Why 'Assisted Suicide' is wrong.

Dominating article on front page of today's Telegraph reading "Call to legalise assisted suicide". Interesting in the sense of why was it there today. Nothing significant has happened. The Telegraph has allowed today's edition to be used as a part of a 'softening up' exercise - preparing the ground for a carefully planned 'offensive' later in the year to change the law which criminalises assisted suicide. I look on it as the opening salvo of a battle to come, lurking just over the horizon.

The issue is very sensitive and complex. The Suicide Act 1961 decriminalised suicide. The same act created the offence of assisting suicide. This is a bit odd in that since 1961 it has been a criminal offence to help someone do something which is not an offence! Its also unusual in that any prosecution requires the specific consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The purpose of the Suicide Act was to prevent legal action against extremely vulnerable people, who had attempted suicide, without undermining the sanctity of human life. Its a typically British approach to the law - based on common sense, compromise and precedent. The law has not been invoked since 1961 where reasonableness suggests it shouldn't have been. There have been few, if any, cases where the DPP's consent has been given to a prosecution which was obviously undesirable.

Yet, despite the above, there has been an ongoing campaign to change the law, and make assisting suicide legal. The campaign is usually conducted with reference to the sort of cases which precedent indicates that prosecution would not take place. The argument for change is based on a human right (within the EU Convention) to end one's life at a time, and in a place, and in circumstances of one's own choosing. Article 8 reads 'Everyone has a right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence' - but it is qualified by what follows. There have been some slight non-fundamental changes as a consequence of legal cases involving Dianne Pretty and Debbie Purdy.

Now to today's Telegraph article. Lord Falconer, former Labour lord chancellor and long term advocate of changing the law is heading an inquiry by the think tank, Demos, entitled 'Commission on Assisted Dying'. Its a title that makes it seem in some way 'independent' which it is very definitely not. Lord Falconer's intention is to publish a report that looks 'weighty' as a base for a change in the law that he has long wanted to see. A social care 'expert' named Martin Green has been giving evidence to Lord Falconer's Committee, and the Telegraph has been persuaded to give great prominence to what he's had to say. His arguments are those that have been used, and rejected, in the past.

Now to why I oppose a change in the law. A secondary reason is that, as Martin Green concedes, it is not possible to eliminate the risk that people will change their minds, particularly people with dementia who go through major personality changes as the disease progresses. Another secondary reason is that the unscrupulous will use the law to remove inconvenient elderly and disabled through pressure on vulnerable people. But for me much the strongest argument is the pressure which will be generated by self-generated pressure and society norms on the elderly and disabled to remove the burden that they represent by suicide. I am a Board Member of 'Living and Dying Well' a public policy research organisation committed to evidence-based consideration of the facts surrounding the issue of the assisted dying debate in the UK. Our Chairman is Lord Carlile of Berriew - two former next door neighbours uniting in the UK Parliament on a social issue of great importance to both of us. Without strong evidence to demonstrate that my concerns will be assuaged, I will do what I can to resist a change in the law to legalise assisted suicide.

Andrew R. T.

In Today's Wales on Sunday, Matt Withers asks some searching questions about the new leader of the Conservative group in the National Assembly for Wales. Matt seems to think that because Andrew had to face a competent opponent in order to win the position of leader, it automatically follows that there are "two distinct trains of thought" running through the group in the Assembly. Well, I did not see anything suggesting such division, (beyond what would be normally expected in a leadership contest), and seen nothing of note since. Truth is there has been, since the establishment of the National Assembly for Wales, differing opinions within the Conservative Party towards devolution. It seems to be less so today than its been since the referendum in 1997. Personally, I saw not much difference between what Andrew and Nick Ramsey were saying in the run up to the leadership vote. It seems that Nick is more in favour of 'Welshifying' the Party, whatever that means. I have heard this same proposition put forward by other commentators as well. If that's supposed to mean developing a strong and distinctive Welsh dimension to the Assembly Conservative group's policies, then I think Andrew will deliver just that. For what its worth I think Andrew R T Davies will lead a very united Assembly Conservative group into the next Assembly Election in 2016, will develop a good working relationship with his Westminster colleagues, and will also develop a good relationship with other opposition parties in Wales.

Beauty in the eye of the beholder!

Letter from Peter Fineman in today's telegraph. - Winston Churchill once sat next to an air marshal's wife, who wore an aeroplane brooch on her ample bosom. Noticing him looking at it she asked "Are you admiring my aeroplane?" to which Churchill responded "No Madam, the aerodrome." He would probably be hounded out of office by the Daily Mail today. I wouldn't dare say such a thing. It would without doubt be reported on the BBC in Wales.

Planning Gain for Community Benefit

Powys County Council copied me into a press release today concerning a proposed development at Hay-on-Wye. I so approve of the principle involved that its worth a blog post. The proposal involves a development company, Powys County Council itself and the local community. The public-private partnership principle is that enough profit should be generated by private sector delivery of profitable retail and social care space to finance a new 240 pupil school and community centre (at no cost to the Council). Don't know the details of the proposals, but I do like the underpinning principle. Lets have more of it. And lets look at the sorts of other things that might work.

Here's me thinking aloud. Yesterday, I visited the HQ of the Powys Local Health Board at Bronllys. It looks just as I imagine an east European prison block might have looked on being left derelict for 20 years. How on earth can staff morale survive entry through the door laughably marked 'RECEPTION'. OK inside, and Bronllys is a nice place. I wonder if there's any potential for housing development profit to finance investment in the LHB HQ?

Or this. Castle Caereinion is a small village near our home, where numbers in the school are just above OK. With enough new housing permission, the school's future could be assured (and the local shop) and a 200 yd bypass of the village centre could be built which would greatly enhance the village centre. Cannot advocate this though without the local council's support.

Or on a bigger scale. If £30 billion worth of permissions of varying sorts could be identified in S E Wales, a new Severn Barrage could be built by the private sector, saving the Welsh Uplands from crazy desecration by onshore wind farms.

Or even the Montgomery Canal. I always thought that it could have been fully restored to its former glory, if enough development opportunity had been identified alongside it. And on and on we could go.

Unfortunately the reality is different. For example a developer has been seeking permission to build a Marstons Pub in Welshpool for over 30 weeks now. I'm told that another application for a Marston's Pub submitted in London on the same day was approved in 7 weeks. I hear stacks of similar complaints about attitude towards development in Powys. Seems to me unforgivable that potential job creating work should be left sitting in planning department in trays at present. But let me not be churlish. This post is about my County Council actually showing initiative.

Protecting Our Countryside

I do not like the ongoing undignified row between Government and organisations concerned with protecting the countryside - suffering 'split loyalties'. Am a longstanding member of the National Trust and until elected MP for Montgomeryshire was President of the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales. Was also Chair of a Local Planning Authority for 7 years in the 1980s. This row concerns disagreement over plans to redesign and simplify national planning policy (in England)- which is undoubtedly needed. But there should be constructive debate. Inevitably there will be disagreement, but there's no need for a shouting match.

Friends, who share my love for the countryside are telling me (as Clive Aslet is doing in today's Telegraph) that the Government's proposal is to "let development rip through those parts of Britain that aren't formally protected as National Parks or part of the Green Belt". They tell me that "we are throwing out of the window the directing of development towards brown field sites". This is unjustified over-the-top language. But Government Ministers have responded by dismissing these concerns as 'selfish nihilism' and my friends as 'left-wingers within the national HQs of pressure groups'. They are no such thing. They are people who care about the countryside, and do not want to see it sacrificed to accommodate rapidly expanding population levels, driven by immigration and family breakdown. Their concerns should be taken seriously.

At root, the problem is too many people. If the population of Britain is allowed to continue to grow as it has been doing, and is doing, some of our cherished countryside is going to disappear under concrete. And its no good forcing our rapidly expanding population into ever more densely populated urban pockets. Recent rioting on the streets has shown us where that leads. Today, we learn that in the last year, net immigration was around a quarter of a million people. This is unsustainable, and will destroy the Britain we know. There is something depressingly pathetic about reducing such an important issue to an exchange of insults. I'm going to have to take more interest in the proposals to change planning regulations, even if they do not apply in Wales.

Power of the 'Blue Foxes'.

The 'Blue Foxes' have put the issue of 'hunting with dogs' back on the political agenda. They are a group of Conservative lady MPs who do not believe the Hunting with Dogs Act should be repealed. In today's Western Mail, and reported on the BBC in Wales, much is made of an intervention in the debate by Andrew R T Davies, leader of the Conservative Group in the National Assembly for Wales. Andrew takes the view that the Coalition Government should hold a vote in Parliament on the issue, and comes out firmly on the 'repeal' side.

This is interesting from several perspectives, the first being whether the Assembly group leader should be telling the Coalition Government what it should and shouldn't be doing. Must declare that I'm entirely comfortable with this myself. No reason why he shouldn't tell us what he thinks, as long as he realises that its not going to make any difference. So happens, I agree with much that he has said, though not in any hurry to hold the vote. There's too much else in the Government's in-tray at the moment.

The Hunting with Dogs Act is a very bad law, which has already become discredited. Much hunting is continuing, within the law, simply by changing certain practises, making a a mockery of the Act. It really ought to be repealed. But its not so simple. Firstly we do not know that there is a majority in the House of Commons in favour of Appeal. Not enough 'repealers' were elected, and a few have turned out not to be 'repealers' after all. There may not be a very big coven (or is it pack) of 'Blue Foxes' but they do make a difference. And there's absolutely no point in holding a vote that is going to be lost!

Personally, I would vote for repeal if there were to be a vote - just as I was ferociously opposed to the legislation as it was being passed in the first place. For someone who has never hunted, or taken pleasure in any form of country sport, including fishing, for over 40 years, my outrage was and remains intense. Libertarian instincts flow strongly through this rural breast. In fact I was so outraged that I've allowed the Tanatside Hunt to meet on my farm ever since the ban was introduced, and they will be free to do so for evermore.

Our Court System working well.

