@wallbngr54 they're disgusting hypocrites #Walmart #Waltons twitter.com/RCdeWinter/sta…
— RC deWinter (@RCdeWinter) March 31, 2013
There is no justification for the bedroom tax. It is a tax based on ideological spite rather than on saving money or on fairness. There is an ideological minority in the Tory Party that hates the poor and the bedroom tax is am ideological sop to them.
The fact that the bedroom tax had been inflicted on those who live in private rented accommodation before it was inflicted on people in social accommodation is not an argument in favour of the bedroom tax. It is wrong in both cases and, as the old saying goes - two wrongs do not make a right!
As it happens I have some sympathy with the problem of people living in houses that are too big for them blocking housing. My parents are part of the problem! They live in a five bedroom ex-council house - sold to them by the last Tory Government and taken out of the social housing mix. But if they sell it they couldn't afford a smaller house in the private housing market.
If your lot hadn't destroyed the social housing stock in the first place the problem wouldn't have arisen. The Bedroom Tax is punishing the poor for the effects of the anti poor policies of Thatcherism – that you and yours celebrate.
The sickest thing about your policy is that if my parents hadn't wasted money on oversubscribing their little wealth into buying a council house, which may be eaten up by age care costs, they could be living in a council bungalow with a spare room that their children, grandchildren and great grand children could use on visits. But even that would not be allowed if they were re-housed under the bedroom tax!
The family friendly argument is popular but doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Because of the distances travelled, by virtue of being held in two different places and because of the huge size of each constituency the most family unfriendly of elected offices is the MEP, where Wales currently has 50 / 50 gender balance and has been fairly well represented by women since the first elections in the 1970's. If a lack of family friendliness was the real reason for gender imbalance in politics 40% of all MEPs ever elected in Wales would not have been women.
If any party offered me a safe seat as an MEP I wouldn't accept it, I cannot think of a worse job in elected politics, I wouldn't fight tooth and nail for it, any boy or girl who wants the job is welcome to it!
And that is the real rub in gender politics – when men stand it has sod all to do with gender it's to do with ME. I stood for election to my community council last year. If eleven women were elected and I was the only man elected, I couldn't give a shit about the men who lost, as long as I won!
I stood so that I could be a community councillor not so that a man could hold that role. I stood as an individual who hoped to contribute to the council not as a male!
The feminist movement, to a certain extent, has homogenised female politics. A woman stands election for womanhood rather than just as a candidate for her party, and that is wrong!
If I vote for Leanne (through her party) in the next election my support will be based on what we have in common between our ears and in our hearts not on the differences between our legs!
I want Wales to be an independent and successful country I don't care about the gender balance, disability balance, racial balance etc that delivers a free Wales; I just care about the deliverance!
The oddity is that most people who tell me that they would vote OUT are not anti-European; they are opposed to a European Superstate. They agree with the idea of a Common Market, they agree with the idea of a "level playing field" where employment rights or animal welfare standards etc are equal thoroughout Europe they like the idea of free trade and free travel in Europe; what they don't want is an United States of Europe.
Such attitudes are not "little Englander" attitudes, they are not UKIP attitudes; they are actually Pan European attitudes. Large numbers of the citizens of every part of Europe want to rein back the idea of a European Superstate and re-embrace the idea of a Common Market. Supporting either the Europhobes or the Europhiles in an UK stark choice referendum will be bad for Wales. What we should do is unite with those, thoroughout Europe, who want a new European settlement where independent nations are In Europe, but not under Europe's thumb!
Every New Year thousands, probably millions of people will make a resolution to lose weight and increase their fitness levels, and they have many companies to help them achieve their goals.
Or do they?
In the pure capital society in which we in the Western World exist a diet programme that worked would be counter productive to business. If I could make you thin and you stayed thin, I wouldn't have any repeat business!
