Â鶹Éç

It's not often that I can describe my colleagues as little boys on Christmas Eve - and they are mostly boys as you know - but yesterday was an exception. So agog was the Western Mail's Senedd Correspondent at the prospect of the All Wales Convention reporting that he felt, he said, as though it was the eve of Christmas Eve.

This morning Nick Bourne, the Conservative leader, was "looking forward" to reading the report.

Jane Hutt, the Education Minister was simply "awaiting it" - a neat distinction between the language of government and opposition.

The Convention's report will be made public at midnight. There will be some official responses tomorrow but expect little more than the photo opportunity equivalent, a sort of thank-you-for-the-hard-work and we'll-consider-it response. I imagine some will even steer clear of welcoming it. It's publication will be marked and no more.

There'll be a statement from Rhodri Morgan next Tuesday. The Tory leader was quick to "understand" if the First Minister would want to leave any meaningful debate until a new First Minister is in place. In fact he was pretty clear that for any debate to be meaningful, it would have to be led by the new First Minister.

That takes us into 2010, the stockings long-since opened and packed away, the tree taken to a council recycyling site.

But hang about: just hover over next week. On Wednesday the Welsh Secretary Peter Hain will be in Cardiff Bay to address Assembly Members. He'll be making a statement on the Queen's Speech before it's debated by AMs. While he's here it's hard to imagine he won't have something to say about the way the current legislative process is working, Sir Emyr's report and the timing of a referendum.

He has made his views entirely clear already. If you want to read the speech he gave in Cardiff some weeks ago in full, then . His political detractors portray him as anti-devolutionary, keen to protect alleged whispered pledges to Labour MPs at the time of the coalition deal that though a referendum "on or before 2011" was part of the deal, it would never happen. It would never wash with the public. How can the architect of this current system accept, they say, that it is broken and does need fixing?

Mr Hain would of course argue that what he's doing is something far simpler. He's doing as others have been telling me over the past few weeks I should be doing, others involved in the election of a new Labour leader and First Minister - following the numbers. Look at opinion polls, look at the gap between those who say they'd vote 'yes' in a referendum and those who'd vote 'no' and consider the gap. 5%, 6%, 7%? No more and not enough. Think timing. Think likelihood of winning.

Granted, ask the public a question in terms of a kind of parity with Scotland and the figures the pollsters gather shoot up. The gap opens, is gaping wide. But while a Yes campaign might be fought on those terms, the question would never be put in those terms. So again, follow the numbers: 5% ... 6% ... 7%.

Let's wait and see what Mr Morgan and Mr Hain add to the debate next Tuesday and Wednesday.

In the meantime: the report itself. It'll be yours to read online come the morning. I'll be typing 'if' into the word search box - a pretty big 'if'. I'm guessing like everyone else that there'll be sections that push the boundaries of the Covention's remit, sections that don't offer firm recommendations but concentrate on the evidence gathered.

I imagine they'll discuss numbers of AMs. They'll discuss the evidence put to them that Wales ought to follow the Scottish model in that everything ought to be devolved other than the areas listed as reserved. .

I'll be looking out for a line that says something along the lines of "If a Welsh referendum is fought on the issue, the Convention believes the evidence suggests it could be won".

If the referendum is fought on the issue? Which referendum can you think of that was fought on the issue, that was a straightforward answer to the straightforward question put on the ballot paper? Which referendum result can you think of that wasn't affected by the popularity of the government, how much money was in people's pockets, how secure their job was, how the weather turned out?

If it's there (an if in itself) than it's a pretty big if.

If you want to see an Assembly with full law-making powers, Assembly Members able to get on with law-making without reference to parliament - then enjoy the moment. If you're a True Wales supporter, brush off those press releases accusing the Convention of being no more than a taxpayer funded Yes campaign.

But on both sides of the fence, beware the 'if'.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?