See that my good friend, Lord Carlile of Berriew has been telling the BBC that he thinks the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are going to 'fall-out' over the sentencing of rioters. I do not think this will be the case - at least not to any meaningful extent. I do agree there may be differences in rhetoric, but I would expect the MPs of both parties to accept that politicians should not interfere with the courts.

Despite this non-interference approach, there is absolutely no reason why politicians should not have an opinion. It would be very odd if politicians did not have an opinion on a matter of such importance. I also believe that all MPs accept, as Lord Carlile seems to that "There is absolutely no doubt that the riot situation calls for severer sentences". There is a difference between stealing something, and 'looting' as part of a riot, even when the act, in isolation, is the same. Our magistrates and judges know this, and will sentence accordingly - which is why we've been seeing some harsh punishments handed down. No doubt some of these will be reduced on appeal. Nothing wrong with that, because the appeal system is part of the judicial process. Must add that I have been hugely impressed by how the court system has risen to the challenge of dealing with so many criminals at the same time.

Children's Hospital Services in Shropshire (and Mid wales)

Met with Adam Cairns and John Davies, Chief Executive and Chair of the Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Hospitals Trust today. Subject under discussion was the reconfiguration of hospital services in Shropshire. Matters to Montgomeryshire because we don't have a DGH, and most people see the Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals as their 'local' hospital for emergency and elective treatment. And Telford is another 20/30 minutes further away from us.

Perhaps the most contentious aspect of the proposals is the bringing together of paediatric services (currently on both sites) into a £28 million spanking new purpose-built children's unit at Telford. Not surprisingly this move has angered the people of Montgomeryshire (including me). About 800 of us turned out at 3 public meetings earlier this year to tell the Trust that we were strongly opposed to their plan. The Trust took not one blind bit of notice and went ahead with their proposal anyway. It currently awaits formal approval. At the public meetings, Adam Cairns said that he would consider a 24 hour Paediatric Assessment Unit (PAU) at Shrewsbury (as a sort of concession) but it has now been made clear that this is not to be. The PAU will be closing at 10.00pm. Most of our meeting today was about this issue. Let me tell you what was said.

The Chief Exec conceded that he had said he would look at the 24 hour proposal at the public meetings in Montgomeryshire. However, the idea was roundly condemned by all his advisors - the official Assessment Panel, the Trust's paediatricians, and even those who were opposed to the principle of the move to Telford. It seems that there would be very little practical point. In most cases, children will be taken direct to Telford by ambulance (if its obviously serious) or to the nearest A & E Dep't - where they would either be assessed as able to go home or again taken direct to the new unit in Telford. In any case, on average there are only a total of 3 cases per night after 10.00 in both hospitals. All a PAU would achieve is to tie up paediatric consultants in a unit without patients. Don't blame the messenger. This is what I was told today.

So that's the official line. However, the trust has agreed to hold another round of meetings to update the public about what stage their proposals have reached - in Llanidloes, Newtown and Welshpool this autumn. I hope these meetings are on days when I am not tied to Westminster. More importantly I hope those who attend these meetings will challenge the Trust on their proposals and the reasons they give to justify them. Montgomeryshire parents are going to take some convincing.

No sex please we're All Blacks.

When I played rugby around the North of England and Midlands, we took preparation seriously. No drinking for at least 12 hours before the match. At least 10 minutes heavy bonding in the changing room, with much noisy foot stamping and shouting. And another five minutes hate-generation on the field before kick off (I was always excused this part, because by this stage my fuse was already alight). Must admit I was never convinced about this stuff, and was greatly relieved when I returned home to play in mid Wales, where all we had to do was be on the field by kick-off. Occasionally the odd player was still having a pee behind the big tree at Feggy Leasowe when the whistle went - bad form but nothing like as unacceptable as that French actor who took a pee in the aisle on a Cityjet aircraft yesterday.

Anyway back to rugby preparation - and the fearsome All Blacks. They have always been a bit unusual with the bulgy-eyed, Michael Jackson routine they call the Haka. But in today's press I read of an amazing new development which demands that the entire New Zealand population gives up sex until after next month's Rugby world Cup. All the nation's passion should be directed into supporting the national team. Now I might not have taken much notice of this, except that the media 'messenger' is Sean Fitzpatrick, one of the most inspirational captains ever in world rugby. If I was a New Zealander, that would be it until the world cup was safely in the cupboard. Sean's message is asking all New Zealanders to "selflessly step into the bedchambers of this fine country, throw aside your natural instincts, and your lacy underwear (especially the men), stand proudly in your flannelette's and whisper "I love you New Zealand".

Another idea the newspapers are reporting today which was considered by the All Blacks was to have near naked models on Harley Davidsons driving 1000 sheep through the streets of Auckland. Don't ask me why. But the Head of New Zealand's RSPCA was outraged that the rest of the world would see images of these sheep panting, scared and possibly injured as they clattered down the streets of Auckland. Now if he'd said this about the male pedestrians I could have understood what he was trying to say. Nice idea, but I can think of several reasons why I don't think this tactic would have worked - making sheep pant would not be one of them.

Now you may laugh at these ideas, but Clive Woodward taught us 8 years ago that attention to the most minor detail made the difference. With the support of panting sheep, naked female bikers, and an entire sex starved nation behind them, my money is on the All Blacks.

Oh No. Not more 'phone hacking' moral outrage.

Oh how our media must have been spitting when rioting, looting and other forms of criminal activity forced them to lift up their eyes from their navels, and the phone hacking infection that nestles there. Anyway, enough of this coverage of civil disorder and criminality - enough of this distraction of jobs, economy and deficits. So what if the Home Secretary made an important speech today. Its time to get back to 'Hackgate', and some serious navel inspection.

It seems that MPs on the 'culture' committee have today released a letter written by Clive Goodman, a former NoW journalist who was jailed for 4 months in 2007 for phone hacking. The supposed 'smoking gun' in this letter is Mr Goodman's assertion that he was promised his job back after serving his sentence if he didn't implicate the NoW in court. Now I think this is interesting, and there will have to be some effort to discover whether Mr Goodman was telling the truth or just trying to get his job back. And we need to know why the NoW made such an offer - if it actually did. Now I can understand why the BBC are going big on this, because its a wonderful opportunity to discredit their main rival. And the Guardian because its 'their' story. But I really do hope that tomorrow's newspapers (that I buy) are not going to give us more wall-to-wall of it. I know its an important issue, but I'm bored. And I also know that not a single Montgomeryshire constituent has raised the issue with me for weeks. I used to have lots of letters, emails and cards, almost all of which had been prepared by lobbying groups which had it in for the Murdochs - but hardly a single unprompted approach from a constituent ever. Almost every constituent has a view on the riots, even in Montgomeryshire. My worst nightmare is that we have another six hours of moral outrage in the Commons when we go back in early September.

The Siren Voice of Inaction.

Sometimes I find politics a bit depressing. Today was such a day. The response to the Prime Minister's speech about how to respond to the riots of last week was as unconstuctive as it was dispiriting. David Cameron had no option but to discuss various steps that the Government could take. Just imagine what the reaction would be if all he said was that we are going to do is hold an 'inquiry' that will report in 3 years time. Don't suppose every proposal mentioned will go forward, certainly without amendment, but I believe bringing a moral dimension into the debate is essential. Criminal behavior is not neutral. It is wrong, and criminals should not be allowed to get away with it. As I've listened to the media over the last few days, I've realised that there is a bigger gap between the media and the people than between politicians and the people. The one thing our Prime Minister should not do is listen to the media, who use bloodhound-like skills to track down people who will rubbish every word he speaks. Its the sterile game that they play.

"Lets consider some conditions on benefits, in that those who riot should suffer some loss". Can't possibly do that because with less money, those on benefit will have more incentive to rob. "Lets consider a 'war on gangs'". Oh dear, can't possibly use a word like 'war'. "Lets make both parents take responsibility for their children". Can't possibly do that because it may stigmatise single parents, even though it does no such thing. Almost every comment on the Prime Minister's speech demanded the spending of more public money which we do not have. "Lets reform the police force so that its more responsive to the public and more than 12% of police are out on the street at any one time". How dare politicians do or say anything that has not been approved of by every Chief Constable in the land. And on and on it goes. What David Cameron has to do is follow his instincts, and not be diverted from taking on those who will always find reasons for doing nothing.

The respective roles of the Police and Politicians.

Over the last week, the regard in which the police are held by the British people has increased significantly. So has public understanding about the main role of the police - retaining public order, and by whatever force is needed. We all hope the police can defend us and our property without using excessive force, but if needs be force must be used. Because we have not felt for many years that our way of life has been threatened by the sort of thuggish criminal behaviour we saw last week, we have become complacent. We are not complacent now, and have a much clearer idea of what the police are for. They are what stands between us and Hobbsian anarchy.

But none of this means that the police are beyond questioning. And while operational matters are entirely for the police, there is a role for politicians in questioning, in taking an opinion on performance, and in developing overall strategic direction. After all, we pass the laws. The police cannot be a law unto themselves. Its the politicians responsible for the police that have to stand before public scrutiny. Not sure that every senior policeman gets this. Reading today's press has strengthened my support for the introduction of elected police commissioners. Accountability matters.

Two other issues bother me as well. Firstly all this conjecture about Bill Bratton - and I've no idea whether he would want to run the Met or whether anyone would want him to. But it seems illogical to me to limit the application list to just British police personnel. I cannot think of a single reason why this should be. We want the best person available to take on what is one of the most difficult jobs in the country. And in my opinion, it doesn't matter where they come from.

And finally, there's the matter of police funding. I do not like reducing police funding, just as I do not like reducing defence spending, or education funding, or charity support, or S4C spending etc., etc.. (Maybe I'd support transferring the massive subsidies for onshore wind farms though) We have a huge deficit and threatening debts, and we have a credible deficit reduction plan, which has made the UK a 'safe haven' and kept our borrowing costs very low. Any backsliding under pressure will cause huge damage to our credibility with the international markets. Its just not going to happen. The price would be too high. I know that this is not a popular view at the moment, but as it was last week, and it is for everyone else, it comes down to a question of operational priorities for the police. And they must have the support of politicians to deliver on their priorities. Which is why I think MPs should be making a point of emphasising how much they value the police at the moment. Its a tough time for them.

