Red + Green = Brown
Saturday, June 09, 2007

Hardly the most inspiring colour, is it?

And yet, whether Wales is a car or an aeroplane, there seems to be mileage in the red-green Plaid-Labour idea again. Adam Price is all for it. And Edwina Hart used her first interview since the twentieth century to put her weight behind it too.

(Quite how any assembly member has managed to dodge the Welsh press for so long is a complete mystery. After all, there are only sixty of them. There should probably be a Dragon's Eye rota, just to even it out. At least that would give Helen Mary Jones some well-earned time off to go scarf shopping.)

Plaid and Labour in a grand coalition? Lefties everywhere are getting erect nipples just thinking about it.

But they haven't had to face Ieuan Wyn Jones. Does this man really fancy playing second fiddle to Rhodri's 'same-old' septet?

No.

He'd quite like to captain the ship himself. That's why the opposition are already behaving like a government in waiting in Cardiff Bay, with joint strategies and chummy tell-all telephone conversations between the leaders.

Adam Price is evidently doing everything he can to make a deal with Labour more palatable. After all, his father was a miner don't you know.

For all it matters, Ieuan Wyn Jones' father might as well have been Aneurin Bevan. He's still pushing for the rainbow.

Six weeks, then, to make or break a government. And at the end of it, most of the parties in Wales could be faced with seismic splits.

Labour is set for an internal battle whether it teams up with Plaid Cymru or not. And if Plaid go with Labour, Ieuan Wyn Jones' position would look very shaky. But then again, a deal with the Tories would cause a massive rupture with the left of the party. Meanwhile, Mike German and Nick Bourne really need to deliver the rainbow coalition to be sure of their jobs.

My prediction: I'll go out on a limb and say that three of the parties will have different leaders by the next assembly election. Within the next few months there'll be some sort of deal between the parties. And that means losers as well as winners.

Labels: , , , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 2:03 am, ,


Rhodri's letters
Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Here's what Rhodri Morgan is offering Plaid Cymru and the Lib Dems in exchange for keeping him in power. Compare and contrast...
**********************************************

Dear Ieuan,

How about some of this?

1. To take part in an "even-handed" and "seen to be independent" inquiry by the Assembly Finance Committee, possibly chaired by a Liberal Democrat on the Barnett Formula - which determins the way the Assembly is funded.

2. Bilateral "early" discussions on the Assembly's Budget.

3. A moratorium on existing proposals for changes at community hospital level and that already agreed changes in District General Hospital serves are not implemented unless and until associated community services are in place.

4. to involve other parties in significant public appointments e.g. chairs of NHS trusts.

5. a joint group to be set up involving Plaid Cymru and Labour members in the assembly and Westminster to assess the pre-conditions suitable for a referendum to be triggered on Scottish-style powers and to advise on the preparations which would need to be put in place prior to a referendum being called.

6. regular meetings between the First Minister and the leader of the opposition e.g on a weekly basis.

Tories r evil 4 eva.

Rhodri. xxx
**********************************************

Dear Mike,

Fancy a ride on my aeroplane? Here's what's on board:

1. an opportunity to work with government ministers on bidding for the powers to legislate on the Welsh Language and affordable housing.

2. To take part in an "even-handed" and "seen to be independent" inquiry by the Assembly Finance Committee, possibly chaired by a
Liberal Democrat on the Barnett Formula - which determines the way the Assembly is funded.

3. Bilateral "early" discussions on the Assembly's Budget.

4. A moratorium on existing proposals for changes at community hospital level and that already agreed changes in District General Hospital serves are not implemented unless and until associated community services are in place.

5. to set up a cross-party team to explore and report upon the practical experience of introducing proportional representation (the single transferable vote system) in local government in Scotland.

6. to involve other parties in significant public appointments e.g. chairs of NHS trusts.

Let's do it. Yeah. Groovy.

Rhodders. X
**********************************************

So, Rhodri's taken the sting out of the health issue by giving in on hospital reconfiguration, for the time being.

But how come the Lib Dems get offered deals on the Welsh language and housing and not Plaid?

Looks like Rhodri's trying to become the prism which splits the rainbow.