The "diet industry" has no interest, whatsoever, in keeping you thin and healthy. Its interest is in keeping you in a "yo-yo" situation where you lose weight and gain weight and lose weight and gain weight ad infiniteum! The industry' has a vested interest in making sure that it fails in order to keep you as a continuous dieting customer!
A simple example – I have two spoons full of sugar in my tea. If I stopped taking sugar in my tea I would get use to unsweetened tea and I would make a life changing difference to my sugar intake. But hey I don't need to make that life changing decision because I can use 0% sweetener instead. – so I am permanently addicted to sweet tea – so I yo-yo between taking sugar and going back to sweetener!
When you eat a Granola Bar rather than a Mars Bar you are confirming the "bar" habit rather than breaking it, you are falling into the diet industry trap. If Mars bars are making you fat – give up snack bars - don't swap them for false "healthy" bars.
And remember that normal healthy people have bellies – the six pack is unnatural and probably unhealthy!
I can sort of understand the nationalist position. They want Ireland to be independent in the same way as the English Democrats, Mebyon Kernow, Plaid Cymru and the SNP want their parts of these islands to be independent or less dependent on each other.
There are those who propose and oppose nationalism in England, Scotland Cornwall and Wales but we tend to accept each other's views as legitimate ones to hold even in our most vehement of arguments. The vast majority of people in mainland Britain probably couldn't give a toss about the Independence / Union argument.
I don't know if my local county hall flies the Union Flag permanently, or if it flies it only on flag days or if it doesn't fly it at all, whatever it isn't a big deal to me and it won't be a big deal to most of us who live on the larger island. Even if it was a big deal we might send letters to the editor of the local rag, complain to our MP, we may even raise a petition. We wouldn't riot!
If anybody started a riot in Llandudno because the Union Flag was absent from the Town Hall the local Lore and Order Tory Brits would be the first to condemn the rioters and would insist that they were dealt with by the utmost severity of the law.
That is basically why I don't understand the politics of the north of Ireland, the loyalists don't seem very loyal to what the local Brits tell me are British values. And the local Brits tend to see the likes of Ian Paisley and his loyalist ilk as "Irish Scum" rather than a True Brits.
How can you be "loyalist" to Britain if the rest of Britain abhors and rejects your interpretation of loyalty?
Of course I sympathise with Ann in her loss, I met her late husband Owen on a few occasions and I would be horrified to think that his last days were blighted by lack of care in Wales' flagship hospital, but I'm sorry Ann, I doubt that it is true.
Because professional health care workers expect to be at the butt end of anger as an expression of grief, being insouciant about such attacks is an element of being a caring health care worker.
When my eldest son was a little boy, about 4 years old, he was rushed into hospital with a very severe ear infection. A doctor told me that if the infection spread to his brain that he would die and that the severity of his condition suggested that that was the most likely outcome, his chances of survival were very low indeed!
I hated that doctor with a level of hatred that you cannot imagine – I wanted to do worse than "shoot the messenger".
I see him occasionally in the aisles of the local Tesco store and every time I see him I feel my stomach churning 12 years after the event! Did he break the news gently and with compassion or was he brusk and clinical? I don't know. All I can remember of the event is the horror of some ****** telling me that my lovely little baby was likely to die. Thankfully my son survived, but I still hate that doctor despite the fact that he saved my son's life.
When our loved ones are in hospital it is difficult to be rational, they are the most important people in the world to us we are very emotionally involved with their care, anybody who shows less emotion in such a crisis can appear "callous". But the nurse on that ward may have thirty other patients to deal with s/he has other relatives and friends who are as demanding of her / his attention for their loved ones as I am for mine. S/he can only give one thirtieth of the time that I feel my nearest and dearest deserves, because s/he has to care for the other 29 patients too.
Having a child, a parent, a spouse a grandparent in hospital coming to the end of their lives is probably one of the most traumatic experiences any of us can have. Dealing with the expression of that trauma is an everyday occurrence for health care professionals; If they become emotionally involved they will burn out! A caring professional must be able to share professional empathy with all patients and clients but they cannot give personal sympathy (which is what most of us want from them) and carry on working.