The Voice of an Angry Woman.

Spoke at length to a constituent today who left me speechless - in the sense that I had no answers - at least none that I felt it appropriate to offer. She just brought home to me the scale of punishment that is being handed out to people who have worked hard to raise a family without relying on the state.

My constituent is a successful schoolteacher earning just about enough to take her into the higher rate tax band. Her husband has taken on the role of caring for their three children. So they are going to lose all of their child allowance, knowing that other couples earning almost twice as much will be keeping theirs. She also pointed out that she will have to pay a lot more of her wages to fund her pension, and that she will have to work for longer before she receives it.

Now to that which, entirely reasonably, made her so angry that she decided for the first time in her life to raise her feelings with her MP. She knows people that live ever so comfortably on the state, spending the money she pays in taxes, and never giving a thought to working to earn their own money. And she's had to watch while bankers, with shameless greed, have pocketed billions in bonuses, after her taxes were used to bail them out following their spectacular incompetence. Like her and many before me, I do find these millionaire bankers to be like sewers - nauseating but necessary.

As I listened, I felt rather helpless. The issues she raised are way 'beyond my pay grade' to change. I could have pointed out that the previous Government so screwed up the economy that we have little choice but to take tough decisions to repair the mess - but I didn't. I do not think it would have helped. But when I listen to really hard working and responsible people telling me how it is, I feel sickened by the likes of Gordon Brown and Ed Balls and their economic 'clever dick' illiteracy refusing to accept any shard of blame for the appalling damage they inflicted on the British economy. Pray they never get the chance to do it again.

Extracts - Prime Minister's Speech today

"Keeping people safe is the first duty of Government"

"It is criminality pure and simple".

"We will do whatever it takes to restore law and order and rebuild our communities".

"People stealing flat screen televisions was not about politics or protest, it was about theft">

"No phony human rights concerns about publishing photographs will get in the way of bringing these criminals to justice".

"The Acting Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police said he would be the last man in Scotland Yard, with all of his management team out on the streets before he asked for the army".

"Whenever the Police face a new threat - they must have the freedom and the confidence to change tactics. This Government will make sure they always have that".

"I can confirm that any individual, homeowner or business that has suffered damage to or loss oftheir buildings or property as a result of rioting, can seek compensation under the Riot Damages Act, even if uninsured".

"Normally claims must be received within 14 days. We will extend the period to 42 days".

"We will weed out unnecessary planning regulations to ensure that businesses can get back on their feet and feel secure as quickly as possible".

"The Government will also meet the immediate costs of emergency accommodation for families made homeless".

"There is a moral problem in our society with children growing up not knowing the difference between right and wrong".

"And to the lawless minority, the criminals who have taken what they can get, I say; We will track you down, we will find, we will charge you, and we will punish you. You will pay for what you have done".

Reclaiming our streets

Biggest question for our Government for a long time is how to deal with the current criminal activity that is disfiguring our society. I'm hugely pleased that Parliament has been recalled. There is no option but to reclaim the streets, and we must do whatever it takes. It seems that there are huge numbers rioting, but in truth its probably a minority, with massively more young people hiding behind their doors frightened of the thugs who have taken over their street.

Lots of people are advocating putting the military on the street, and using water cannon, plastic bullets etc. This would be a seriously big deal. Don't think we have ever used plastic bullets to control riots in the UK. Far better that if its going to happen, it should be done with the approval of Parliament. I've taken a fair bit of stick on my Facebook site for this opinion. Most commenters want to go in with the army now.

I do find the justification that some commentators are giving for the violence to be unacceptaable. What we have seen is the actions of criminals and theives. The police must throw the kitchen sink at this and everyone found guilty of contributing to what's happened should be shown little sympathy by the courts. This has been a bad day for the image of the UK across the world, but I do think its a time for cool heads, not rash actions. Whenever the country faces a situation in which there may be a need to take some dramatic steps to take control, its as well for a Prime Minister to keep options open. There may be a variety of complex reasons behind where we are, but at present there is one dominating objective - and that is to reclaim control of the street. I desperately hope that our unarmed (generally) police can recover control the situation.

And finally, I've just watched Harriet Harmon on Newsnight delivering a very disappointing performance, about which I do not think it wise to comment. I do hope Ed Miliband takes a more responsible and statesmanlike approach on Thursday. Michael Gove really let fly - and she deserved it (in my opinion).

One-way to Hell in Welshpool

Things of which I approve are happening at Powys County Council. The cosy consensus which has stultified debate and ostracised the voice of the people for 20 years has been smashed. A ruling coalition has been formed (currently Powys Independents and Lib Dems) something which I always approved of, though preferring the Conservatives to be involved. Next year perhaps. As a consequence of this, an 'opposition' has also emerged - to 'oppose'. Initially, it seemed to me that the new governing coalition successfully smothered any potential for genuine opposition by taking control of the 'scrutiny' committees - a dastardly plan. But the Chief executive has stepped in. It seems that we are now to have 'committees' established to conduct reviews of issues, taking evidence, making recommendations - in effect holding the ruling coalition to account. Well done, Mr Paterson. Democracy is not dead in Powys after all.

Now to the interesting first issue under discussion, the new traffic gyratory system at Welshpool - otherwise known as the one-way system. A committee, under the Chairmanship of Cllr. David Jones has been established to look at how it's working, or not! Perhaps they might even ask why it was introduced in the first place. I can see this putting one or two noses out of joint. Good. Great stuff. At long last we will have Councillors asking the questions that the people they represent want asked.

Personally, I hate one way systems. They usually cause more problems than they solve. They work fine when traffic is light, but cannot cope with heavy traffic - especially when delivery vehicles are allowed to completely stuff up the system by parking on Berriew St. and Severn St. during the daytime. Dozens of people have approached me with their concerns. Firstly by town centre businesses suffering a loss of trade, and secondly by people concerned about the greater danger in crossing Broad St., especially for the elderly and less mobile. Only thing positive you can say is that it's nothing like as bad as Newtown. So don't hold back Councillor Jones. Lets have a hard-hitting report. And when you've done with this issue, I've a few other ideas for your committee to look into.

What Price Solar Power

As the threat of destruction of my home area becomes ever more real, I become an increasingly implacable opponent of onshore wind power. Inevitably this stimulates interest in other forms of energy. The biggest change for me personally was to accept that new nuclear generating capacity should be built. I now support Horizon Wylfa 'B' proposals on Ynys Mon - onshore wind or not. I also feel less antagonistic towards offshore wind, because the turbines are less intrusive. The two most significant undeveloped 'ideas' floating around are shale/other forms of gas which exist under our ground, and a Severn Barrage. the latter depends on the private sector working up a scheme that will not require Government money - so it will have to be an absolutely massive scheme to generate enough money from associated development to pay for it.

But we shouldn't forget the smaller contributors. Quite a bit of solar has come on board this last year or so. Unfortunately commercial solar development ended today. The level of Government subsidy which had been so generous that so many solar farms were planned that the cost to Government promised to become unacceptable. I did read somewhere that 100 Mw of solar power was created in the UK in 2010 - that's about 40 turbines-worth. And about 8000 Mw of solar was developed in Germany in the same year. That's about 3,000 turbines-worth. Can this possibly be true I ask myself. with luck some knowledgeable person will visit this post and enlighten us. And then theere's the 'Green Deal' to reduce demand - but that's for another day.

Raising money to defend our homes from National Grid.

Mathrafal lies half way between Pontrobert and Meifod in the heart of one of Montgomeryshire's lovely valleys. My Nain and Taid used to live nearby (at N01 Tanyffridd Cottages). He used to be the local roadman. My first road accident was near Mathrafal when I fell off Taid's bike. Today Mathrafal was the site of the Sustainable Life Festival, where thousands of people turned up to to raise money to save this beautiful area from the destructive ravages of National Grid and wind farm mega-businesses - and to have a bit of fun at the same time.

Mathrafal used to be the seat of kings and princes of Powis from the 9th century to 1212, when the Castle was destroyed by Llewelyn ap Iorwerth, and the seat of power moved to Powis Castle near Welshpool. Historically, Mathrafal has been a place where the people of this part of Wales have fought for their existence. The people of the area know that we are in for a similar fight today, and over the next few years. This time the enemy is National Grid and the onshore wind industry, whose power is derived from central governments and made fat by massive subsidies paid out of our taxes. (Its a cruel irony that we are being forced to pay for our own desecration!)

Stuck me in conversations today that people are afraid of National Grid, in the way that people might have feared Darth Vadar and other dark forces. Many local people believe these dark forces are so powerful that they cannot be resisted - a resignation that those leading the Mid Wales Connection Project have been keen to encourage. Luckily there are thousands of other people who are made of sterner stuff, and are going to fight these onshore wind leviathans to the last ditch. Llewelyn ap Iorwerth might never have won if he had been up against today's 'People Power'.

Lies about wind farms at Llanerfyl

Its always a good sign that you are scoring well when others start telling 'porkies' about you. Since I began notching up a few runs over the wind turbines/pylons in mid Wales issue, a few people have raised with me a 'suggestion' that I once wanted turbines on my own land. This is simply not true. And when this untruth is deliberate, its reasonable to refer to it as a lie, and the perpetrator as a liar. While this should be my own 'private' business, I've decided to expose the porkie-tellers. This is what actually happened.