The opposition parties could, of course, do most of this themselves with Labour in opposition. But without taking power "willy nilly", will they be given the opportunity to get worked up enough to justify a vote of no confidence?
**********************************************

Plaid's Adam Price MP is blogging again. Today he sets out his conditions for a deal with Labour, which he says is preferable to an arrangement with the Tories. These include a formal coalition with Plaid AMs in the cabinet, a joint programme for government and a referendum on full law-making powers within four years.

Labels: , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 5:07 pm, ,


An extra 28 days to negotiate (with minimal death)
Thursday, May 17, 2007

Time is running out for our plucky AMs. If they can't get behind a first minister by next Friday (Saturday at a push) the whole of the country will grind to a halt instantly and there will be bedlam on the streets.

What's that, you say? Wales has been chugging along quite happily without a government? S4C2 hasn't been inundated with sackfulls of requests to play library footage of plenary sessions? Oh.

But, if the suited and the scarved in Cardiff Bay really need a couple of extra weeks to cut a deal, there is a possible way out.

All they need to do is come up with an evil murderous plot.

Much like the offering of a sacrificial virgin in Russian folklore, all assembly members must do is select one of their own to die for the cause of Welsh politics. First they nominate a first minister, then they kill him. That's because the government of Wales Act allows the assembly 28 days to nominate a first minister in the event that he passes away. Simple.

In fact, they need not even kill the chosen one. According to the legislation, merely rendering him "permanently unable to act" is sufficient enough. A bit like the cast of Belonging then.

Anyway, that's the method. All they need now is a victim...

Labels: , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 12:23 am, ,


When a defeat feels like a defeat
Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Remember back before the election, when Rhodri Morgan said he'd "leave the stage" if he thought Labour had suffered a defeat? Then, like spoons to a chocolate fudge cake in fat camp, we all leapt in with wild estimations about what that might constitute.

Most people settled on 24 seats. Yeah, that would be a bad enough result all right.

But.

He didn't say anything about number of seats.

Instead, what he talked about was translating votes into a Labour government: "If they want Labour to continue, then Labour voters have got to come out and vote Labour - that's the key message."

So, could it still be a 'defeat' if the other three parties come together to form a rainbow coalition?

Could it still be a 'defeat' if he can't persuade one of the other parties to join a formal coalition?

Could it still be a 'defeat' if he can only secure 'general support' and not the 'confidence and supply' arrangement which would put the government in a more secure position?

Who knows (apart from Rhodri), 26 seats could be a 'defeat' after all...

Labels: , , , , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 9:49 pm, ,


Tenei Te Tangata Puhuruhuru*

Keep a keen eye on airport departure lounges over the next few weeks. The assembly has a further 22 days to elect a first minister, which would take them conveniently into their Whitsun holidays.

In the meantime, nobody except Mike German is returning Rhodri's calls. So Wales goes on without a government. And the longer it goes unresolved, the more people are talking about Labour going it alone with Plaid or the Lib Dems backing them up in a confidence and supply type arrangement.

This, we are endlessly told, is the New Zealand model. They even sent over a cabinet minister to give Rhodri some tips on how it's all supposed to work.

But hang on a minute, why are we taking lessons from a country that's only got one vowel sound?

Their election was won narrowly by the Labour party, but only after what has been described as a "dirty campaign punctuated by threats and bullying". Even then, the auditor general found they overspent by $768,000 and ordered them to pay it back.

Despite the predilection for rugby and sheep farming, New Zealand is not Wales. Neither is their much-lauded governmental agreement necessarily transferable.

For instance, in New Zealand the government is supported by minority parties in exchange for ministers outside of the cabinet. But Welsh legislation wouldn't permit such a deal here.

In the Senedd, it's cabinet or bust. And nobody seems to want to share a table with Brian Gibbons. So, Labour would have to fill the 13 seats themselves. That means means half of Labour's assembly members would end up in government. Bearing in mind that Rosemary Butler is deputy presiding officer, the other 12 would have to spread themselves very thinly indeed across the various scrutiny committees which will be central to the new system.

Martin Shipton will be polishing his axe with relish, because if some of the women in Labour's ranks weren't up to it last time around, they'll find a minority government under the new system even tougher.

In New Zealand, meanwhile, there are 20 members of the ruling party in the government, leaving a further 29 to perform backbench functions.

Neither situation is ideal, but at least down in Mordor there's a somewhat more realistic ratio between ministers and ordinary members within the ruling party.

