Frontline services are of course very important – hospitals, schools, social services, are all essential services that people expect to be funded by government; they are services that people rely on. However, there are spheres in our society that also deserve support because of the enriching texture that it brings to our daily lives; the added value that comes from performance, creativity and history, generates well-being, which gives quality to our lives.

Funding of heritage and the arts is an important part of British culture. To allows us to explore ourselves and our cultural identity. I’m not going to get drawn into a debate on how much the state should fund or about whether we have the right balance of funding, between state subsidy and philanthropic patronage. What I will say, is that the current model of government money channelled to independent, arms-length bodies, who make the final decisions on where that money should go, is the right one. But there has to be some remit guidance from government as to how that process should operate – so that everyone involved in that process is clear as to what is expected - this is vital to ensure equality. Moreover, there has to be some strategic rationale regarding wider government policy and how funding organisations that aim to deliver the goals of inclusivity, innovation and aspiration, is a social mission that helps transform society and benefits its citizens.

The Hijinx Theatre Company, is one such company that for me, ticks all the boxes of marrying strategic policy goals with the creation of innovative, challenging and high quality artistic production. The unique and excellent work of Hijinx is well known; not just in the capital but across Wales. The inclusive and respectful way in which it operates is exemplary, offering each performer – both able and those with special needs – a real sense of achievement and fulfilment.

Yet, I was astonished that the Arts Council for Wales has slashed its budget by 40% and has done so without any clear explanation why it has taken such a decision. I am of course, very aware of the constraints on public sector budgets due to the unprecedented legacy left by the previous UK administration. However, for a government body that received only a 4% reduction in its programme funding to inflict a 40% cut on one of its funded organisations, is out of step with the rest of its budget allocation and does not make any rational or strategic sense.

I am certainly not the only Assembly Member unhappy with treatment of Hijinx. I think the Arts Council must come forward and justify its decision to reduce the funding for Hijinx by such a considerable amount. But more importantly, the Assembly Government needs to clarify the remit guidance that it provides the Arts Council, to ensure that each organisation that applies for funding is treated equally and that each decision that is made is independently evaluated to ensure absolute fairness to all.

Yesterday I suggested, somewhat tongue in cheek, that in addition to voting perhaps we ought to allow prisoners the chance to leave the boundaries of their environment to undertake their Christmas shopping. In some respects I was also making a point about the absurdity of allowing prisoners to vote.

Voting is a right enjoyed in a free democratic society. It sits alongside many other rights which we enjoy, such as the freedom of association, the freedom to attend educational institutions, to pursue work and leisure opportunities. It is everything associated with our freedom which is at risk if we commit an offence which results in a prison sentence.

Voting at elections is part of the freedom and for these reasons I am baffled as to how the Government, at the insistence of the European Court of Human Rights, can equate the removal of one of those basic freedoms with a spell in prison.

{In an earlier version of this blog I referred to the insistence of the EU. This was an error on my part as the ECHR although a European institution is not regarded as an institution of the EU, however its decisions set judicial precedence for the European Court of Justice and institutions of the EU are also bound to respect the convention.}

Many years ago I visited HMP Cardiff in an official capacity. It was a fascinating insight to what lay ahead for those on their way from Cardiff Crown Court. I also found it to be a terrifying experience. In many respects I have a strong constitution, but on leaving I found myself sitting quietly on the wall  in deep contemplation of what I had experienced.

To me the witnessing of what it meant to lose one’s liberty, to live perhaps briefly or for several years in such a restricted way summed up why prison is important. It’s not just about punishing those who commit crimes to ensure that the public can be safe, nor is it just about the prospect of rehabilitating criminals however important this is.

It is about the deprivation of liberty. The restriction placed on an individual as a reminder of what they had done and why the state has chosen to respond by insisting on a prison sentence.

A Government which reinstates one of the basic expressions of liberty and freedom starts to undermine what a prison sentence is all about.