In 2006, a Spanish wind farm company named Gamesa approached 5 landowners in the Llanerfyl area, (my family being one of them) informing us that they were hoping to build a wind farm on our land, and offering each of us a generous sum of money annually if we would sign a contract granting 'exclusivity' to Gamesa for 5 years. Now I didn't want to offend my neighbours (or my family who quite liked the idea) so I exercised my right to make no reply, believing (correctly) that the proposal would eventually go away. However I declined to sign any contract, and informed Gamesa that I did not want any of their money. I have no idea what my neighbour's responses were. I should add that even though Gamesa knew of my anti-onshore wind stance, they showed me around their various wind farms when I was in Spain (at nil cost to Gamesa before you suspicious types ask). They were not the first (or last)to think I would change my mind. It was also the case that wind measuring equipment was stationed on land which I had once owned, but had sold long before anyone thought of wind farms in the area. In addition, because I was an Assembly Member at the time, opposed to the Welsh Government's TAN 8 policy, I made all this public. I still remember taking the poor BBC reporter and cameraman (who turned up wearing smart shoes) up the dirtiest roughest track possible to the site in pouring rain for an interview for Wales today. Laughed for days about that.

Doesn't worry me a damn when lies are told about me by my political opponents. But I do mind when my efforts to resist the Mid wales connection Project are being undermined. So the next time you hear someone repeating these lies, perhaps you would be so kind as to correct them.

Shedding some light on Lake Vyrnwy sale

Severn Trent announced today that it has selected United Utilities/RSPB as its 'preferred bidder' for the Lake Vyrnwy Estate in Montgomeryshire. One privatised utility company selling the bulk of the village of Llanwddyn to another. Severn Trent also announced today that no 'preferred bidder' has been chosen for the rented housing it owns in the village or the sporting rights on the Lake as yet. This is the biggest land sale in Wales for many years and the decision has outraged local opinion - for two reasons.

Firstly, another bidder, Mr Rhys Jones, a businessman with strong local connections had engaged enthusiastically with local people and had satisfied them that he wanted to make major investment in the Estate, something that has been lacking under Severn Trent's ownership for many years. Inevitably, local people are disappointed because 'their' man did not win. Second reason for outrage is the cloak of secrecy surrounding the deal. Its not like its one farm - its almost their entire community. And the only reason Severn Trent made their intentions public today was that local Cllr., Simon Baynes and I did it for them last week.

I cannot criticise the actual United Utilities/RSPB bid because I know nothing about it. Its all a big secret. But local people have been desperately unhappy with the way Severn Trent and RSPB have managed things in the past. The best hope of blowing all this secrecy out of the water is Lord Elis Thomas, Chair of the National Assembly's Environment and Sustainability Committee, who is considering establishing some sort on inquiry into the sale. Now that would be fun - forcing the two privatised utility companies and RSPB to answer questions in public on the background to what looks a cosy deal. Perhaps they'll refuse to show. Perhaps Dafydd El will have them summonsed! Watch this space.

The Pain of the 'Long Goodbye'

Regular readers will know that I have a soft spot for Plaid Cymru - even though I'm not sure whether it's OK to have soft spots for political opponents! Perhaps its a bit like when I had a soft spot for Warrington Rugby Club, when I played for Shrewsbury. Great club, but nothing I liked more than kicking lumps out of them on the field of play. Anyway, I'm a bit worried about the state of Plaid Cymru - and mainly its down to the lack of a leader. I do not count Ieuan Wyn Jones, because once you've announced that you are standing down, authority just drains away.

Don't suppose my advice would carry much weight, but I thought Ieuan should have announced his resignation the day after the May election - assuming he was not going to fight another election. I reckon that Lord Dafydd El took the same view which is why he threw his hat in the ring immediately. The first timetable that Ieuan gave us was ridiculous. At least its been brought forward to next spring. I don't buy this excuse that its necessary to complete a review of what's gone wrong before electing a new leader. The new leader should should take charge of the review. Whatever, its time to look at the runners and riders.

I just do not think Dafydd El wants to be the leader - what with all that discipline and example setting. Not his thing. I'd make him Ambassador to Buckingham Palace. He will find spoons to stir elsewhere. I can see but two runners, with Elin Jones the firm favorite. And Simon Thomas will make it a contest. I'd love to see my old friend, Rhodri Glyn having a pitch, but just cannot see it. Saw Adam Price last week, and Dafyydd Wigley, and I see Jonathon Edwards every week. Just saying.

Lembit - take it on the chin like a man.

In the General Election of May 2010 in Montgomeryshire, I managed to inflict defeat upon the wannabe Liberal Democrat candidate for Mayor of London - Mr Lembit Opik. Seems that Lembit does not think that I actually had anything whatsoever to do with it. And neither does Peter Black AM who thinks defeat was due to his self-obsessive and flamboyant behaviour, loss of perspective, free cruises, and his daft response to the expenses scandal - and a whole lot of others I talk to at Westminster take the same sort of line. Personally, I did not see much difference in Lembit's behaviour to that before previous elections. Whatever it seems that I just happened to be in the right place at the right time and be the fortunate beneficiary.

Lembit, in his personal manifesto, seeking nomination as candidate is putting the blame for his defeat on Mick Bates, who served as AM for Montgomeryshire, alongside Lembit for 11 years. I really do find this to be utterly nauseating. OK, so Mick's assault on a paramedic after a night on the booze might have had a marginal impact, but I worked with Mick for many years and he was a hard working AM, who I never heard make a negative comment about Lembit.

One of the things I like least about politics is the failure to take responsibility for what they say and do. The truth is that Lembit Opik went into the 2010 General Election with a lead over the Conservatives of 7000 votes (16,000 against 9,000). He came out of it with defeat by 1,200 votes - the biggest swing from Lib Dem to Conservative in the UK - and at a time when the Lib Dems were going into the Election on a roll. At Westminster it's seen as the biggest shock since Cassius Clay beat Sonny Liston. My advice to Lembit is to act like a man, take it on the chin, and accept responsibility - and send a written apology to Mick Bates. And as for me, I just say "Look at the scores on the doors" and remember Gary Player who said "the harder you try the luckier you get". Think it was Samuel Goldwyn who originally coined the phrase though.

The 'Blue touchpaper' of Welsh constituency boundaries has been lit.

Since being elected a Conservative MP, I have always voted with the Government. Perhaps this loyalty was most tested when I voted (several times) in favour of what was to become the Parliamentary Voting Systems and Constituencies Bill. Despite reservations, I accepted that I was elected on a manifesto which included reducing the number of MPs by 10% - and it would be disingenuous to vote against the means of bringing our commitment into effect. I also supported the decision to reduce the number of Welsh MPs from 40 to 30. Didn't like it, but there can be no intellectual basis on which to argue that Wales should have pro-rata more MPs that the rest of the UK. In fact, the existence of the National Assembly could be (and often is) used to argue the number of Walsh MPs should be even lower.

Soon, we are going to be faced with the consequences of this Act - and its going to be messy, very messy indeed. In September, we're expecting to see the Boundary Commission's first stab at future arrangements. Montgomeryshire, and other well known constituenceis, as we have known them for many decades, will be no more. Fledgling Welsh political careers of promise will hit the buffers - across all parties. The consequences of this change will hang over the remainder of this Parliament, as most MPs will be working in a fog of uncertainty about their careers. More of this when we see the BC proposals.

But there's another potentially controversial aspect to these changes - the impact on the National Assembly for Wales. Just a few weeks ago I heard Labour MPs openly supporting the aligning of Assembly constituencies with the new Westminster constituencies. I knew this could not possibly last, and warned anyone who would listen that Labour would inevitably change its mind about this. (Constitutionally, what would need to happen is that the link between Cardiff Bay and Westminster boundaries which was broken to allow the PVSC Act to be passed would have to be reinstated.) Today Martin Shipton has reported on the first salvo by a leading Labour AM against this re-linking. Expect Labour MPs to follow.

Perhaps I see bigger problems than there will be. But let us consider what could well be happening. The Welsh Government, representing a majority in the National Assembly are likely to be opposing new boundaries for future Assembly elections, forced through by Westminster MPs. Martin tells us that Leighton Andrews, speaking with the full blessing of the First Minister, will oppose this as a tactic by the Coalition Government to change the constitution of the National Assembly to prevent there ever being the possibility of a Labour majority in Cardiff Bay. I see the makings of a major rumpus here. The blue touch paper has been lit.

What sort of Tory am I.

In today's Mail on Sunday, the great William Rees-Mogg, divides Conservative MPs into four sub-groups: the Old Right, the New Right, the Coalitionists, and the small pro-European group. (Note the Oxford comma!) - and he goes on to describe the New Right as 'Europragmatists. So, since I have so much admiration for the great man, I have to consider where I might place myself - and whether I agree that there are clear demarcation lines between these groups - and whether its possible to claim membership of two groups.

I am not a man of the Old Right, or of the pro-European group. I'm clear about that. So what about the other two. I find it difficult to decide. After much thought, I have to concede that I am first a Coalitionist. I would have preferred that the Conservatives won the General Election, and that we were not in coalition - but we didn't and we are. And the only way to go into a coalition is with 100% commitment. Of course it is restricting sometimes, but in general its worked well, and I'm happy that the two partners are making a decent fist of the teamwork.

The only problem with being grouped in with Coalitionists is that it tells readers not much about where I stand on our relationship with the EU, which is shaping up to be a defining issue of this Parliament. If my commitment to the Coalition was not so dominating, I would see myself very comfortable in the Eurosceptic New Right. Well, that's cleared that up.

Return of Edna Mopbucket to County Hall.

Fantastic news. Edna Mopbucket has been back on the phone - and up to her old tricks, listening at keyholes. Reckons she was cleaning at Powys County Hall last week when she overheard heated words and oaths emanating from a 'Cabinet' meeting. I had to explain to Edna what this 'Cabinet' is - and that it came about because the Powys Independents and the Liberal Democrats took over all the power for themselves, and kicked out the Montgomeryshire Independents, the Conservatives, Labour and Plaid. "Oh" she said "So that's why they looked so terribly 'puffed up' with importance and exuding the same sort of 'airs' that only come with new found wealth and massively increased salaries. I told her to stop exaggerating. It wasn't that bad.

