other more vocational classes a year later. Which they would have not have done, if they had not signed up for the first course.

We should not act too rashly and all the Parties in the Assembly should work together for the good of the people of Wales, and not simply obey the wishes of their London Masters.

Republicanism and Democracy

 Over at Plaid Wrecsam there has been an interesting article on the Oath of allegiance. I couldn’t help but put in my own contribution in the comments section and finished by stating

“it is shameful that a pacifist republican elected to any Assembly or Parliament who answered his/heir’s own conscience who refused to take such an oath would be excluded from the democratic process. At the very least the part her heirs and successors should be removed. Republicanism is honourable and democratic.”

There was a reply from NitroTab who

Said...

“A Republic and a Democracy are two very different systems of governance glynbeddau. You can't be a Republican and believe in a Democracy at the same time as they are entirely different.

A common mistake a lot of people make actually.”

Now I accept that there are many republics in this world that are not democratic, but it is ridiculous to suggest that they are incompatible.

However it is the position Monarchy I am concerned with here. I could possibly swear an oath of loyalty to the monarch as the current head of state, but the Oath also adds that one should......

"sincerely and truly declare and affirm that I will be faithful and
bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and
successors, according to law."

Heirs and successors? No I am a republican. What this part of the oath  means is that any avowed republican, who has received the majority of votes in constituency at a general election on a platform of abolishing the Monarchy could not take his/her seat without lying on oath. Is this democracy?

Even if we had a Monarch who was a paragon of virtue I could not support he or she because there is no guarantee that their successor would inherit these virtues.

There are a number of republicans in Parliament and our Assembly  who lie when taking the oath. But they cannot express republican views in the chamber; But is it not a contradiction of our Human rights that we forbidden to express our views in the very heart of our democracy?
The Option should be given as to members of the Northern Ireland Assembly to sign Pledge of Office. Then we can at least have some measures of true democracy. I am a citizen not a subject.

Childhood Poverty.

I am one of six children brought up by caring and loving parents in a small hill top village and I was 21 before I and the rest of my family moved to a house with a bathroom and  inside Toilet. Of course there is always a danger when writing about ones childhood of sounding like Monty Pythons “Four Yorkshiremen’s Sketch”: But I don’t think that any time during my childhood did it to occur to me that we were poor, and that there were things we as a family lacked. Some of my friends were a little better of but we were had mostly the same lifestyle.

Actually I believe today’s children have it worst they live in a much more materialistic society where the lack of items such as a mobile phone Xbox(or equivalent) designer backpacks emphasises the poverty gap between them on their friends and can lead to psychological bullying. Indeed, it can increase the education gap, because the need for pupils to have access to computers and the Internet. That is why the plan (based on Plaid’s manifesto for the last Assembly elections) will be carried out is welcome.

There is a poignant article by Barbara Ellen in today’s Observer here. In which she condemns the programme “How the other half lives?” A series in which better off families aid less well of families. Babara’s analysis is bang on. We cannot solve society's problems by well meaning individuals (or those appeasing they conscience) in such way. But I suspect that the new Con-Lib government will follow previous governments in trying to shift their responsibility for child poverty to religious charities and the free market.

We need a government that address the causes of poverty, this includes:

Unemployment. At the moment for successive governments the line has been to blame the unemployed for their position.

A cycle of poor education: (if the system failed your parents than it is likely to fail you).

Transport: I cannot but help but ask why has there been no attempt to investigate the link between lack of easy access to reliable public transport or ones own transport and unemployment and poverty? What percentage of the unemployed can’t drive as opposed to the UK average?

What we need is action not pithy reality TV programmes or right wing responses.