In addition to the usual flannel which we expect in Ministerial statements about cooperation and collaboration and the like he added what to me is the most important statement on the future of education that we have seen from this administration. He said:

I will also be seeking views on a proposal to prevent an increase in the number of foundation schools. Each of these schools administers its own admissions, adding to the complexity of the local authority task of planning and providing school places. I therefore currently intend to prevent schools from changing category to become foundation schools, and to prevent any new foundation schools being established. This should retain the status quo in terms of the number of admission authorities, with the aim of ensuring that, as far as possible, local authorities are able to plan school places on a strategic basis.

The attitude of the Welsh Assembly Government towards Foundation Schools is clear in this ministerial statement. On this basis, regardless of the legal requirements of assessing an application to become a Foundation School, I am now fearful that Leighton Andrews is going to reject the application by Whitchurch High School to become such a school.

If the Assembly Government fail to support the High School it will lay the school wide open to a sustained attack by Cardiff Council who wish to damage what they have achieved. We need schools that are flexible, innovative and capable of determining their futures without the constant unnecessary interference of politicians and local education authorities.

I am challenging Leighton Andrews to confirm that he will be deciding the future of Whitchurch High School on the merit of their application, and the established framework within which such decisions are supposed to be taken, not on his ideological drivel spelt out in this statement today.

Families throughout Cardiff North want fairness from the Assembly Government, but I am afraid I do not trust the Assembly Government to deliver it.

I know that many people in that area will be delighted that those in the Welsh medium sector will get this investment; for many years the expansion of this sector has been based on taking over existing buildings that had been occupied by English medium schools. I admit that this isn’t the best way to provide the additional capacity.

In fact the construction of a new Welsh medium school is exactly what I and our Councillors in Whitchurch argued for there.

The Council’s original proposals for Canton are very similar to those published for Whitchurch, effectively a decrease in pupil places in English medium with an expansion to cope with demand in the Welsh medium sector. Our view was ignored by the Council who maintained that the options they published were the best, claiming that they couldn’t provide for an expansion to Welsh medium places without dealing with the “problem of surplus places” in the English schools.

The Council’s intention is to give Canton what we argued for in Whitchurch. I have always maintained that Whitchurch benefits from having excellent schools regardless of which language the children are taught. We have seen our community turn in on itself, fuelled by a Council so insensitive that it couldn’t see the pitfalls of designing the reorganisation in this way.

If the children in Canton can benefit from this investment, which I welcome, then so should the children in Whitchurch.

The most important aspect of the debate for me, is that the people of Cardiff have their say on whether they think this is a good idea for the future direction of the capital. I am a representative politician for part of the city but I am also a resident. My view is that the city would benefit significantly from having an elected individual, fully mandated by voters from right across the city that would provide clear lines of accountability, demarcated responsibility and effective leadership so that it is clear to everyone in Cardiff “where the buck stops”.

I am not saying by any means that Cardiff ‘must have’ an elected mayor. The case still has to be made and the details scrutinised. However, I would say that the current system that governs the process of triggering a possible referendum is so perverse it is putting the citizens of Cardiff at a complete disadvantage compared to the citizens of England’s largest cities like Birmingham or Manchester. I intend to develop this argument further in an article to WalesHome next week.

I would like to thank Dan O’Neill – the Echo’s own ‘Kairdiff Kid’ – for his recent article (18^th August) examining the prospect of an elected mayor for Cardiff. I do have a few observations regarding the points he made.

I would firstly say that just because some of America’s mayors ended up in prison isn’t a reason to shut down the debate from the outset. The situation in America is not just indicative of some of the people they elect but of a system that lacks scrutiny and rigor. You can’t just extrapolate and assume the same here. On that basis you’d scrap local county councils because of previous misdemeanours such as those experienced in the Vale of Glamorgan or Blaenau Gwent, where council leaders and members ended up facing criminal charges.

Secondly, Dan ridicules the notion of belief and idealism. Surely one of the reasons why turnout at elections has been dropping and a general distrust of the political class has been increasing is because politicians are seen as clones without idealism and belief.