Anyway, she reported much 'sound and fury' and gnashing of teeth through the keyhole. It seems things are not turning out quite as expected. She reckons one very self-important voice started complaining about these Montgomeryshire Independents getting all the limelight over the wind farms debate at Welshpool. Edna said the PIGS (I've warned her they don't being called PIGS) were furious that some ruse trying to claim all the publicity by issuing a press release to pretend it was all their idea had backfired, and that Councillors David Jones and Graham Brown emerged as stars of the day. Michael Jones, the new Cabinet Leader had to remind one very agitated chap in the back that he leads on the issue now, and he'd better fall into line if he wanted to keep his new salary. Edna reckons there was much tittering around the room at this. Told her she must be making this up.

And then another voice started complaining about formal questions that "these bl***y MIGS and Tories are tabling" - asking embarrassing questions about dismal performance in dealing with planning applications, and the comparative collapse in recycling performance. Edna reckons that there was outrage that all this stuff is public - and not being dealt with quietly, as happened under the old 'Executive Management Board'. She reckons that Mr Patterson, who seemed to be in control, told them "You voted to grab all the power for yourselves, and up your pay so its no good complaining. You took the gain; now take the pain".

I take all this with a pinch of salt because Edna's hearing is probably failing her a bit. And anyway, I approve of this new 'Cabinet' system. Always did. Great to see at Welshpool last Wednesday the 'political groups' competing to support the public, 1500 of whom had turned up to listen. 53 Councillors sticking 106 fingers (coincidentally, the same number as turbines at Llandinam) up to higher authorities. And great to see the planning and recycling performance (or non) being debated in public. As Edna said rather indelicately "Looks like they've stopped all p***ing in the same pot". As usual, I'm not sure whether to believe a word the old girl tells me, but it was nice to be in touch again.

Powys CC wind farm meeting on Wed

Cannot go to the special meeting of Powys County Council being held at Welshpool Livestock Market on Wed.. Councillors will be debating their approach to policy on wind farms and associated transmission infrastructure. To some extent, the Welsh Government First Minster's statement of 10 days ago has drawn the teeth on this debate, but its still an event I would like to have been able to attend. Let's start by looking at the motion that is currently down to be debated.

'Powys County Council calls on the Welsh Government to carry out an immediate review of TAN 8, and to call a moratorium on all wind farm applications, whether pending or in pre-application stage until the review is completed. In carrying out the review, the Welsh Government is specifically asked to consider environmental, socio-economic, community, ecological, transportation, cultural, and cumulative impacts of the construction of wind farms and the necessary infrastructure in rural Wales. Powys County Council also asks that in carrying out this review, the Welsh Government carries out a cost benefit analysis of wind farm energy production when compared to alternative sources of energy'.

I'm not at all sure that this is now directed at the right target. Since this motion was first being worked on, we have had the Carwyn Jones statement, which has fundamentally changed things. The most important sentence was that the TAN 8 limits should be regarded as the 'upper limits'. To that extent, I rather like TAN 8. And the second most important sentence was that there is no need whatsoever for a 400kV cable/pylons to deliver these 'upper limits'. I rather like this as well. This needs to be reflected in the Council's thinking. These sentences, if translated into policy, would mean about 100 new turbines, no 400kV cable, no sub-station, (and buried 132 cables as well). Not everything protesters wanted - but nothing like as bad as we were fearing.

The real target now is the Westminster Government, which will be debating recently published National Policy Statements on Renewable Energy Generation before the summer recess. Its what I'm building towards. Because energy (over 50 Mv) is not devolved, TAN 8 is referred to in these 'statements' as no more that a 'material consideration'. Not good enough, and the Council should be saying so, loud and clear - and it should be a part of the motion. Energy is not going to be devolved, but we need to raise the bar a bit higher than 'material consideration'. What about something like 'presumption in favour' of the TAN 8 targets. And I would like to see something about refusal by the Council to contemplate a sub-station. That should scupper National Grid's hideous plans. And there should be some serious questions about what the Welsh Government is going to do about all these wind farms that were thought to be heading towards forestry land. Expect to see some changes in the motion. This is all enough to make me wish I was still a councillor.

Its why we Welsh dream

40 years ago today, the British Lions beat the All Blacks on their own turf. They achieved legendary status by going on to win the test series 2-1, with one test drawn. Rugby was a big part of my life then, and the stars of that tour remain stars in the Glyn Davies 'Hall of Fame' today. Right up there with Trever Hunt, who joined me for a tour of the House of Commons and lunch last week. He was the surgeon who redesigned my lower body 10 years ago, while removing a cancerous tumour from my bowel.

And most of the 1971 Lions were Welsh. Let me list them - in no particular order. Coach Carwyn James, Captain John Dawes, Gareth Edwards, Barry John, JPR Williams, Mervyn Davies, Delme Thomas, Derek Quinnell, John Bevan and John Taylor. There were great players from the other home nations as well. Willie John McBride, Mike Gibson, David Duckham John Pullin, Fergus Slattery, Ian McLaughlan. There was even a second row named Gordon Brown. They were heroes. McBride's forwards never took a step backwards, and Barry John's backs were mesmerising. We all have our favourites. For me, the greatest of them all was Gareth Edwards.

Here's Carwyn's speech before embarking on the mission

- "Look here, I want each one of you to be your own man. Express yourself not as you would in the office for the next three months, but as you would at home. I don't want you Irishmen to pretend to be English, or you English to think you are Celts, or for Scotsmen to be anything but Scottish to the core. You Irish must continue to be ideologists off the field, and on it fighters like Kilkenny cats. Let you English continue to stiffen those upper lips, and simply continue to be superior. And the conservative traditionalism of you Scots - strong, dour, humourless in phony caricature - let it be seen as colourfully fired up these next 90 days by the oil of your country's new-found radicalism. As well, I demand that all of you make sure you let us Welsh continue to be bloody-minded and swaggeringly over-cocky in our triple-crowning arrogance."

Imagine Warren Gatland saying that - or any Welshman being in a position to say that today. 1971 is why we Welsh alway carry a candle of eternal hope. Happy dreams.

The Greek tragedy

Longstanding and dear friend, David Rowlands called in my office this morning, plonked himself down and handed me another of his letters. David is a full blooded Ukip man. I assumed it would be another of his 'outraged' letters - probably about the idiocy of pouring more billions down a Greek drain. But No, he was supporting me on my mission to prevent the mid Wales uplands from becoming industrialised by wind farm companies. It didn't matter because Boris dealt with the impending Greek tragedy in his Telegraph article today anyway.

Boris says that "We should stop chucking good money after bad". This will have a lot of purchase because so many people who talk to me about Greece agree with Boris. In fact people who talk to me about anything agree with Boris on this. Now, the consequence if no-one chucks more more money at Greece is 'default', exit from the Euro, followed by unpredictable turbulence across Europe and wider. Another way of looking at all this is to see the EU as developing into a single state (fiscally speaking) and these massive transfers as a sort of EU Barnett Formula - an extension of regional policy. This could well be the equivilent of Baldrick's cunning plan. I hope David didn't read the Boris article or he'll be back in my office tomorrow with another envelope.

Where now on wind in mid Wales.

Just about landed back on earth again following the First Minister's 'Statement' about onshore wind farms in mid Wales last Friday. It astounded me, which is a rare event for this old hand. Keep on looking for the catch, and cannot find it. OK, so there's all this 'side issue stuff' about devolving extra powers to the Assembly, which the media is lapping up (despite it having been on the agenda for at least 10 years). But it cannot conceal the main issue. The Welsh Government will not support a 400kV cable on pylons into mid Wales - and there is no chance that an undergrounded cable can be justified, while Carwyn Jones sticks to a max of 500 Mw of new wind generation in the 3 mid Wales development areas. I'm a cynical old b***** but this looks good however which way I look at it. The overall 'project' looks to be in deep trouble - which is just where I like it.

Am a bit reluctant to commit to 'next steps' for a few days. Need to talk to National Grid, SP Energy Networks and my 'advisers'. But I have already called publicly for National Grid to abandon their plans to run a connection from mid Shropshire to mid Wales. No doubt NG will consult Dep't of Energy and Climate Change for guidance on this. My advice (for what it's worth)is "Listen to me boys" (in a non gender sense). If you and DECC go ahead with this when all of Wales is opposing you, and that's how it looks, you will precipitate a constitutional crisis. Just throw darts at a photograph of Carwyn, and bite the bullet. Smell the coffee. Your plan to industrialise the mid Wales uplands is over.

Of course, there will still be plenty to argue about. There could easily be a wind farm that is economic running a 132Mw cable all the way to the Grid (that's onshore wind farm economics, or fantasy economics to the rest of us). But last Friday's Welsh Government 'Statement' will give the Local Planning Authority more confidence to refuse permission. There will still be a rumpus about the one big outstanding application at Llandinam that awaits decision, and which does have a licence to export electricity. Probably won't say much about this issue for a week or so - when future strategy has been decided. I talk about something else.

The 'Listening' First Minister

Was driving home from Llandrindod when I heard the news. Almost drove through the hedge. Carwyn Jones, First Minister of the Welsh Government had issued a Statement on Planning for Renewable Energy in Wales - blowing the project to industrialise the uplands of Montgomeryshire right out of the water. He said "My Government could not support the construction of large pylons in mid Wales and my ministers are pressing this case with Nationl Grid Transmission and with Ofgem" - and he made special mention of Montgomeryshire. I promise never to be rude about Carwyn ever in my life again. Well not for a few days anyway.

Of course there were the crudest of smokescreens to cover the huge reversal in policy, but the important point is that he did the right thing - so there will be no churlishness from me. The people of mid Wales have begged and pleaded and persuaded Carwyn Jones to amend Tan 8, and help us save mid Wales from the sentence passed upon it in 2004. Just as David Cameron has done in respect of the NHS, Carwyn has recognised that his renewable energy policy needed changes, and he's had the courage to deliver.

Lets look at the cover, which is itself interesting. First is the tossing of the ball into the Westminster Government's court. For weeks I've been building up my campaign to persuade Charles Hendry, the Minister to publicly reject the National Grid 400kV connection from mid-Shropshire to mid-Montgomeryshire. It had been going well, and I was planning a big speech on July 19th. Now I will have a new message. Its not just the people of Mid Wales who are opposed - its the people of Wales. To approve National Grid's plans when every political party in Wales, the thousands of campaigners and the First Minister would make Tryweryn look like a vicarage tea party. I will be asking National Grid to abandon its plans forthwith.

