Â鶹Éç

Â鶹Éç BLOGS - Betsan's Blog
« Previous | Main | Next »

M for Measure

Betsan Powys | 16:36 UK time, Monday, 22 October 2007

What's this? (And no, it's not the joke about the peep-peep-peep of the English Rugby Team's open-top bus reversing back into the garage.)

It can be laid. In fact it's being laid this very afternoon. It's small, or compact perhaps. Crack it open and you'll find something curious inside. Someone, somewhere is going to work on it as I write.

I'm talking about the Finance Committee's report on the NHS Redress (Wales) Measure, or as we like to put it, the very first new Welsh law that's been brought forward by the Government. Their conclusions are pretty brutal and to the point.

"The Committee's judgement is that it cannot reliably assess the impact of the proposed NHS Redress Measure. It concludes that it has little alternative but to recommend that the stage one debate on the general principles of the Measure is not brought forward until the Committee, and by implication Assembly Members generally, have had an opportunity to consider the better estimate of costs that will flow from the work currently underway".

In other words - go away, do your sums, come back with something more robust and then we'll look at it again. Oh and Assembly Members are going to want a go at this one and they'll be nastier than we've been.

This is the very first Welsh law. The power to enact legislation is, as the First Minister himself put it back in June, "one of the major distinguishing features of this third Assembly ... When we enact a Measure, it has the same force as primary legislation. It is measure with a capital M'.

Getting a capital E for effort from the Finance Committee (with its majority of 6 Labour/Plaid members) is not a particularly distinguished start.

°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment

  • 1.
  • At 11:01 AM on 23 Oct 2007,
  • Mark Davies wrote:

So, they botch their first attempt at legislation (you wouldn't have got a good win at the Bookies on that) but then they're still pushing for more powers? These guys are extraordinary.

This is what the process is about, no they haven't botched the legislation, the scrutiny element has worked. Now I wonder how many other bits of legislation are rushed through Westminster with less than wonderful scrutiny? Rather than being a failure this is a success, the system has worked. This now goes back to the civil servants to redraw. If this is the quality of the work of our AMs then long may it continue.

  • 3.
  • At 12:53 PM on 23 Oct 2007,
  • Penbedw wrote:

Speaking of England rugby - well you mentioned it in passing - didn't it gladden your heart to see the 'patron' of Welsh Rugby, the future King of England, and his half brother, getting so agitated at the red rose demise.

And afterwards, how good of them to help the losers to drown their sorrows. Now if that had been soccer players drinking spirits from the bottle, what would the coverage have been so kind? Class divide? Surely not.

  • 4.
  • At 10:58 AM on 24 Oct 2007,
  • Arfon Jones wrote:

I never thought there were sufficient AM's to properly scutinise the measures and I'm pleased to say I was wrong...the system works!!

This post is closed to new comments.

Â鶹Éç iD

Â鶹Éç navigation

Â鶹Éç © 2014 The Â鶹Éç is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.