Indeed professional standards and even basic empathy can often conflict. Refuse to tell an 82 year old granny how her granddaughter and prospective great-grandchild are doing and you will be accused of being a callous "jobs worth"; give that information, unintentionally, to hacks and you have breached patient confidentiality and are the butt of a radio hoax and at the arse end of a Professional Conduct Enquiry!
What annoys me most about Ann's intervention on this issue is that she, as a Labour MP, has allowed Jeremy Cunt to respond to her grief by claiming that nursing has descended into the normalisation of cruelty! A means of blaming nurses, rather than government, for failings in the NHS
Ann - Is that sick lie about dedicated public servants what you want Owen to be remembered for?
Whenever there is a news item about people who live with a disability a representative pops up on the telly to speak on their behalf!
Where do these representatives come from?
Who elects them?
Who selects them?
I am very hard of hearing and I have up to 50 absence epileptic fits a day, but I have never, ever, been approached by any organisation purporting to represent my disabilities before they give evidence on my behalf to the National Assembly or Westminster Committees. When I see these people representing me on BBC Democracy Live I wonder how on earth they were selected to speak for me because they haven't got a fucking clue about the realities of living with hearing loss or epilepsy in rural north Wales.
Who are Epilepsy Wales/Epilepsi Cymru? I have lived with epilepsy for 40 years without this organisation ever aproaching me or asking my opinion about epeleptic issues! Apparently Wales Council for the Deaf is a lead organistaion in informing the Assembly about hearing loss issues - sorry for the pun, but as a deaf person, I've never heard from them!
Today's news about the closure of another two Remploy factories in Wales is apparently supported by SCOPE a charity that has grand ideas about some disability utopia, but doesn't have a realistic clue about the realities of living with a disability!
How many people who live with a disability voted for the Scope Representative to "speak for them" in support of a Tory attack on real people whose only chance of a job is in a Remploy factory?
I agree with IDS, most people with a disability can work! Disabled people should have work. Working is a good therapy, but the idea that I can compete in an open jobs market is a total fallacy. Be honest – given the choice of employing a healthy young 17 year old or 50+ deaf epileptic – who would you give the job to?
Sorry SCOPE, but your trendy lefty lovey attitude towards disability doesn't help me!
The only way that I can get a job is if I can get an employer that discriminates in my favour – like Remploy!
The only way that I can be represented is if I am consulted as a disabled person -rather than be represented by the wheelchair pusher who is asked does he take sugar and answers, wrongly, on my behalf - like Scope!
Disabled People Against Cuts Caerdydd and supporters will gather at the Aneurin Bevan Statue, Queen Street at 5 pm on Monday 3rd December. The event will include the lighting of 1000 candles to remember welsh disabled and sick people who died last year shortly after being told that they were fit for work and having benefits cut by an Atos 'work capability assessment. It may also include 'direct action' such as blocking roads.
The National Day of Remembrance for those killed by ATOS has been supported by disability campaigning organisations including Disabled People Against Cuts, Black Triangle and others. 29 MPs signed an Early Day Motion in support off the day including Welsh MPs, Martin Caton, Anne Clwyd, Jonathan Edwards and Albert Owen.
According to an FOI (Freedom of Information) response publicised by the Daily Mail journalist Sonia Poulton on October 7, the current weekly average Atos/DWP death toll of people found fit for work after an ESA work capability assessment now stands at 73 people per week.
A FOI in April revealed in 2011 an average of 32 dying a week after failing test for new incapacity benefit. More than a thousand sickness benefit claimants died last year after being told to get a job.
There have been numerous horror stories in the media of people with terminal illnesses (in one infamous case even someone in a coma) being declared fit for work by ATOS and having their benefits cut.