No doubt some people will use this as an opportunity to call for more assembly members. But that misses the point. The system is designed to work when there are a reasonable amount of people in government. In the end, it might come down to a call from Rhodri to decide whether he considers his 26 members numerous and capable enough to pull it off. As they say in New Zealand, 'He who stands, lives, he who sleeps, dies.'


*lit. 'this is the hairy man'. Line five of the haka, apparently.

Labels: , , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 12:14 am, ,


As stable as a unicyclist with a flat tyre
Tuesday, May 08, 2007

At the moment, all the talk coming from the leaders of the four parties is about securing a stable government.

But, let's be frank. It ain't going to happen.

Take the prospect of a Lab-Lib pact. Rhodri says it's an 'inedible' choice. Great start - like telling your date she's a minger before you've even got to the main course. Meanwhile, a 'senior Labour source' says, "we should try to do a deal with the Liberal Democrats. Our philosophy towards them should be, ‘hug them close and strangle them slowly’." There is something very disturbing about that philosophy, and it does not bode well for a future stable government.

Take the prospect of a Plaid-Labour pact. Rhodri says it's an 'unpalatable' choice. But is it really? Incest or perhaps even watching golf are unpalatable choices. Rhodri is simply talking about forming a responsible government for Wales.

Never mind, Plaid Cymru would prefer to sacrifice their best ever chance of power, with Ieuan Wyn Jones as first minister in a rainbow coalition, because they aren't confident enough they could make a difference.

You know what they always say about Iraq - there was no exit strategy. Well, you could say the same about this election. The biggest lie of all was that 'the people of Wales will decide the composition of the next assembly government', spouted by politicians from all directions. That's simply not true. Some people voted Plaid on the understanding they'd stay in opposition, others on the presumption they'd work with Labour and others on the offchance they'd team up with the Tories. Despite constant pushing from the media, it was never clear where their preference lay. They certainly didn't say they'd prefer to stay in opposition, which is what Deputy Leader Rhodri Glyn Thomas has said today.

So, in the end, the politicians will decide the composition of the next assembly government. And the people might not be best pleased.

UPDATE: May I welcome readers from The Times. I must warn you, though, that there's rather a lot of talk about Welsh stuff here. We're the country to the left of Shrewsbury - adopted homeland of your next Deputy Prime Minister:)

Labels: , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 12:52 pm, ,


Sunday lunch coalition update
Sunday, May 06, 2007

We've just learnt a lot more about what sort of shape the government of Wales might take. Thanks to the BBC, of course.

Liberal Democrats aren't keen on a coalition with Labour (no matter what their leader thinks). Back at you, say Labour, who aren't keen on a coalition with the Liberal Democrats either. Neither are the unionist wing of the party sold on a deal with Plaid. Merthyr AM Huw Lewis said he was personally opposed to any outcome which involved Plaid ministers in cabinet.

Step forward Lord Dafydd Elis Thomas with yet another option: an 'agreement' between Plaid and Labour in which Plaid AMs abstain on key votes to stop the government from collapsing. What Dafydd-El didn't say was that Plaid would demand a big prize in exchange for sanctioning such a deal. A referendum on further devolution by 2011 springs to mind.

Bloody hell, he's only gone and read this blog between finishing the Politics Show and appearing on S4C's Maniffesto programme. Speaking in Welsh, he said that for him, the dealbreaker would be a referendum on Scottish style powers to further the cause of devolution. I suspect other Plaid AMs think the same.

So, that's the carrot for Plaid supporters. However, the stick would inevitably be used to prop Labour up, which is exactly what they said they wouldn't do.

Labels: , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 12:49 pm, ,


101 ways to prop up a 'failed Labour administration'*
Saturday, May 05, 2007

Peter Black, newly re-elected Lib Dem AM for South Wales West, knows exactly what he is doing.

Yesterday's blog post got the ball rolling. 'It is clear that we now need a fresh approach and a radical re-think,' he wrote. For 'radical re-think' read 'leadership contest,' I responded. He had opportunities to deny this both on my blog and on Radio Wales. He chose not to do so.

And today, he's at it again: 'My instincts are that the Welsh Liberal Democrats do not have to be the deal-makers in this process. We have our own issues to sort out first around where we are going as a party and what sort of image we project to the Welsh public.'

