Plaid Cymru’s Dafydd doesn't want to lord it up

Jan 28 2008 by Martin Shipton, Western Mail

PLAID CYMRU’S former president last night stressed he does not want to be called Lord Wigley, despite winning an internal party election for a seat in Westminster’s second chamber.

Members of Plaid’s ruling national council gave Dafydd Wigley top place when they voted for three nominees for the House of Lords.

Mr Wigley represented Caernarfon as MP and AM for a total of 29 years until 2003. He had two stints as party president, and currently holds the title honorary president.

The other two successful candidates from a shortlist of six were Plaid’s economics adviser Eurfyl ap Gwilym, vice chairman of the Principality Building Society, and Janet Davies, the former leader of Taff Ely Council who served two terms as AM for South Wales West until she stepped down from the Assembly last year.

The unsuccessful candidates were Plaid’s former chief organiser, Dafydd Williams, the party’s office manager at Westminster, Rhian Medi Roberts, and the chair of Gwynedd County Council, Meinir Owen.

The party overturned its longstanding objection to taking seats in the House of Lords because of recent constitutional changes brought about by the Government of Wales Act 2006, under which the Assembly Government can seek permission from both Houses of Parliament to legislate in defined areas.

“I don’t want to be known as Lord Wigley,” said Mr Wigley, although he accepted he would have to be given a formal title with a geographical element and that a coat of arms would have to be created.

“I will need to have conversations with the officials responsible, and before I’ve done that I don’t think there’s any point on speculating how things may turn out.”

Mr Wigley said the only reason he was now prepared to go to the House of Lords after previously turning down a peerage on at least three occasions was because of the “constitutional disgrace” under which the Upper House now has an absolute veto over legislative proposals coming from the democratically-elected Assembly.

He said, “As the Western Mail pointed out in a recent editorial, the Lords now has more power over specifically Welsh legislation than it has had since the Parliament Act was passed in 1911.

“The Lords can veto Welsh legislation in a way it cannot veto legislation for England.

“That is a constitutional disgrace, but made it essential that Plaid Cymru had people in the second chamber to argue the case for the Assembly Government and Wales.”

Mr Wigley said there was an arguable case for Plaid to be given more peers.

“With the three of us and Dafydd Elis-Thomas [who accepted a peerage in 1992 when he stood down from the Commons] we now have four, but on the basis of Plaid’s electoral support a case could be made out for us having a total of six or seven members in the second chamber,” he said.

“I’m very happy with the team that has been elected. I think we will all bring different kinds of experience. Eurfyl obviously has a very strong expertise in economic policy and a great knowledge of the City. He is also a particular expert on the funding of the National Assembly and will be well positioned to argue for a change in the funding formula.

“Janet Davies has great knowledge of the environment and local government, having been both an AM and a council leader.

“Apart from the important job of safeguarding Wales’s legislative interests, I am also looking forward to resuming my parliamentary work on disability issues.”

Dr Eurfyl ap Gwilym, who costed Plaid’s manifesto for last year’s Assembly election, said, “From a personal point of view, going to the second chamber will provide me with a platform.

“For the last 10 or 15 years, I have been doing quite a lot or work behind the scenes advising the party’s AMs and MPs. I welcome the opportunity to have a platform of my own.

“I think we will have a challenge persuading members of the Lords to back some of the proposals coming from the Assembly.

“They don’t like the fact that they can’t amend them. I would hope we could establish a convention under which they agree not to block legislative proposals based on manifesto commitments, as they do with Bills coming from the Commons.”