'A GRIEVING boy of 13 has accused Atos of killing his disabled dad. Kieran McArdle told the Daily Record in a harrowing letter how his father Brian, 57, collapsed and died the day after his disability benefits were stopped. He had been assessed by Atos and deemed “fit for work”'
'A cancer sufferer, who had her benefits cut by government officials who said she was fit to work, has died'.
'I sought this debate in order to raise the case of one of my constituents, Colin Traynor, who was epileptic. He was assessed as fit for work, yet died less than four months later' (Michael Meacher MP)
One of the arguments made by Plaid Cymru in favour of campaigning for enhanced devolution rather than ought right independence is that if devolution works well for Wales, then the people of Wales will embrace the process and demand more and more powers for Wales. Opinion Polls suggest that there is an element of truth to Plaid's theory and as time has gone by support for devolution has increased substantially, but every attempt to move the process of devolution on is stymied by the same old opponents of Welsh self determination – the Labour Party.
In the four years prior to the 2011 referendum all of the talk was about parity with Scotland which seemed to have massive support amongst the electorate. It was only in the statuary period three weeks before the vote, that honesty entered the campaign and we were told that the actual referendum would be on a cosmetic issue!
The first volume of the Silk Report suggests another referendum on another cosmetic issue that won't be held for at least another 10 years, I'm sure that the second volume will contain even further obstacles to attaining what many thought they were voting for a year and a half ago.
In the meantime the Labour Government in Cardiff is doing what the cynics of 1979 were predicting: Ruling Wales poorly in order to prove that Wales can't run its own affairs. We have had a Labour Government since the beginning of Devolution and in that time it has lowered Wales' economic performance, worsened the health of the nation, inflicted poorer education on our kids and encouraged maximum immigration of non Welsh speakers into the Welsh Language Heartlands.
Broadcasting has been administratively devolved to Wales since the 1950's. Before the creation of the Assembly we had Teledu Cymru, TWW, HTV Wales, BBC Wales, BBC Cymru, The Welsh Light Programme, Radio Wales, Radio Cymru, S4C and a number of regional broadcasters. Local broadcasting within Wales is likely to expand over the next few years. As the media has been practically devolved for so many years, one would think that the governance of broadcasting should naturally be devolved – but Labour is opposed to devolving broadcasting!
Some have laughed at the unfortunate timing of the Welsh Labour Government asking to pull an episode of a soap opera on the day that Lord Levison published his report on statutory control of the press. I don't think it's funny, unfortunate nor an accident. It is another case of the Labour Party deliberately creating a situation which proves that Wales shouldn't have broadcasting devolved, because Wales can't be trusted, even in the case of the editorial independence of Soap Operas. Labour attitude through and through.
The Evolution of Devolution project has failed, and failed miserably, it's high time that all of us who support the National Cause - Left or Right- In Plaid or anti-Plaid – Cultural, Political, Economic and every other sort of Nationalist to give up on the Devo project and go four square for independence, because at the current rate Wales will become extinct before it evolves or devolves much further.
The story is headlined Welsh Not a myth to stir up prejudice against the British Government!
In the article David T C Davies MP claims that, an infamous 19th century school punishment handed out to children for speaking Welsh in class is largely a myth used to stir up anti-English prejudice. He Justifies this statement by claiming that:
Until the 1870 Education Act, the state had no involvement at all in schools, so whatever was observed by the inspectors who wrote the Blue Books had nothing to do with the Government.“The teachers who imposed the Welsh Not were Welsh and its imposition would have been done with the agreement of parents.“ Of course I have no sympathy with the Welsh Not, but it’s important to recognize that it wasn’t imposed by the British Government.”
The article is then followed by over 200 comments made by anti- Welsh trolls, many of whom are probably one individual posting under numerous monikers. Although, in fairness, some of those opposing the trolls also show a degree of ignorance about the truth about the Welsh Not and make unfounded remarks about Mr Davies himself.