The second lovely strategy (which I really enjoyed) was to claim that there's a danger of Westminster imposing large wind farms on mid Wales, and that the responsibility should therefor be transferred to the National Assembly - supposedly to save us. Laughed when I read that. The main reason these wind farms were proposed in the first place was Carwyn's TAN 8 policy guidance. But lets be done with this churlishness. Today has been a great day, and I genuinely feel for the first time that the Powys protesters have a great chance of pulling off a spectacular victory.

Welshpool Livestock Market - centre of anti wind protest.

Interesting developments in Powys. Montgomeryshire Councillors David Jones and Graham Brown have submitted a motion for debate by the Powys County Council on 29th June. It demands that the Welsh Government conducts a full review of its renewable energy policy guidance to planning authorities before any new planning permissions for wind farms are granted - including a proper environmental assessment that (disgracefully) has never been held. This is an excellent proposal which I expect the Conservatives to support.

The meeting was to have been held in the Council Chamber at Llandrindod Wells, but it seems there is a high profile visitor to the town that day. If a decent crowd of protesters turn up, the important visitor could be discomforted. I know it can't be the Queen, because Mrs D and I are going to her Royal Garden Party that afternoon! They shouldn't have moved the meeting because if its a member of the Royal family, he or she may well have wanted to join the protest!

Anyway, Cabinet Business Manager, Steve Boyd has informed us that the meeting has been moved to Welshpool Livestock Market, where a building is being converted into a makeshift debating chamber. An audio system is also being installed so that any people attending will be able to hear what is going on. This is all rather a good idea. I'm only upset that I cannot attend, because of the afore-mentioned Garden Party, and a very important debate over dinner in the House on 'Care' that I'm sponsoring that evening. Let our councillors speak for the people - and expose the First Minister's attitude towards the the people of mid Wales.

In Praise of U-Turns.

I really have read and heard the most utter tosh about the NHS reforms that the Coalition Government are currently taking through Parliament. Sometimes I really despair at the hopelessness of commentary on our political process. And some of it from our own side!

Now lets start from the proposition that we want our Government to legislate in a way that delivers the best results. The 'best result' is not necessarily the Bill that is first put before the House of Commons (or Lords) - which is why we go through the various stages of debate before the final product goes forward for Royal Assent. Sometimes a lot of change is needed and sometimes no change at all. Sometimes a Government abandons its proposals altogether. What happened with the NHS Reform Bill was that the Health Minister and the Prime Minister decided to 'pause' for three months to reflect, after a fair bit of criticism from health professionals. We need to get any reform of the NHS right. A group of knowledgeable people were asked to advise, which they did today. And now we can move forward with a better bill. Seems to me a sensible way to behave.

What I find particularly childish is the portrayal of this entirely sensible consideration of complex and sensitive policy as some sort of dual between the two Coalition partners. There are still some who do not get it. We have a Coalition Government. The Lib Dems and the Conservatives are colleagues. Whenever I hear Conservatives undermining Lib Dems or vice-versa, I think its like watching footballers trying to kick the ball into their own net. We govern together as a team, and we win together as a team.

Welsh Football Supremo Speaks Out

I was pleased to read of the opinions of the President of the Football Association of Wales, Phil Pritchard in today's Wales on Sunday. I know Phil. He lives just down the road from me - in Welshpool. We sometimes have a coffee and chat about things. I've not seen him since the Wales supported the uncontested election of Sepp Blatter to continue as FIFA President, in what was widely seen as a farce. Football has become such big international business that it was just not reasonable for the FAW to say nothing. So the interview was a bit of a coup for the WoS.

Seems to me that more than anything else it was a big poke in the eye for the English FA. I quite approve of that. Now I had been ready to criticise the Wales FA stance, but now I'm not so sure. I think I have rather more sympathy with Phil's view. Yes, Blatter has become a comic figure. Yes, his continued presence at the pinnacle of world football brings the game into ridicule. But reading Phil's comments makes it clear that England's representatives treated the other home countries with casual arrogance, simply assuming they would fall into line behind them with minimal discussion. If England had not been quite so full of themselves they might have received a bit more support. Maybe Wales will vote for someone else when Sepp Blatter reaches his mid 90s, and FIFA meetings have to be held in his nursing home - assuming there is an alternative candidate who has not been barred from standing because of corruption charges. Until then, the activities of FIFA will carry on being a carry on. After all, football is in the entertaining business.

Its 'The Economy' Stupid.

Regular visitors to this blog over the last few years will know that I am no fan of onshore wind farms. My main opposition to them has been based on the damage they do to landscape and natural beauty for minimal benefit - even if my opposition to the project to cover the uplands of Mid Wales with mass turbines and pylons has been based on the sheer lunacy of the idea. But I've realised that no-one cares about landscape, and that there are many otherwise sensible people who have been conned into believing in this lunacy. So - in a moment of mental clarity today, it dawned on me that if we are to defeat this madness we must fight it on economic and financial grounds. We must help people to see the truth. Future posts on this issue will no longer be about the desecration of our uplands and valleys, awful though that is. Because its about a search for truth, I will write in a way that invites those who disagree to inform me, and my readers where they think I'm mistaken.

In this post, I'll look at the misleading nature of claims made by onshore wind developers - and use a local example to demonstrate. In last week's local press, a developer was lauding, with great pride, a new wind farm application which could produce 80 megawatts of power (and power several million homes! ). OK, so I exaggerated the second bit! Well, lets look at this a bit more closely, assuming that the power would be sold to Scottish Power. We know that the most recent production factor for Welsh onshore wind farms is 19% (despite some ill-informed journalists claiming it to be higher). So this new wind farm is actually going to produce an average of just 16 megawatts, at completely random times - sometimes delivering 80 megawatts and sometimes nil. This means that Scottish Power would need some other form of conventional power source (oil, gas or nuclear?) to provide 80 megawatts of rapid back-up whenever the wind doesn't blow. For the wind farm to provide anything at all needs some other form of power generation to be running at reduced power - and reduced inefficiency. A bit like a car idling.

What was being boasted about as delivering 80 megawatts, actually delivers bu**er all. Probably makes the position worse. And that's why the people of mid Wales, who began by opposing a mad project to desecrate their homeland, have become opponents of the whole onshore wind farm sector now that they know a bit more about it.

Philip Johnson's Must Read in Today's Telegraph.

I've never met Philip Johnston, who writes for the Daily Telegraph. I have read some of his stuff - but I've not read anything as good as the article he's written today. The headline reads ' Wind farms aren't just a blight, they're a folly'. As a PPS, I have to be conscious that I do not say anything that conflicts with Coalition Government policy of 'onshore wind having a role to play as part of the energy mix, but that proposals should have strong community support and democratic legitimacy". So I'll just tell you what Philip wrote, without embellishing it with my opinion.

"there is one fundamental difference, between the great transformative projects of the 19th century and today's wind turbines: the latter don't work"

"To produce the same amount of electricity as one coal-fired power station, you'd need a wind farm the size of Greater London. And when there is no wind - or too much - the power produced is minuscule or the turbine has to be switched off while fossil fuel stations take up the slack."

"to see remote tracts of countryside that, by and large, survived the industrialisation of the landscape now threatened with defilement for no good reason is scandalous."

"A conspiracy of vested interests is seeking to bludgeon communities into accepting what has become a money-grabbing free-for-all masquerading as an environmental panacea."

"It is the greens and not the opponents of wind farms who are the true heirs of the 19 century Luddites, standing in the way of an energy policy that would benefit us all - and protect the landscape."

Pulling a fast one ?

Had an interesting email this morning from probably the sharpest legal brain I know, which accuses the Welsh Government of seriously duplicitous behaviour in respect of the timing of its controversial TAN8 decisions. Its a bit complex but I'll try to simplify what he claims happened.

European Directive 2001 requires member states to undertake statutory consultations with other agencies before proceeding with any "plan or programme" concerning "land use" or "energy". This directive was adopted in Wales by Statutory Instrument no 1656(W 170), taking effect on 24.7.04. The Welsh Government rushed through its TAN8 announcement just 11 days before the deadline - before when it would have been statutorily required to consult the Countryside Council for Wales, Environmental Agency and CADW. Environmental scrutiny of a massive land use change, supposedly to benefit the environment. The only people who would have understood what was happening would have been the relevant civil servants and the Minister they were advising.

Probably too late for Judicial Review, but its being looked at. Personally, if this is as reported, I would find it quite shocking to discover our new devolved democracy behaving in such an underhand way. Just one more thing. The First Minister was a barrister, and responsible for energy policy when all this happened.

Caring for the Elderly

'Appeared' on BBC Radio Wales' Sunday Supplement this morning. The subject was 'care of the elderly'. Fellow guests were Baroness Finley and a new Labour AM named Mark Drayford. Never encountered him before. He seemed very keen to be party political. Started off by talking about Mrs Thatcher for goodness sake, and later on started talking about reductions in public spending as if it was nothing whatsoever to do with the Labour Party. When discussing a really important subject I do find this approach to be so tiresome - so I just ignored him. I think Vaughan found him tiresome as well.

Reason this issue was under discussion today was the publicity there has been through this last week about Southern Cross, an issue that's been on my radar for a year. Southern Cross is the biggest care provider in the UK, and has been an accident waiting to happen. Lets set aside the 'care' aspect of this, and consider the financial structure of this company - put together in great haste, during a property boom about 5/6 years ago, by a private equity company, split into two and sold on (at graet profit). The problem as I see it, is that the property side of the business, and the operational side are completely separate entities. There's nothing wrong with this model if its a group of hotels say, or golf courses. If the property side goes awry (which happens) the casualties can look after themselves. But care home residents can't. When there are unplanned home closures, there is inevitable a great deal of human misery, and accellerated deaths. My view is that there should be financial regulation as well as care regulation to ensure that only sound business models are allowed to operate in the sector.

