I READ both Mr J Cuthbert’s (Gwent Police and Crime Commissioner, Labour), and Mrs J Watsons AM’s (Labour), letters regarding Mr D Rowlands AM’s (UKIP) intent to engage in democratic dialogue, and their success in denying it at an event in the Assembly with growing amazement.   

Amazement in that Mr Cuthbert stated “I did not actually see Mr Rowlands speech” that he was to give. 

That’s right Mr Cuthbert did not know what Mr Rowlands would say, but supports Mrs Watson decision to disbar him on the spurious notion that she thought people at the event would have found his views “upsetting”.

Is this the bench mark for open democratic discourse in the Assembly, that people are refused to make fact based statements because they may “upset” those invited to an event? 

As the official UKIP cross party member in the Assembly on Modern Slavery, something both Mr Cuthbert and Mrs Watson strangely omitted from their letters, Mr Rowlands should have been allowed to speak regardless of who organised the event. 

Caroline Jones was to have spoken but rightly declined because Mr Rowlands is the party’s lead on this matter within the Assembly. 

Surely as members of the same party their comments would have been similar anyway?

Perhaps Mr Rowlands should organise an event in the Assembly on this issue, and allow anyone with a valid opinion to attend. 

I know that’s a hard concept to grasp in the Labour controlled Assembly, but you never know it might catch on.

Jonathan Williams
Talywain