Let's start with David Davies, himself. Mr Davies is a fairly fluent Welsh speaker, he is not an anti Welsh blow-in to Welsh politics or a stranger to Welsh culture. Indeed David's great, great, great grandfather the Rev Peter Williams, was the author of what is probably the most famous Welsh song in the world, Guide me o thou Great Redeemer (better known to rugby followers as Bread of Heaven) so David has every right to comment on Welsh culture. Secondly much of what the MP sid about the Welsh Not is factually correct.
As Mr Davies says the Welsh Not was never imposed by the British state on Welsh Schools. The person responsible for creating the myth of the Welsh Not, Sir O. M. Edwards, notes that some of those who thrashed him in Day School for speaking English were the same teachers who taught him how to read and write in Welsh in Sunday School, and recounts an incident when one of those who beat the English language into him admonished for speaking English, rather than Welsh, when they met on a train. The Welsh Not was used as a means of teaching English, rather than one of oppressing Welsh.
Where David Davies' argument fails is in his claim that the Welsh Not was never endorsed by the British state, because Until the 1870 Education Act, the state had no involvement at all in schools" which, with all respect is a load of tosh! Before 1870 schools were run by the Church – The Church of England was an integral part of the State at that time.
The Not punishment was invented by the Church, it was first used in monasteries to discourage the use of any native language in favour of the use of Latin. The origin of the Welsh Not also included an English Not!
After the dissoloution Anglican and then nonconformist missionaries used the practice throughout the Empire against hundreds of languages – many of which have become extinct because of Language Not practice as endorsed by the British Government.
I suspect that David Davies is not responsible for the Newspaper's headline Welsh Not a myth to stir up prejudice against the British Government because there is nothing in the article that suggests that David said anything like that, but the headline writer is way off the mark.
The Myth of the Welsh Not came from a True Brit who was a Liberal MP, His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Schools and a Knight of the Realm – not quite the typical Radical Welsh Nat Extremist, but a person who was at the heart of the Brit Establishment and a confidant of the British Government, a person who would hardly stir up prejudice against the British Government!
That the Welsh Not, The Gaelic Not, The Afrikaans Not and hundreds of other Nots were used throughout the Empire in order to promote the use of English is not a myth!
We pay our politicians good money to represent us, for that money they should bloody well do the job, rather than jib out of the job every so often and ask for a "referendum" to cover their fears of making a decision.
There is something patently ridiculous in the idea of needing a referendum to make a decision - when the referendum can only be called when those who have the power to make the decision, without a referendum, feel that the vote will go their way.
If the last need for a devolution referendum is anything to go by, we won't even have a debate about the issue of tax varying powers for the next goodness knows how many years, we will just have a convoluted debate about the best time to decide about discussing the issue!
There are only two honest ways of dealing with this issue, one is for the elected to accept / reject Silk's recommendations without a referendum and accept the consequences of their decision. The other is to put the matter to a referendum as soon as is practically possible – next May - perhaps. Procrastinating about the best time will be dishonest, duplicitous and a disservice to Wales
If we have to have another bloody referendum I will, of course, make another application to lead the No campaign on a NO! Not Good Enough platform :-)
I have received a number of press releases from organizations who are concerned about the democratic deficit caused by so few voting in the Thursday's Police Commissioner Elections. I could use them to fill the void in my recent blogging activity, but I won't because personally I am very, very pleased that so few voted. p>
Unlike other regional elections, such as the Regional Assembly Lists and the All Wales European Election List – the Commissioner vote has been a vote for an individual rather than for a list member.
As an individual, despite a miserly 15% turnout, Winston Roddick's 35K vote is three times the personal vote won by any constituency AM in North Wales and twice the personal vote of any MP elected in North Wales.
Despite the limitations of his job, despite the lack of confidence in the vote, despite the pathetic turnout numbers Winston Roddick is currently, by far, the individual elected with the largest personal mandate in the whole of North Wales - and that's the danger of these elections! Imagine the moral authority the person elected to the post would have if 70 or 80% of us had cast a vote! p>
I hope that the low turnout will result in the abolition of these elections – because the danger of just one individual Police Boss having more electoral clout than any MP or AM in North Wales frightens me.