It's now acknowledged that the leaders of Lib Dem councils are not keen on a Lab-Lib pact. Their long-term strategy is based on undermining Labour, not propping it up. In addition, one third of the Lib Dem assembly group have now spoken out against a Labour coalition. OK, so that only adds Eleanor Burnham to the mix (so far), but that's the Lib Dems' fault for only getting six assembly members. When the numbers are this small the fractions are more significant.

These prominent dissenting voices make a coalition with Labour increasingly unlikely. It was also the least preferred option of people quizzed in the little-reported BBC election night poll.

So, where does that leave Welsh governance? Heading towards either a rainbow coalition or a Plaid/Labour agreement, I guess. And as I trawled through the archived articles of the election period, I came across this quotation from Plaid, time and time again: 'We would not go into coalition under a Conservative First Minister and we would not prop up a Labour Government either.'

Only once did a caveat pop up. And it popped up as Ieuan Wyn Jones and Matt Withers were licking the froth off their coffee spoons in Cardiff Bay. 'We wouldn't prop up a Labour government simply by agreeing on minor issues,' said IWJ as a spot of cappucino foam inadvertantly perched itself on the end of his nose.

I would've thought, then, that working out what constitutes a major issue would have been a priority for the new Plaid group as it met for the first time yesterday.

*-100

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 12:53 pm, ,


Presiding over before the game begins?
Thursday, April 26, 2007

Forgive me please, just this one 'what if'. I need it...

Unless Labour pull off a big shock in this election, we expect a hung assembly on May 4th. The first business of that assembly is to elect a presiding officer. Whoever is bestowed that privilege will be politically impotent during their tenure, except in casting the decisive vote on those occasions where there is a tie. This makes the presiding officer feel terribly important. This and a plentiful supply of both blue and red bottles of Ty Nant mineral water, so his Lordship can have bubbles if that is what his Lordship doth wish.

Anyway, this happens within seven days of the election and the assembly then has a further 28 days to nominate a First Minister, who on this occasion will be appointed by the Queen (if he can be bothered to turn up).

So what's my point? Well, if it's tight (and there's every chance it could be tighter than a badger's anus), then the political affiliation of the presiding officer could determine which parties are able to form a government. In other words, it may well be that there is but a week for coalitions and/or agreements to be battered out after the election. There's also every chance that the parties will fail to agree on a way forward in that time, meaning that the election of a presiding officer could become quite a highly charged and controversial affair.

Of course, this is speculative twonk. But I wouldn't completely rule out someone other than Dafydd Elis Thomas getting their hands on the presiding officer's fizz next year.

Disclaimer: This is based on a nocturnal scamper through the assembly's standing orders (yes, I need a girlfriend). If you spot something fishy, let me know.

Labels: , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 12:07 am, ,


Deal or no deal?
Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Right, that’s the day over. Time to reflect. (For background see HERE)

My initial reaction to this story was that we could nit pick our way out of it. What’s the difference between a deal and a coalition, I wondered. Isn't this just a story about semantics? Some blogs and news bulletins evidently wondered this too, because that's also the line they took.

But if we go back to Labour’s denial, what they say is that “this story is rubbish from start to finish”.

So, is it?

Is it rubbish that senior labour politicians (note that the report calls them politicians and not sources) are understood by the BBC to be “prepared to make major policy concessions in return for the party's support in votes of confidence and on issues such as the assembly budget”?

Is it rubbish that “prominent Labour figures have said they are considering a deal with Plaid”?

Is it? Is it? Eh?

If it is rubbish, then someone has made it up. Surely Labour aren’t accusing the BBC of that?

But let’s imagine it isn’t rubbish. The sound of cava/asti/lambrusco corks popping/unscrewing echoed around Ty Gwynfor today (they’re saving the good stuff for election night). Plaid think Labour are in meltdown. And they’re optimistic. This sort of ‘deal’ would see their programme of government implemented. They almost seem proud that they wouldn’t get any cabinet ministers.

But what would be the point of a deal like that? If Plaid argue that the current administration is incompetent – why keep it in power? And if Plaid value their seven election pledges so much – why trust a Labour government they so frequently decry to implement them? Why forfeit the chance to have real influence?

