One of the features of parliamentary process is that
votes on legislation, budgets etc eventually come down to a straight ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
Prior debate, both in committee and on the floor of the chamber, offers
opportunity for parliamentarians to seek to amend and improve the proposition
under consideration, but at the end of the process, nuance, subtlety, and the fact
that there may be varied reasons why members choose to support or oppose the
proposition are all erased in a simple binary vote.
Whether Labour made the ‘right’ call in this week’s
Senedd vote on the supplementary budget is a matter of opinion, and depends on
first asking the question ‘right for who?’; what suits the party’s needs may or
may not suit the needs of the people. Maybe they were trying to put down a
marker about not being taken for granted; perhaps they’re just struggling with
the move from government to opposition. Whatever their logic, I’m amongst those
who think that they called it wrong on this occasion. Whether the government
should have made more effort to get them onboard is another moot point – just as
former governing parties need time to adjust to being in opposition, so too
former opposition parties seemingly need time to adjust to being in government.
The biggest disappointment for me, however, came not
in the vote, but in the aftermath. Voting against the government is not the
same thing as voting for the other opposition parties, and Plaid’s repeated criticism
of Labour for voting ‘with Reform Ltd’ grates with me. It’s a tactic which has been
used by Labour, in particular, against Plaid for decades, especially in
Westminster, but it’s a kindergarten approach, and it’s disappointing, to say
the least, to see the party which has been subjected to such an approach for so
long trying to use the same approach against its former tormentors, rather than
demonstrating that the grown-ups are now in charge. There are going to be a lot
of votes in the Senedd during the current term, and the combinations of parties
voting either for or against a proposition will also vary. Voting the same way
as Party B doesn’t mean that the rationale for voting that way is shared, and the
suggestion that it does is a dishonest way of avoiding the substance. Resorting
to the ‘yah boo’ tactics of Westminster is not a good look.
Posts
3 comments:
I agree with your point. Plaid's criticism of Labour voting the same way as Reform was pointless and purile. And just because Labour indulged in the same sort of childishness when in government is no justification for doing the same. However, this was undoubtedly a shameful piece of political grandstanding by Labour. The one-off in-year lump of cash they were demanding be spent on ALN could and would never be spent on ALN. That's not how Welsh Government funding of education in Wales works and even if it were possible to set it aside specifically for the purpose of supporting ALN, it could never be spent in an effective way between now (or rather September) and the end of the financial year. Ken Skates and co know that of course. They were in government a few months ago. But then, this was never about supporting children with ALN and everything to do with petty party politicking. Pathetic.
Completely agree with you on the substance - Labour made the wrong call for reasons of politics rather than in support of childen with ALN. But those occupying the moral high ground on the substance do themselves no favours by resorting to childish responses. After the outcome of the Sebedd election, I was hoping for an improvement in the level of debate, rather than simply swapping roles.
Your last paragraph is on target , I may not agree with every word , but your thinking is sound.
Expectation of HMG in London and Caerdydd is far too high, as those that sit in cabinet are in no way suited to manage a department of state. Their life experience has not equipped them to do the very basics of the job , so I think the media has been too harsh.
Understanding the levers of power is not as simple as performing well to camera and there is a ‘front of house’ and a ‘back office ‘dimension which Tories and Labour (in the past) know how to use to avoid car crashes.
In your post of 15th July, you mentioned Gentlemen’s Clubs in Pall and St James. Sadly, there are less of them , but both Tory and Labour are equipped to use these vehicles to steer a course through difficult issues. I visit some of these Clubs from time to time – not as a member ,but by invitation , I believe in the Marxist rule (Groucho) ‘I would not join any club that would accept me.’
Plaid Cymru in my experience has no knowledge on how these systems work and if anyone of their cabinet reads this post ,my advice is to learn fast. As a first step I would advise them to meet with you and start listening to people that have some knowledge of the darker arts.
Post a Comment