It is that sort of power that leads to the creation of a Police State.
I stand by my claim that the Labour Part is Standing up for Wales against the Tories by intentionally scuppering Welsh Laws by making them laws that will inevitably be challenged by The Secretary of State for Wales, the Counsel General almost admitted so in the Assembly yesterday!
Those who have claimed that the SoS for Wales is at fault are being naive. If the SoS doesn't challenge the laws when there are obvious doubts about them; they are open to challenge from any Tom, Dick and Harry – a challenge from the SoS that is rejected / upheld will actually strengthen the validity of any Welsh Law.
By seeing the flaw in the Official Languages Bill, David Jones MP might be doing a favour to the language (which he speaks fluently) by asking the Supreme Court to validate the bill. If validated by the Supreme Court the Bill is legally sound! If the Supreme Court says No, it will say why and a more sound bill can be passed by the Assembly based on its judgement.
On the other hand David can ignore the bill's current failings and allow any Tom, Dic and Harri to oppose it in hundreds of courts of law.
If I was a Hairy Arsed Tory Anti Welsh Monster, I would have ignored the problems that the Bill raises and would have waited for the proverbial to hit the fan.
By flagging the problems and attempting to resolve them David Jones isn't quite the "Monster" that Labour would have us believe. He is a good friend of Wales who is trying to sort out a mess in the best interest of Wales!
Of course the main problem is the pathetic Devolution settlement that Wales suffers – a settlement that many voted for enthusiastically! Last year - I tried to organise a No! Not Good Enough Campaign – but I had little support.
It appears that it wasn't good enough
I TOLD YOU SO!
Having listened to broadcasts from other party conferences, where nothing was debated, where no policy was decided, where the party hierarchy was not held to account, I thought that the NATO debate at the SNP conference was a breath of fresh air.
A party conference where delegates were allowed to argue passionately for and against what they believe to be the best policy followed by a knife edge vote, where the arguments presented to conference made the difference to the outcome of the vote - that is what party conferences use to be for should be for!
How many other Governing parties, in the so called Democratic West, would allow such a debate and such a vote? Very few!
Agree or disagree with Conference's decision (I disagree) it was fantastic to have such an open, honest and hard hitting debate – decided by ordinary party members.
The fact that UK Party Conferences have become nothing more than staged managed rallies rather than a place to argue policy and that Scotland still has a party where debate is open and free - should, in-itself, be an argument for independence and a reason to vote YES in 2014!
Gideon Osborne wants to cut back on benefits in order to do what he wants to do with the economy.
There is one really pathetic state benefit that he should tackle if he is serious about boosting the economy. The Christmas Bonus.The Christmas Bonus is £10 that is paid to all benefit recipients in late November, it was first paid in the 1970's; I can't recall if it was Mr Heath or Mr Wilson's government who introduced it, but I can remember my Grandmother being thrilled to bits because the £10 enabled her to buy a pair of socks for all of her descendants – the first time she had been able to buy all her kids and grandkids a Christmas present. The Christmas Bonus is still £10 forty years later – it probably costs more than £10 to distribute it and in this day and age ten quid is hardly a bonus of any real value to the recipient. Abolishing the Christmas Bonus would be a sensible saving if one just wants to cut the benefits bill. Let's be honest a tenner at Christmas isn't really a benefit anymore! Ditching the payment and the cost of paying it would make serious inroads into the benefits bill! On the other hand – the best way of boosting the UK economy in the run-up to the important Christmas quarter would be to update the Christmas bonus to a sum that enabled grannies to buy gifts for all their descendents again! Giving every scrounging bastard, older person, tax credit parent, disabled individual, single mum etc a £2K Christmas bonus - that will be spent rather than saved will result in a HUGE boost to the economy! And therein lies the problem of the Tory attitude to solving the economic downturn in these islands' prosperity – the idea that the economy is top down as it use to be 200 years ago, that the "poor" depend on those higher up the financial / social scale is wrong in this day and age. It isn't so now! The way that the mass economy works is that the things that sell best are the things that we ALL must have – if we are on the dole or on a £5K per week – for the economy to grow we must enable the poorest to buy! In a mass international market – the mass is the key to economic success, not the elite – The Cameron / Gideon axis doesn't get this modern truism and is, therefore, bound to fail.
