Next you’ll be saying that we should rename Abergavenny “Mouth of the River Gavenny”, or Dartford to “Oak River”, or Glasgow to “Green hollow”. That is what they might mean (translated from original Brythonic/Welsh), but they’ve never been called by their English meaning. Ridiculous.

If you really can’t read them, you shouldn’t be driving.

But bilingual traffic information signs are unreadable at normal driving speed.

They are distracting and hazardous.
Surely on safety grounds alone these should be in the language spoken by the majority.

There’s nothing ‘faux’ in my being offended. And it’s chicken and egg. If I hadn’t been offended, I wouldn’t have written the blog post, and it wouldn’t have led to this interesting discussion.

“In 97, many Labour and Lib Dem supporters refused to get involved in the official ‘yes’ campaign in Swansea and instead worked within their own party structures. Such people should be encouraged to do so, as it is far bettter for them to be involved than not at all. This may well be the path for Glyn”

Factually correct and agree with you entirely.

I accept that you would think that.

I have my reasons and evidence for saying what I believe. You are right that there is some great debate on this (albeit not all strictly related to the title) and I wouldn’t want to drag it down. However, there must be a way that I can respectfully point out the elephant in the room.

Whilst a select group of people are free to have their ‘high-brow’ discussions on this website, they do need to know that the things being said here could not be further from the reality of what the man or woman on the street thinks…. well certainly not my street anyway.

This has been an excellent debate and as somene who was up to his neck in the 97 campaign, it is not a debate that we could have had then, without accusations of ‘all sorts’.

Glyn is being a little pre-emptive in deciding whether or not he should be involved in a ‘yes’ campaign, as no-one really knows what shape it will take. Yet, I do anticipate an all party campaign that will be far more inclusive than previously held. I welcome this approach but see dangers in unity. For starters, we must involve individuals from outside the political spectrum. As much as I dislike the ‘celebrity’ culture that influences society, it is far more significant than it was in 97 and far more likely to swing a public deeply cynical about anyone resembling a politician.

We will also have to take account of individuals who while being supporters of the confirmation of powers, will find it impossible to work alongside fellow ‘yes’ supporters who they loathe. In 97, many Labour and Lib Dem supporters refused to get involved in the official ‘yes’ campaign in Swansea and instead worked within their own party structures. Such people should be encouraged to do so, as it is far bettter for them to be involved than not at all. This may well be the path for Glyn and I’m sure that it has nothing to do with Lembit!

As a final thought, I hope in future that people read all the thoughts of such topics, before being ‘offended.’

Back in 97 the political parties worked through Yes for Wales to varying degrees. For example, Labour had its own machine run by Andrew Davies and though some Labour people – and quite senior ones – joined and were active in YfW, it wasn’t an exclusive or excluding arrangement. I can well anticipate this happening again in 2010-11 but since I won’t be one of the people planning the Yes campaign this time, it’ll be up to those that deliver that function to work out the boundaries. Though it would be odd if a multiple approach isn’t permitted, I’d imagine that Glyn, for example, would feel more comfortable doing his own thing through a network of pro-more powers Conservatives.

Similarly, will there be a single No campaign? But that’s a matter for them.

But what has happened here does raise questions about how the Yes Campaign should work, as you clearly think what has happened here has “crossed a line”. In particular the question is to what extent it should be a centralized campaign, as opposed to an “interlocking network” of campaigns sharing the same goal. Is there more strength in being united, or would it be better to let groups form that could draw in new people who would feel uncomfortable in a centrally organized, overtly “political” group? In particular I’m thinking of younger people who very definitely tend to want a Wales with more autonomy, but are disillusioned with the political process to the extent that they tend not to vote … and that applies to more than just young people, of course.

Not wanting to pick on Glyn Davies, but he has said that he does not want to join “the” Yes Campaign, even though I have no doubt he will put all his efforts into doing his part on his own or in a smaller group. I think (reading between the lines, and I may be wrong) that he must have some suspicion that the Yes Campaign might be fought too much on party lines. And I have said here that I think it might be a justified concern given some of the things Peter Hain said a few months ago.

You, Daran, have more experience of being at the centre of a Yes Campaign than anyone. Perhaps it might be worth starting a thread on the pros and cons of various approaches we might take … or at least what lines we should not cross.