What's in a name?

In about 1979-1983 or there about, the late Daily Post columnist Ivor Wynne Jones criticised me in one of his typically anti-Welsh columns regarding something I had said or done in the nationalist cause, in which he referred to me as the Rev Dr Allan ap Hugh. I dropped a note to the Post to say that I was not a Rev or a Dr and that I am Alwyn ap Huw rather than Ivor's interpretation of my name.

Ivor, being Ivor, couldn't accept that he had made a mistake and retorted:
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet - as would the name of the foulest stench of the briar smell as foul!

I appologise to Duncan Higgitt for getting his name wrong in my last post.

Having said that, I hate to admit it, but perhaps Ivor had a point!

MP's hold PM to account shock horror

The front page of today's Daily Post is a further example of the expenses scandal getting out of hand. Wanting to get their bit of the action the Daily Post has "exclusively" discovered that the three Plaid MPs used some of their incidental expenses allowance to pay for legal advice regarding the Iraq war.

The Daily Post seems to think that this is wrong, because it means that "Labour supporters forked out" to fund a campaign to oust the Prime Minister. Rather a pathetic claim to make. As all tax payers pay towards all MP's costs, Plaid supporters will pay a damned site more per head to Labour Tory and Lib Dem MP's than than any taxpayer pays for the cost of Plaid MPs. And all of the MP's expenses put together will be chickenfeed in comparison to the billions that opponents of the illegal war have had to fork out to finance the military campaign.

What ever one's opinion of Plaid Cymru, Tony Blair or the war in Iraq, it should be clear to any unbiased observer that getting legal advice about the activities of the government of the day is a legitimate way for oppositions politicians to hold the government to account.

This is a non story and is more of an embarrassment to the Daily Post for reporting it than it is for the three MP's concerned.

Western Mail Tasers Daily Post!

The Western Mail / Wales on-line website reports that North Wales Police used a taser gun on a runaway ram who was causing traffic danger on the A55.

It is illegal for Welsh shepherds to use electric shock collars on either their sheep or their sheep dogs under Assembly directives, so why should North Wales Police be allowed to use electric shock guns on sheep? The WM demands to know!

Can I suggest a simple answer?

To stop a pile up on the A55.

The most revealing comment in the Western Mail's report of the story has nothing to do with sheep, shepherds or policemen. The barb is in the way that the Western Mail attempts to undermine the Daily Post:

One driver who witnessed the incident said it upset his 13-year-old daughter, the Liverpool-based Daily Post reported

Both the Daily Post and the Western Mail are owned by the same stable: Trinity Mirror. The Liverpool and Welsh editions of the Daily Post have been separated for many years. The Welsh edition, the one that reports trouble on the A55, has been publishing from Llandudno Junction for many years, it is not Liverpool Based.

Why is the Western Mail briefing against the Daily Post?

Are there worries that one of the titles is about to be axed?

Are both papers due to be merged?

What is going on? The people of Wales deserve to know!