Let's suppose that my cynicism about the reason why the first two Assembly Bills have been subjected to judicial review is wrong (as nationalist and socialist commentators alike suggest in response to yesterdays blog post).
Let's suppose that the fact that at least one and possibly two other Bills are in line for judicial review has nothing to do with the Assembly Government / the Labour Party deliberately picking a fight with Westminster, what happens next?
The Supreme Court will not make its decision on the validity of these contentious bills on the morality of the Assembly being able to pass them; they will just look at the dry bones of law and the law will unequivocally find against the Assembly.
If, after it finds against the Assembly, we all condemn the law for being an ass and we complain that such laws are morally indefensible even if legally sound, what happens next?
Will the Labour Party mount a vigorous campaign for a more robust devolution settlement? Will the Conservatives and the Lib Dems admit that there is a flaw in the Government of Wales Act and insist that it is rectified by their colleagues in Westminster? Will even Plaid say that the Campaign for Devo Max / Independence starts today?
Sorry! I'm still a cynic - the answer to all of those questions is No! No! No!
Creating Bills that will be challenged in law has everything to do with the right to moan it's not fair but absolutely nothing to do with creating a system that is fair!
What happens next? – The answer is nothing other than the traditional Labour Evil Tory hissy fit rant.
I think that my cynicism is well founded!
The fate of the National Assembly's first attempt at passing a law under the new powers it gained following last year's referendum is currently being considered by the Supreme Court following a complaint from the Wales Office that it is without the competence of the Assembly. Apparently the Assembly Government had been warned by Whitehall sources that there were problems with the Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill before the bill had gone through the Assembly's processes but the Assembly Government chose to carry on regardless.
Yesterday it was announced that a second bill, The Official Languages Bill is about to face a similar fate because the bill deals with both the devolved Welsh Language and the non-devolved English Language. I am not at all surprised by this move; back in 2010 when the Assembly was discussing the Welsh Language LCO I noted on this blog that "There is a failure in the devolution settlement. The Assembly has the right to legislate on the Welsh Language, but not on the Languages of Wales. A measure that says that English and Welsh are both official languages would be illegal;" I made this statement, not because I have superior knowledge of the law, but because that was the feedback that those of us who raised the issue of Official Status got from Assembly Members and Civil Servants. So the Assembly appears to have passed the Official Languages Bill knowing full well that that there were elements in the Bill which were not within the Assembly's current competence.
A third bill, dealing with organ donations is, almost inevitably, going to face a similar challenge, but yet again it appears that the Welsh Labour Government is going to press ahead with that bill regardless of any legal warnings too. When the Government of Wales Acts were passed such legal challenges were expected to be very rare, but they seem to be the defining trait of the current Assembly. So the question has to be asked "Why?"
From a nationalist point of view one could see these legal challenges as a way of highlighting the deficiencies in the Welsh devolution settlement and making the case for more devolution, but that is not what the Welsh Labour Government is doing; Welsh Labour, on the whole, is lukewarm about giving the Assembly further powers.
The Labour government in Cardiff is basically having a pissing competition with the Con-Dem government in London in order to prove that they are "standing up to the Tories". They are allowing the governance of Wales to stagnate in silly legal challenges. Rather than using the limited powers that we voted to give the Assembly in the referendum for the benefit of Wales, Labour is abusing that mandate by bogging the right to pass Welsh laws down in petty party politicking and point scoring. Yet again - the Labour Party is putting what's best for Labour before what is best for Wales!