Following Cheryl Gillan’s announcement yesterday that the referendum on the Assembly’s powers would take place in the first quarter of next year, Cymru Yfory’s David Llywelyn Davies and True Wales’ Rachel Banner appeared on Good Morning Wales today (about 2h 34m in) to discuss issues surrounding the date and more.

The arguments Rachel Banner put forward in favour of a No vote were depressingly familiar, and far-removed from what is actually on the table in the referendum. We heard how the ‘political elites in Cardiff Bay’ are merely grabbing more power for themselves, that this referendum is part of the process of Wales separating from the UK, that a Yes vote would cost more and that the Assembly should instead concentrate on ‘Health, Education and the Economy’. Let’s take these points in turn:

The political elites

If it is the political elites that reside in Cardiff Bay, why is it that according to recent polling carried out by YouGov and the Insitute of Welsh Politics almost two to one of respondents believe that the Assembly should have more influence over governing Wales than Westminster, let alone the fact that the current UK Cabinet does not have a single Member representing a Welsh constituency?

‘The slippery slope to separation’

This referendum is not about independence. A Yes vote would not mean Wales ‘cutting itself off from the rest of the UK’, it would give us simpler, more effective government within a UK framework, and allow us to act swiftly for the benefit of our people and our communities.

Increased costs

As we have pointed out before, evidence published by the All Wales Convention shows that resources that are currently tied up in the inefficient and wasteful LCO process would be better spent on making laws more quickly and more clearly, and in a more joined-up way.

Health, Education and the Economy

Health and Education are fields already devolved to Wales. And yet, under the current flawed system, we have been unable to legislate fully on issues like improving the rights of mental health patients in Wales and providing safer school transport without wasting years in having to ask permission from Whitehall first. As David said this morning, why on earth wouldn’t we want these powers in Wales, especially given that the responsibility is already with the Assembly? In fact, the Assembly can only begin to properly concentrate on doing all it can to improve Health and Education once this mess is sorted out.

Finally, it was clear once again that True Wales has no answer when challenged on what positive benefits would be retained in the event of a No vote. The example of the smoking ban was proof enough of this – for the families of hundreds of people who lost their lives in the two years it took the Assembly to get powers on banning smoking this referendum is not about banal constitutional debate, or mythical political elites.

In a guest blog for Cymru Yfory, Political Commentator Lee Waters looks at the challenges facing the Yes campaign in the forthcoming referendum on the Assembly’s powers.

Though they present themselves as political innocents the No campaigners are sophisticated political operators.  And though opinion polls consistently show that they are out of touch with Welsh public opinion, once the date is named for a referendum they’ll be given an equal platform by the broadcasters.

So how should progressives deal with their backward looking pessimism?

1          It’s about the future

As flawed as the law making system is the referendum is not going to be about mechanics.  There are bags of evidence that the LCO system is not working but it is of little interest to most voters. There is little profit in getting drawn into opaque arguments about the Government of Wales Act.  The Yes campaign needs to focus on the future.

The No campaigners will dust off the Leo Abse playbook and conjure up the bogeymen of the past – the elites, the language fanatics, the constitutional obsessives who care little about bread and butter issues in their quest for an independent Wales.  But the Yes campaign must not be distracted by the dog whistle tactics of the 1970s.  We must frame the debate to be about the future and not the past.

Over the last decade the Assembly has gradually grown in stature and confidence.  A Yes vote will help take Wales forward, giving Wales a stronger voice.  It will give those we elect the tools to protect our communities from Whitehall indifference.

2          Hope not despair

We face tough times in the coming years and the Yes campaign must set out an optimistic vision for the future and contrast it with the backward looking message of the No campaign.

The choice is between a more confident Wales where young people don’t need to leave their communities in search of jobs and challenges, or a dependency culture where we look to others for solutions to our problems.

What is the vision of the future offered by the No campaigners?

3          The consequences of voting No

The majority of voters want to see devolution succeed, but the No campaigners want to hobble our Assembly.

They present a No vote in the referendum as a risk-free venture.  Defeat the elites, says Oxford-educated Rachel Banner, and let Assembly Members carry on as they are.  But staying as we are is not an option.  If Wales votes no to the proposals for modest reform, the Assembly’s ability to stand up for Wales will begin to unravel.

We already know that London officials need little excuse to sideline Welsh affairs. If there is a no vote the slow and complicated system of law-making will get even worse. The holes in the devolution settlement will be systematically exploited as Whitehall mandarins feel they have a green light to frustrate the Assembly’s requests. 

So the status quo is not an option. Forward or back, that’s the option. And let’s not pretend otherwise.

It is good to see that David Cameron and the UK coalition government intend ‘respect’ to be the hallmark of its relationships with devolved governments. In Wales the agreement to ‘take forward the Sustainable Homes Legislative Competence Order’, which the Conservatives in opposition had managed to block, may be an indication of that respect.

The proposals on funding for Scotland and Wales however suggest that the former is to be accorded more respect than the latter.

On page 28 of the Programme for Government document we read that ‘we will review the control and use of accumulated and future revenues from the Fossil Fuel Levy in Scotland’. That’s pretty unequivocal, and the advantage to the Scottish Parliament’s budget is likely to be substantial.

Not so the issue of the demonstrable injustice of the current funding arrangements for Wales. The ‘concerns expressed by the Holtham Commission’ are recognised (which is some way short of accepting the substance of Holtham’s findings), but action to correct the injustice must await ‘the stabilisation of the public finances’ which, need one emphasise is likely to take a long time. The spin that the ‘priority must be to reduce the deficit’ is of course is irrelevant: correcting an injustice in funding terms is as important in times of scarcity as it is in times of plenty – indeed it is probably more so.

The gross inequity in the funding for Scotland and Wales under the Barnett formula has a long pedigree. Those interested in the story should read Tomorrow’s Wales’s evidence to the Holtham Commission and the House of Lords Barnett Committee of Inquiry. It has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with the comparative esteem in which Wales and Scotland are held by the UK Government.

What has this to do with the forthcoming referendum and the issue of proper law-making powers of the National Assembly? Quite a lot, it seems.  The Coalition’s Programme for Government document also says, ‘Depending on the outcome of the forthcoming referendum, we will establish a process similar to the Calman Commission for the Welsh [sic] Assembly.’ (Calman considered issues of  funding as well as further powers for the Scottish Parliament.)

Try breaking the code and you might get something like: ‘We shall see from the result of the forthcoming referendum whether you Welsh deserve to be taken seriously and your grievances addressed’.

It looks as if a resounding Yes vote is vital, not just to get a more effective, more democratic system of government for Wales, but to get at least some of the extra cash we need to protect us in what promises to be a time of hardship.

If, as Len Gibbs of ‘True Wales’ suggests (29 May), the population as a whole has a poor understanding of devolution, then his letter to the Western Mail on the referendum question will not have done much to enlighten it.

There is no hidden agenda here. The referendum cannot, and will not, offer independence or autonomy. It cannot, and will not, provide law-making powers in any area of policy other than those already under the Assembly’s responsibility. Those areas of policy are already fixed and are not up for debate.

The choice before the people of Wales is this: either we stick with a system where the Assembly has to keep asking Westminster’s permission to pass legislation in policy areas already devolved to it OR we change to a system where the Assembly can simply legislate in those same specific fields without wasting tremendous amounts of time, money, patience and good will.

The reason for people’s alleged confusion about devolution is precisely the same reason that the referendum question is so difficult to frame – we need a simpler system, and a yes vote in a referendum will provide it.