As far as tactics go, this is akin to political castration. Some very senior figures favour this sort of ‘agreement’ with Labour, but I’m not entirely sure that anyone is looking that far ahead. For the time being, it is serving a much more important purpose in electoral strategy: it undermines the Vote Plaid Get Tory line, it forces Labour into coalition territory (rather than talking about earning a majority) and it draws out the divides between the nationalists and unionists in the Labour party.

This may be talk best saved for May 4th. But it’s having an impact now.

UPDATE: I didn't hear Good Evening Wales (helpfully transcribed by Ted Jones), but apparently your mammoth debate in the comments section of my previous post got a mention from Labour's devilishly loyal Merthyr AM Huw Lewis:

"We have been upended in our campaign today by this individual or individuals. That combined actually with very damaging internet speculation which is going on at the moment I think has been a bad day for Labour and it needn't have been…"

I hope you're proud of yourselves!

Labels: , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 7:01 pm, ,


Kick Labour into touch?












Plaid Cymru are going to need some new posters.

1230 UPDATE: This is fast turning into a game of semantics. Just the sort of thing that will turn ordinary people off as much as it turns us anoraks on.

Labour rule out a coalition with Plaid, who in turn rule out 'propping up' Labour. But that doesn't rule out an 'agreement'. Which is just what Labour are accusing Plaid of patching together with the Tories. At least nobody now has the moral high ground on making amorous advances. They're all at it.

1245 UPDATE: Have talks, official or otherwise, already taken place?

1345 UPDATE: Leighton Andrews insists the source is not a senior figure: "The BBC may have found someone in the Labour Party to say what the BBC is reporting - but they are certainly not anyone with any authority to say anything about Welsh Labour strategy pre- or post-election." But the BBC's Vaughan Roderick claims it is someone 'high up in the party'. It's hardly surprising that Labour's unionist wing are issuing such strenuous denials. But what about the so-called nationalists in the Welsh Labour camp?

Labels: , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 8:57 am, ,


Peter Hain: assembly election candidate
Friday, March 02, 2007

Well, not quite. I've seen the list of Labour candidates and his name isn't on it. But if he were to stand, and if he won the Labour leadership in the assembly, he'd be entitled to 'rule out' a coalition with Plaid Cymru.

That's what he did yesterday in the House of Commons in his position as member of parliament for Neath and Secretary of State for Wales. Eh?

Has he consulted with Rhodri Morgan? Is this the official Labour party line in Wales? "I don't think there is going to be much of an appetite for it," is all the First Minister's spokeswoman would say, leaving the coalition door ajar.

But hang on. If it's been 'ruled out' then the First Minister's hands are tied: a 'can't do politician' if ever there was one.

Labels: , , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 7:16 am, ,


A Plaid and Labour love in?
Thursday, January 25, 2007

Plaid's deputy leader Rhodri Glyn Thomas:

I believe a good working majority means at least 34 votes. If Labour were in coalition with Plaid after the election, it is possible that we could have 40 seats between us. But there would certainly be at least 34, freeing up Ministers to do their jobs without the handicap of being tied in to the Assembly for most of the week.

Perhaps they should just join forces *before* the election and be done with it. Anything else is just cheating Welsh voters, isn't it?

Labels: , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 10:05 am, ,


Conservatives - The Party of Wales
Friday, January 12, 2007

Glyn Davies is undoubtedly a colourful politician and an imaginative thinker... which is probably why he keeps dreaming of rainbow coalitions.

He's at it again in today's Western Mail:

Asked about the hostility of some Plaid members to the idea of linking up with the Tories under any circumstances, Mr Davies said, "The challenge is for the Conservatives. At the moment there are a lot of people in Wales who think of the Conservatives as being an English party. They don't think we want to be part of the government of Wales. And we've got to change that perception. There are a lot of people in Plaid Cymru who see the Tories as being beyond the pale. But there are a lot of people in Plaid for whom the Tories are very much the second choice as well."

His optimism is commendable, but that still doesn't take into account the stubborn group of Plaid AMs who would veto a coalition with the Tories under any circumstances. With the Assembly's party groups in such small numbers, this is a sizable and influential obstacle that simply won't be overcome. As I wrote earlier this week, intelligent Tories such as Glyn Davies should be thinking of a Plan B.