Truth is we are moving forward into a massive crisis in care delivery. We are living to be older, which brings with it a huge dementia problem which we are not ready for. It must be faced. The Coalition Government did put some 'sticking plaster' money into this sector last year, while we await the publication of a comprehensive report into the future - by the Dilnot Commission, expected later this year. We cannot carry on as we are. We have to find some way of paying for care. We have to find ways of keeping people in their own homes for longer. Failure to do these things will carry a massive price - paid by the most vulnerable people in our society. Its too big an issue to play political games with.

Hello, I'm back - blown in by a wind storm

Have not blogged for weeks. Truth is that I'd become a bit bored - mainly because there are too many individuals around with so little to do that they spend time reading my musings in search of something to cause me or my party embarrassment. So I've decided to take a different approach. No-one who fails to identify themselves will have comments published. So the trolls can p*** off. Anon will need to be relevant, clever or funny.

Reason for me coming out of retirement is that I want to write about some issues which matter to me, one being the industrialisation of the uplands of mid Wales with wind turbines and cables. This first post is no more than a reflection on where we are. I'm going to tell you what is going on over the next few weeks. To begin, we need to look (briefly) on where we've come from.

In 2005, the Assembly Government decided that mid Wales should become the dumping ground for a 400kv cable's worth of wind turbines (as a starter) - 600+ turbines. The then Assembly Member for Montgomeryshire, Mick Bates thought this to be a splendid idea. I didn't. I stuck with that opinion thereafter. I knew that the local population would agree with me, when they realised what this all meant in terms of infrastructure. But even I did not expect the level of public outrage. When I called a public meeting in Welshpool Livestock Market in April, I was stunned by the numbers that turned up - somewhere between 1500 and 2000. I did get a bit carried away standing on a couple of big bales in front of such a responsive crowd, and asked the assembled throng to come to Cardiff with me to show how much we cared. I thought a bit of a do on the Assembly steps would be a good plan. They all came - and some. It was the best demonstration there has ever been outside the Assembly. At a conference two days later, the Secretary of State for Wales said that the people of mid Wales should not be ignored. Carwyn Jones told the conference that they would be ignored. I wasn't disappointed because I expected him to say exactly that. Within the Welsh Government, the opinion of mid Wales is of no consequence.

The Cardiff event was a stunning success - way beyond the wildest dreams of those of us involved in arranging it. But there is the question of where go now. Ideas are welcome on this blog. But a few of us did meet this morning to develop a strategy, and I was shocked by how things have changed in just a few weeks. Tentative beginnings have been replaced by cast iron resolve. The onshore wind farm sector will rue the day they joined in with the Welsh Government to trample all over the people of Mid Wales. They just picked on the wrong target. I always thought there would be a bit of a rumpus. I was wrong. There's going to be a bl***dy conflagration. I have no idea how its going to end. All I know is that they picked on the wrong people. Next blog will be about strategy - or at least that part of it that we are content for our enemies to know about.

Newtown Male Voice

Life is returning to normal - post back op.. Planted a 'fancy' oak tree this afternoon, and went out to a concert tonight. The Newtown Male Voice Choir were performing with 'The Three Basses' along as special guests. I've heard Tom Evans (Gwanas) sing several times before, and his voice floats through my mind whenever I travel up past Cadair Idris from Dolgellau, and down the other side past Gwanas. With him were Trebor Lloyd Evans and a new 'voice' to me, Sion Goronwy - a sound of such raw power that children should not be allowed to listen at less than 100 yds. It was just a brilliant night out, and well worth the bit of backache resulting from sitting in the same place for around 3 hours. And there was a message on my mobile to tell me that we have a contest for the vacant position of leader of the Conservative Assembly Group. Its good to have a contest. Pity Sion Goronwy isn't standing for us. At full volume, he'd blow Carwyn Jones out of the debating chamber.

My take on Thursday's results.

Been busy. Missed Thursday night's sleep - and paid a heavy price in pain and setback in 'operation recovery' for the pleasure of sharing Russell's victory. And fulfilling a promise to speak to Llanidloes 6th form at 9.00 Friday morning. Rested a lot since then, and today there's marked improvement in mobility. Be back on the treadmill in 10 days I reckon - after over a year's break. Anyway what did I think of Thursday's results.

In Scotland, Alex Salmond pulled off a huge success, leaving Labour in turmoil. Very bad day for Ed Miliband in Scotland. Not much to be said about the Conservatives really. What we know for the first time now is that some serious thinking needs to be done, to ensure Scotland remains a part of the Union. The Prime Minister needs to draw more on the well of inspiration that injected fire into the NOtoAV campaign.

In England, it was a good Council elections result for the Conservatives. Twelve months into a programme of repairing the national finances, with all the pain that entails, and we more than hold our position. That was an incredible result. The reality is that the Lib Dems had a disaster, Labour won fewer seats than expected, and the Conservatives won more than expected.

In Wales in was a good night for Labour, but not good as they hoped it would be. I'd felt they might do 31 - but fell just short. I sense that Labour might go it alone in the short term, with some sort of side arrangement for comfort. There is no Alex Salmond in Wales. Plaid and the Lib Dems had a poor night, especially the former. I was really sorry to see the demise of Helen Mary Jones though. Not only did we go to the same school, but she's made of admirably tough stuff, and her sister's a fellow soldier in the war on destruction of mid Wales by turbine. Nice to see another Powys man, William Powell take his place in the Bay (thanks to Russell). IWJ looks a beaten man at present. He needs to look as if he believes in himself, so that his colleagues can. Could the reverend who enjoys a cigar be looking to even up the score - or is that me causing trouble again.

The Conservatives had a better than expected night. I knew Russell George was going to win, and he'll make a really good AM. Because of my own experiences in 2007, I realised that his victory would mean Nick Bourne was likely to lose his seat. Angela Burns and Janet Finch Saunders pulled off cracking results, and at a personal friend level, its great to see Byron make it (by another turn of the quirky wheel). We need a new leader of the Assembly Group, and we chose an ideal man, in Paul Davies, to manage the contest. I'm think I know who's going to win, but I intend to keep secret how I cast that particular vote. I'm really sorry to see Jonathon Morgan lose his seat. He was a real talent. I wonder what Brynle makes of it all. I'd love a chat with the old rascal.

AV Rubbish (more) in the Independent

The Independent has informed its readers that Montgomeryshire is one of 21 seats which the Conservatives would not have won if the election had been fought under the AV system. It informs its readers that Lembit Opik would not have been beaten by me under AV. Total 'cobblers'. I've never actually bought an Independent, and if this is the sort of tripe it comes up, I'm not going to change the habit of my lifetime, at least that during which the Independent has been limping along. Lets just look at the figures, and you can tell me where you think I might be wrong. The result was as follows;

Glyn Davies - Conservative ----- 13,976
Lembit Opik - Liberal Democrat - 12,792
Heledd Fychan - Plaid Cymru ----- 2,802
Nick Colbourne - Labour --------- 2,407
David Rowlands - Ukip ----------- 1,128
Milton elis - National front ------ 384
Bruce Lawson - Independent -------- 324
50% of the vote would have been -16,907 --- assuming the same number of people voted.

Here's my guess on how preferences would have broken down, though this has to be no more than indicative, because only a proportion of people would have cast preferences. The one party that would have been expected to grasp AV with most enthusiasm, but since their preferences would be unlikely to come into it, we can leave then out. In any case, none of them could have given the Lib Dems a single preference vote! My assumptions are that the preferences would have broken down thus;

Bruce Lawson/Milton Elis would have been shared between Lib Dems and Conservatives
UKIP would have broken 2;1 to the Conservatives.
Labour would have broken 3;1 to the Lib Dems
Plaid would have been shared or been shaded by the Conservatives.

With us being 1,200 ahead (needing just 3,000 preferences) there is no way in the world that the Independent is talking anything but b******* - mathematical fantasy. Let anyone who disagrees let us see their realistic assumptions.

And I should mention that I've done very little canvassing in support of the No to AV campaign. I reckoned that because of the close link between the Conservative Party and opposition to AV, the best thing I could do was my best to support the Conservative candidate, Russell George. I have been proud to do that. I hope we've done enough to ensure he wins on Thursday.

Sir Henry Cooper - 1934-2011

I used to enjoy a bit of boxing as a teenager, but farm life didn't allow me enough time. Ernie Ray was my coach, though I never fought in an official bout. I was on the card to fight at Denbigh, but a ferocious nose bleed the night before persuaded Ernie that I should not fight without my nose being 'cauterised' - whatever that meant. Anyway, this is just a preamble to a post about Sir Henry Cooper, who died today. The sporting heroes of my early teens were boxers. There were some great Welshmen - Howard Winstone and Dai Dower being two of the best. But we all loved 'Enry. It wasn't just his boxing. He was a thoroughly good all round 'gent'. And hugely popular.

As a fighter he was not the greatest. Bit small for a heavy, and not quite good enough at the very top level. Mind you, he almost the best of them all - the magnificent Cassius Clay, later to be known as Mohammed Ali. I loved him as well, and watched his fights over and over again. When 'Enry fought Clay in 1963, the great man was too cocky, and was caught by 'Enry's 'Ammer close to the end of the fourth round. Many of us thought he'd never have survived if it had been at the beginning of the round. Cooper was a good 'finisher'. Clay's corner managed to delay things a bit, and he came out in the 5th and smashed 'Enry all over the place. The fight was stopped with a cut eye, a weakness that dogged Cooper's career. I remember enjoying all those fights between Henry Cooper, Joe Erskine, Brian London and Dick Richardson - all world class British heavies. Through it all, Sir Henry won three Lonsdale belts. Don't think anyone else managed that - not before all these Micky Mouse titles came along anyway.

He was so much more than just a boxer. I remember him as a captain on Question of Sport - with Cliff Morgan I think, though my memory could be playing tricks. I feel a bit sad that Sir Henry Cooper has died. The thing was, we all felt we knew him.

