 |
We really, really could be calling our AMs "Ass-sucks" in the future - not joking. Read on. |
As suggested yesterday, it's becoming harder to tell where reality ends and satire starts.
On this I couldn't decide whether to just look the other way and spare everyone's blushes – like not noticing someone committing a faux pas in public.
Last week, the Assembly Commission - headed up by The Llywydd, Elin Jones (Plaid, Ceredigion) - launched a public consultation on changing the name of the National Assembly.
There's a survey available here as well as a consultation document that probably took some poor sod a few hours to put together and had to be padded out (pdf).
Why?
Good question and it hasn't yet been answered to my own satisfaction. I don't know about you.
The Wales Bill - which hasn't even been passed - will eventually grant the Assembly power over its membership, electoral arrangements as well as institutional arrangements like the name. Alongside the power to vary income tax, there'll be other assorted powers and responsibilities like sewerage, road signs and speed limits.
Due to long-standing public confusion over the roles and responsibilities of the National Assembly, the Commission – the body who run the Assembly – have decided "the time is right to consider changing the name" to "contribute to public understanding of its role".
On 5th July 2016 – within a fortnight of the Brexit vote – AMs spent a precious half hour of parliamentary time debating a motion on whether there needs to be a name change, which was unanimously approved and gave the Commission a go-ahead to consider the implications further.
"Parliament" of course has the same French root as "parlez/parler" or "you/to speak"....or "talking shop".
The Options
 |
| (Pic : Assembly Commission) |
Practicalities of Change
Once the Wales Bill becomes law, changing the Assembly's name will require primary legislation. Although the Assembly Commission accept the change could be done "informally" – through people simply using the new name without any official change (in the same way the Welsh Assembly Government changed its name to Welsh Government) - there are unspecified "risks" attached.
The Bill could be stand-alone or it could be attached to another piece of legislation (such as an electoral reform law). The earliest the process could start is estimated at May 2017, and the new name could be in place sometime in 2018.
There are no hard figures on the potential one-off costs. That will include: signage on the estate, the name of the Commission and independent panels, branding, legal documents, AM promotional material, publications, road signs etc. There's an estimate the total cost of a name change will be somewhere between £40,000-150,000.
Rectal Gazing
I'm disappointed - something that's becoming all too common in this Fifth Assembly and unlikely to end here.
That's not because they're actually doing this, just the way it's being approached. If this were post-Wales Bill, post-Brexit, end of term stuff as part of a wider legislative package on electoral and institutional reform (like the size of the Assembly, electoral system, public engagement and youth engagement) there's no problem, but....
I'm probably still just about considered one of the "softer" commentators in Wales - perhaps too soft - though even if you disagree with my lighter approach (when compared to the likes of Jac o' the North), politicians still do things that make me roll my eyes and bang my head against a wall - more often than you think. There's no point getting angry over it because they don't pay any attention and that'll make me even angrier.
AMs are capable of doing several things at once. However, regardless of whether the Assembly voted in favour of changing its name or not, to spend any significant time and effort on this in isolation demonstrates a disconnect between what the Bay Bubble considers a priority and the rest of us.
There are several problems with the consultation - publicised issues aside.
First of all, no evidence has been provided that the name is linked to public understanding of devolution or even whether a name change would improve understanding and engagement. There's some vague non-sequitur that as the Assembly is getting more powers it is "transforming" into a "parliament".
There's a smidgen of an argument, as made by Glyn at National Left, that "Assembly" was deliberately chosen to distinguish between the empowered Scottish Parliament, and the "Welsh Office on steroids" Welsh Assembly. "Legislative Assembly of Wales" would clearly state what it does too, but it's not included as an option.
As John Dixon at Borthlas suggested last week, there are no practical, constitutional or dictionary definition differences between an "Assembly" and a "Parliament" and, as he also said, "National Assembly" or its variants is more commonly used globally. The National Assembly in France is as powerful as the UK Parliament. The Scottish Parliament is less powerful than the National Assembly of Albania. By calling our legislature an "Assembly" it already stands apart from Westminster too.
It looks an awful lot like an attempt to make and subsequently solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Next, the consultation itself seems a push poll to favour "Senedd".
The proposed new post-nominal titles for members are a mouthful that don't flow off the tongue in either English or Welsh: MPW, ASC, MWP, MSC....AFI....NWA....WWE....REM. The only two-letter option is "Member of the Senedd/Aelod o'r Senedd (MS/AS)" which loads towards the Senedd option for the institutional name.
A problem there is AS is also the Welsh language post-nominal title for Westminster MPs, which could cause even more confusion, while the post-nominal MS (Multiple Sclerosis) would be a lot like calling individual members AIDS or HIV....which is a bit harsh....while the other alternative ASC yn Gymraeg - "Aah-ess-eck"...."Ass...suck"...."Assuck".
AM seems to work pretty well all things considered.
Thirdly, this is actually going to require a law and unless there's political agreement on wider electoral reform and expansion of the Assembly it'll be a stand-alone law too. That means a Bill, committee stages and evidence, various votes and amendments. There's a good chance many hours of AM, AMSS and Commission staff time will be tied up debating what to call themselves.
AMs (or whatever they'll be called in future) won't "level up" just because the name of their workplace or their post-nominal letters change. In fact changing the name of the product is what poorly-run companies do when they get lots of bad press - see Ratners.
The Commission have learned from "Boaty McBoatface" and made the right decision not to allow public suggestions. If they did, and if I were feeling mischievous, I would've suggest a campaign to give AMs and the National Assembly the name and titles they're desperate to earn.
Who wouldn't want to proudly take their place as an elected Anal Fistula (AF) of the National Fartbox?
Playing the Game
It should be obvious my preference is no change. "National Assembly" and "AM/AC" work fine. It's also great value for money because it costs nothing.
However, as nobody's going to bloody listen anyway - and AMs seem determined to plough through (though they've been a little quiet on this, with good reason) - it's worth playing along.
We've been presented with either the traditional monarchical-Commonwealth route, which is to keep the sovereign-derived "parliament" in the name (Welsh Parliament/Parliament of Wales), or we can go for the Nordic-Irish route and solely use the monolingual native name (Senedd).
As myself and seemingly many others informally use Senedd and Assembly interchangeably anyway – at cost of nothing to the public purse, I'd like to add – I would prefer Senedd.
However, as said the only post-nominal title that's not a mouthful (MS/Member of the Senedd) has problems. So I would propose a pre-nominal title of Seneddwyr (Sen.).
0 comments:
Post a Comment