Glyn's second goal is even more ambitious. "I'm very clear that I want a party that is clearly Welsh and clearly identifies itself as the party of culture and language and Welsh identity," he says.

Anyone who has seen a typical Welsh Tory voter will know that he has his work cut out. It's no coincidence that the Conservatives' only constituency seat at present is Monmouth - that bastion of Welshness on the English border.

Labels: , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 10:43 am, ,


The budget: who's lying?
Friday, December 15, 2006

Who do we believe? Did the budget go through because of an extra £13m or a paltry £300,000? The key distinction to be made is when the opposition parties stopped negotiating as an alliance. Plaid claim that anything agreed after that point is new money. So, here's the spin:

Plaid Cymru
- £9.6 million comes from Gordon Brown and all goes to education. In earlier talks Labour was only willing to allow £6 million of this for schools. This money came after negotiations with the Tories and Lib Dems, so it's new money. It's also a £300,000 increase on the £9.3 originally offered by the Chancellor.
- £1.7 million extra for special needs education. This offer was not on the table when the opposition parties negotiated together.
- £2 million for school heating, every year. This was initially billed as a one off payment for next year.
- "A coalition with the Tories is now virtually impossible."

Tories
- £9.3 million was always on the cards, so the only new money is £300,000.
- £2 million for heating was an earlier promise, all Plaid managed was to make it a recurring rather than one-off payment.
- The reserve £1.7 million was always there.
- "Plaid got the wobbles."

So is it a bumper investment or a reshuffling of the deck chairs? Well, it's neither.

But it is a pragmatic resolution for a nationalist party who sensed they were being damaged by the continuing talk of coalition with the Tories. Nick Bourne, for his part, probably played this one a bit too boldly. Coalition are best conducted in hushed tones with curtains drawn and pipes smoked. They're not the business of front page headlines and that, I sense, is what really irked Plaid Cymru.

Labels: , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 10:24 am, ,


Coalition chatter on the blogs
Tuesday, November 14, 2006

There's over six months still to go until the Welsh Assembly elections, but the political bloggers are already wondering who they'd like to get into bed with on May 4th. Will it be Lib-Lab? Or a rainbow coalition of everyone else? Or even Plib-Plab - everyone but the Tories?

Peter Black (Lib Dem)

The Welsh Liberal Democrats, as they demonstrated in the last partnership government, are not in the business of seeking power for its own sake. Our objective will be to implement as many of our policies as possible and we will not be abandoning important principles just to save Labour's hide.

Glyn Davies (Tory)

The alternative must be a Government without Labour - or in other words a Plaid/Lib Dem/Tory Government led by the biggest party after Labour - which I have not the slightest doubt will be the new, modern, reasonable Tories.

Some people don't think that I am serious about this. Well, think on this. I am going around being really nice to and about Mick Bates (really nice man) which for me is the political equivilent of eating cooked rat.


This is going to run and run. Especially since the Tories, Lib Dems and Plaid have only half a year to find red, green, indigo and violet parties to join them.

Labels: , , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 10:08 pm, ,


Who's sleeping with the nationalists?
Saturday, October 21, 2006

Coalition talk is beginning to dominate Welsh politics in the run up to next year's Assembly elections.

Plaid aren't ruling out an agreement with Labour.

The Tories will buddy up to anyone apart from Labour.

And the Lib Dems have already specified what flavour biscuits they'd like at the first cabinet meeting with their Labour chums after the election.

That deal is all but sewn up. The electorate, meanwhile, is being stitched up.

Parties should either contest the election as a pre-formed coalition or put a stop to the conjecture.

They won't, of course, because it's a political game.

The Tories love the idea that they can ruffle some nationalist feathers by talking up the possibility of a coalition with Plaid.

Plaid countered that by threatening to get into bed with Rhodri (and Julie) Morgan.

Problem is it's a bit crowded in there already with the Lib Dems' Mike German snuggled up and dreaming of becoming deputy first minister.

You do sense, though, that the Tories are itching for power. They're even prepared to care about the NHS. And if they can do that they might fancy their chances of sweet talking anyone.

But they need to be caereful that they're not seen as the loose woman of Welsh politics. By all means get into bed with whoever can make you happy - but shut the door and close the curtains.

Labels: , , , , ,

posted by Blamerbell @ 10:11 pm, ,