One benefit of A-V

I'd never heard of the A-V impulse system until today. I learned about it from leaflets familiarising me with what to expect from my consultant surgeon tomorrow when he goes to work with his knife. The A-V impulse system involves a pair of ImPads that wrap around your feet after surgery. They are attached by two hoses to the A-V impulse system controller. The Impads mimic the natural action of the soles of the feet, improving blood circulation while the patient is lying prostrate. At last I have found some useful purpose to A-V.

Monk Parakeets to the Rescue?

This may sound ridiculous, but one way of scuppering National Grid's plans to destroy our landscapes with hideous pylons would be to park a car on top of every one of them. I'm sure you can see how this would work - even if you might enquire how we could get a car up there - 150' in the air. Well its not as far-fetched as it sounds. Mother nature often produces the answers. Enter the Monk Parakeet.

About 150 of these colourful raucous and very greedy parrot-like birds are on the rampage in the Home Counties, following escape from captivity in the 1990s. They are reported as being a problem for two reasons. Firstly they devour copious amounts of agricultural crops, and secondly they build nests the size of family cars on top of pylons. In the US, these nests on electricity pylons have caused serious damage. And there's the added bonus that the Monk Parakeet can develop a vocabulary of several hundred words to tell us what they think. They would need only two to convey to National Grid the thoughts and message on the lips of everyone in mid Wales.

Where does the blame for wind farm 'Madness' lie?

Rather like a wind turbine after several days calm, this blog comes back to life. I suppose Easter Sunday is an appropriate day. And its the mid Wales turbines, pylons etc. that feature in this post - and some of the confusion about responsibility for it all. During the last few weeks, I've spoken at several public meetings, and pinned the blame on the National Assembly Government - and explained why. But not everyone was there,

For many years, there's been a drive to promote renewable energy by governments across the world, including the UK Government. It was, and remains entirely sensible that the Welsh Assembly Government should play it's part, even if the largest projects (nuclear power, Severn Barrage etc) remain a matter for the UK Government. Personally I'd not objected hugely to the odd onshore wind farm in mid Wales, though I'd long thought their inconsistency and huge cost raised questions about viability. (The scales fell from my eyes in 2005). But none of the above justifies the stunning landscape of mid Wales being industrialised. The decision to do this was taken by the Assembly Government in 2005 when it published an updated version of it's planning guidance to Local Planning Authorities, Technical Advice Note 8 (TAN8). The decision was communicated to the public via a 'statement' to the Assembly by then Minister, Andrew Davies AM - and welcomed by all party representatives, except me. I was opposed to the new version of TAN8 for two reasons - firstly because it was all about onshore wind farms rather than renewable energy, and secondly because it meant the destruction of the mid Wales landscape. I knew that TAN8 meant that which has now become much more widely understood. What we are facing (in the next phase of industrialising the mid Wales uplands) is 700/800 new turbines, a 20 acre substation, and about 100 kms of new cables, including a 400kv cable from the Newtown area to mid Shropshire, carried on 150' high steel towers.

Permission for the 400kv cable, and for wind farms over 50mw will ultimately be the responsibility of the Minister for Energy and Climate Change at Westminster. Permission for the substation and wind farms under 50mw will be responsibility of the Local Planning Authority, ultimately the National Assembly for Wales. But all of the decisions will be decided against the planning policy backdrop provided by TAN8. It's only by changing TAN8 that we have any real chance of preventing this madness destroying what many of us hold dear. That's why I think those who object should demonstrate their anger in Cardiff Bay.

Immigration policy. Fuss over not much.

Call from one of Wales top journalists today asking for my take on the Prime Minister's comments on immigration. Since he went to the trouble of asking me, I shared my thoughts with him. Here's a flavour of what I said.

1) It's no surprise to me that David Cameron makes a speech describing his policy on immigration as being the same as it was before he was elected Prime Minister. He has consistently promised to reduce "net immigration back to the levels of the 1990s - tens of thousands a year, not hundreds of thousands." He also repeated his commitment to an 'annual limit'. I'd have been surprised if he had said anything else.

2) It seems wholly sensible that the Prime Minister should speak of immigration during the weeks before local council elections. During an election campaign is an entirely appropriate time to talk about policy. Its an issue which is of great concern to voters.

3) I'm not in the least surprised that Vince Cable expresses some mild unease with the Prime Minister's approach to immigration. Dr Vince has said the same sort of thing before. And anyway, the idea that every Liberal Democrat and Conservative Minister in the Coalition Government must hold identical thoughts is as daft as it is unrealistic. And Nick Clegg commented today that he is 'proud' of the work that he (and Mr Cable) had done for the Coalition's "sensible immigration policy".

The reality is that immigration has been too high for many years, the previous Labour Government had not much idea about how many people were entering Britain illegally, and that a great many people are extremely worried about it. We live in a world where accusations of antipathy towards immigrants are thrown around too casually. Its a serious issue, and if mainstream parties are not going to talk about it, there are plenty of others who will.

TAN 8 is a monstrosity.

Been to another National Grid consultation meeting today, on their plans to build the necessary infrastucture to accommodate another 800-ish wind turbines in mid Wales - in the village of Arddleen. Not quite as many people turned up as I expected. Becoming used to 500+ everywhere. Probably about 250 today. Tried to get some grip on how the decision on the 400 kv cable will be made - and how to influence it.

Following their consultation, National Grid will decide on its preferred option, and submit an application to proceed with the Infrastructure Planning Committee (or as seems more likely, a successor body) - which will make a recommendation to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change - currently the Liberal Democrat, Chris Huhne. Inevitable, the SoS will take the decision against the backdrop of the Assembly Government's TAN 8 policy statement (TAN 8 is a 'renewable energy technical advice note for Planning Authorities). Now lets imagine my dream scenario - a refusal to allow this desecration of the mid Wales countryside. The outrage that would explode in Cardiff Bay, assuming it's a Labour or Labour-led Government. There would be one hell of a row. Chris Huhne would be holing below the waterline the Assembly Government's policy of dumping another 20+ wind farms on Montgomeryshire. Can you just imagine the rumpus about not 'respecting' the National Assembly. On this issue, I'm all for creating a full scale rumpus.

Another issue on today's agenda was the process that would follow a refusal to answer the question on NG's form about where the sub station should go. My intention is to refuse to answer the question and write "Nowhere. We do not want any of this madness", and attaching a letter explaining why. Seems this will not be a 'void' response form. I accept that it could not influence the choice of site that NG take, but my opinion would be noted - and if thousands of us did the same thing, would have to be reported as part of the overall response. Seems as good a way as any of making Chris Huhne think twice.

Its all so awful. Like throwing a tin of pink paint over a Kyffin Williams oil painting. How can they sleep at night.

Salary increases for Powys Councillors.

My salary as an MP is about £65,000. Its always seemed to me to be a very good salary for a job which involves a strong element of public service. Though I'll always take what's offered, I'd have done the job for nothing. Done it differently of course, and of necessity only part-time - and not have been able to afford all those things that are 'expected' of an MP. When I was first elected to Montgomeryshire District Council, I elected not to take any payment at all for my time until I became Vice Chairman, which involved four days most weeks. I then took £16.50 per day. This is by way of a preamble to commenting on what its proposed that Powys County Council's new cabinet members are to be paid from next month.

At present the Council is 'led' by an Executive Management Board of 15 Cllrs. who are each paid £21,700 - with the Leader being paid £28,217. From next month the Council will be 'led' by a Cabinet of 10 (I think) who will each be paid £25,600 - with the Leader being paid £36,017. It is also proposed that there will be special responsibility payments for other individual duties. The increases are being recommended by an Independent Remuneration Panel. The report going to the full Council for approval goes under the authorship of Councillors Tony Thomas and Stephen Hayes.The Conservative Group does not agree with these increases, and its Group Leader will refuse to take the new responsibility allowance.

This seems to me to be quite a strong story. In fact one journalist I spoke to described the increases as f***** outrageous - and she was a lady!!. Personally, I thought the public should know about this, so that they can inform Councillors of their opinion before they vote on these proposals on April 28th. When asked to comment by the BBC and Shropshire Star today, I just said that I thought such increases at this time of pay freezes and cuts are insensitive - and that I thought the public should know before the decision is taken. Some issues do not need hyping up.

Where now for the Welsh Assembly?

So where does the devolution process go now? Important question to which there is no obvious answer. I suppose there's no rush. It may well not go anywhere, anytime soon. The referendum result is in, and it could take a while for the National Assembly to get a confident handle on the substantial increase in it's law making capacity. In some ways its a big move forward for the Assembly, even if in my opinion, it's no more than what most Welsh people (except we anoraks) thought we were voting about in September 1997. And it irritates me a touch to hear so many people saying "the Assembly has now been given law making powers" - as if some great principle had been conceded. The principle of devolved law making power was granted to the Assembly in 2006. What happened in the Mar 3rd referendum was that the process of granting this law making power was greatly simplified and speeded up.

Reason I was thinking about this over the weekend is that Martin Shipton rang me for a chat about it. Don't know whether he's printed anything yet. The next step in the process, in my opinion, is the granting of some form of 'fiscal accountability' to the Assembly. Cannot be more precise than this, except to say I was impressed by Gerry Holtham's Report into the matter which was published last year. We've heard quite a bit of negativity from Cardiff Bay politicians about this, which really mystifies me. Even Berriew Community Council had 'fiscal responsibility' when I was its Chairman 30 years ago! So I reckon the next step is going to be a "Calman-like process" - Calman being he that led a major review of the granting of 'fiscal responsibility' to the Scottish Parliament. It will take a while to work though this though - several years probably.

Personally, I also reckon it will be a while until the range of policy areas that fall under the Assembly's wing is up for consideration - except for some tangential references during the 'Calman-like process'. The next big debate on transfer of policy responsibility, which is already being mentioned by some would probably be criminal justice. This is a mighty area, which would transform the National Assembly. I cannot see this debate firing up into something real for a long time. But then I could be wrong.