Finally, he claims that business leaders and school heads shouldn’t become elected officials because they wouldn’t have served any apprenticeship. Why should politics just be left to those we regard as politicians? Surely there are some very impressive leaders and visionaries who have led in the field of business, education and the arts. Politics and governance cannot just be left to political hacks.

I look forward to the widening of this debate in the weeks to come. Ultimately, I believe that Cardiffians should be talking about the sort of city we wish to live in and the type of governance and leadership which would provide it.

Berman is deeply damaged by this.

He failed to persuade his colleagues, many of them in his own Council cabinet, that he should be their candidate at the 2011 Assembly election. Having led Cardiff Council since 2004 one would have thought he was their obvious choice having had the experience of running the capital city. This lack of confidence from his own party casts doubt on his own future at the helm of the capital city’s local authority.

Secondly and perhaps most seriously is that we still have a Council leader who had decided by applying to be an Assembly candidate that he no longer wanted his present job after next year. I have always believed that Berman lacked the vision and ambition for the capital city, it’s now obvious that he also lacks the stomach for the top job.

As the AM for Cardiff North I have long believed that the Lib Dems are only interested in their Cardiff Central stronghold, and Berman’s wish to represent one part of the city is further indicative of their and his mindset. Perhaps they should be reminded that Cardiff is made up of four constituencies, not just the one.

Over the past few months I know that many people throughout Cardiff have called into question the direction our capital city is heading and whether the leadership is strong enough to give the vision and ambition for the capital of Wales. The decisions taken, for example, over the transport infrastructure and the resulting chaos on our roads, the proposals to reorganise school places and close popular schools demonstrates the poverty of leadership that the people of this great city are having to experience.

Running a local authority is not just about collecting bin bags, for Cardiff it means having a leadership which can see where our capital city needs to be in the next 10 to 20 years. We simply don’t have this.

I do not believe that he can continue in his role, but if he does I hope the Lib Dems will at least show some guts by replacing him.

I mention 2011 without specifying the date because no-one seems to know whether the poll will be in May or June.

We have spent a lot of time recently debating when the people of Wales should be expected to make some really big decisions, on the Assembly’s powers and also when a referendum on changing the voting system for electing the House of Commons should take place.

Now that March seems to be the likely month for the powers vote we had all assumed that it would be full steam ahead for the Assembly election to take place as expected on Thursday May 5, 2011, but of course that would be too simple. Now that May 5 is being talked up as the UK referendum on whether we should have AV to elect our MPs, May 5 is now being talked down as the Assembly elections day. As the Secretary of State can alter the date of the Assembly elections it is being suggested that June could be the date.

I have a few issues with this.

Firstly and most importantly the UK poll on AV should not force us to shift the Assembly election day. The people of this country are more than capable of answering a question on changing the voting whilst also deciding on who their AM should be. The two issues are also separate, unlike the referendum on more powers which is understandably (hopefully) not going to be on the same day.

Secondly if the three polls go ahead in this way then we could see voter fatigue by June. In fact 3 polls within 3 months could really annoy people who would rightly question the cost of completely separating the three events. We also run the risk of getting too caught up in the mechanics of when and how, instead of focusing our efforts on what these polls mean for the public.

It is our chance to celebrate the bravery and sacrifice of the men and women who serve in our armed forces.

Armed Forces Day 2010 is is being celebrated in Cardiff so that the country will be able to honour the men and women who make up the Armed Forces community: from currently serving troops to Service families, and from veterans to recruits. The day is meant to be a celebration, in contrast with the more sombre Remembrance Sunday Parades and Armistice Day observances.

On Saturday civilian men and women will show our appreciation of those members of the armed forces that put their lives on the line every day for this country.

It will allow us the opportunity to give a heartfelt thanks for all those families who support fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, sons and daughters to serve their country on the frontline. It’s also an opportunity to show our solidarity with those families who have suffered losses in recent operations.

The families of our service men and women are the backbone of the British Armed Forces, it is right that we should remember them and their contribution in particular on this day.