I'm sure that Sir Emyr Jones-Parry is a perfectly decent person who doesn't need a sat nav to find his way around Wales. Don Touhig's campaign of kicking the man not the ball by being rude about Sir Emyr is un-needed, unacceptable and probably harm's Mr Touhig's view more than it harms Sir Emyr. However, having said that I do agree with some of Mr Touhig's doubts about The Convention.
In theory The Convention will be inclusive and will ensure that all opinions are heard. The convention may hear diverse opinion but I fear that its true purpose is to listen to just one.
Independence on the one hand and the abolition of the Assembly on the other are both legitimate views which are held by thousands of Welsh people. No matter how good an argument is made for abolition or how fervently the case for independence is made there is no doubt that The Convention will reject these views out of hand.
Some options will probably not even be put to The Convention. What the Scots call devolution max - devolving everything other than defence and international affairs will not be considered, despite the fact that this option is likely to be what is desired by many as the next stage of devolution after the referendum.
The truth is that only two options will be given serious consideration: The status quo and the option proposed in the Government of Wales Act 2006. It is a foregone conclusion that The Convention will support the GoWA proposals.
As it is a foregone conclusion what view The Convention will favour and what it will decide one has to ask whether spending millions of pounds on such a convention is the best use of public funds at a time of tight public spending.
Indeed, as the Convention actually has a practical remit that is political; to smooth over difficulties between Labour AM's and MP's and to promote the GoWA option it is fair to ask if The Convention should be paid for out of the public purse at all. The Convention in reality is a smokescreen for a political campaign and political campaigns should be financed by the supporters of the campaign, not by tax payers, many of whom may disagree with the campaign's aims.