He wonders if Peter Black posted an apology of sorts. He can get this from me – I’m sorry. Sorry he couldn’t convince his party to stick to the promises it was elected on, I’m sorry that the good work he, Bethan, Leanne and others did couldn’t convince them. I’m sorry that it must have gutted them that their party leadership turned its back on its promise and that they will have to see their party suffer. It must be horribly frustrating, to have the agreement you negotiated ripped up. It’s a frustration and incandescence that teems from his letter to Jane Hutt.

I’m not going to apologise for agreeing with Adam that top up fees (and for that matter tuition fees) are iniquitous and the fear of debt will deter students from going to university. Peter has blogged today on the very real impact it is having on students. Like him I think it’s pretty disgusting, and like Bethan, I’ve got student debt. Somewhere in the region of 10k is hanging round my neck.

I’m also not going to apologise for recognising Adam is a talented politician. I realise getting that from an opponent is akin to the kiss of death so I won’t dwell on it for him. But it is what makes his actions over this consultation so surprising. I’m not contesting his authenticity in opposing fees, as I’ve outlined I agree with Adam there are good reasons to do so. He says that letter to Jane Hutt was leaked, surely he always expected that sort of blistering attack to be? Even if it wasn’t, he must have used FOI enough times to know it could come out that way. What struck me as surprising is that a politician had such grave concerns and is so talented yet didn’t write to the minister before the consultation concluded to say so. Maybe he told people from Plaid, but it’s fair to suspect that in response to my FOI they didn’t take those concerns on to the Minister. Judging by the near avalanche of messages I’ve had, I’d say I’m not the only one wondering this.

Again to be fair to Adam, it was a Plaid Special Advisor, Simon Thomas, who I have records of asking for an extension on the time frame – and he seems to have really pressed for it. It may well be these extensions were at the request of Adam (and others). I noted in my first post that Plaid has asked for this.

Kirsty has today asked Adam to contact her about forming a campaign coalition. I know these aren’t the first approaches a Lib Dem has made to Plaid – though that didn’t come from the leadership – and if Cymru X haven’t got an invitation to join the protest outside the Lib Dem debate then they will be shortly. I’ll be intrigued to see how, when or if he responds to Kirsty’s invitation. (As an aside, I love that both Kirsty and Adam decided to do this via new media)

I dearly hope such a coalition is formed and I hope it persuades the Government to stick to the agreement on which it was formed. Unfortunately, I think they are unlikely to be successful. I’m hazarding a guess here but Adam knows the same. He can see the oncoming electoral train from the Liberal Democrats with students and young people voting against them as they feel let down. As Adam notes Plaid lost Ceredigion to the Lib Dems, Simon Thomas at the time blamed it on those ‘student voters from England‘*. In a years time I strongly suspect that they’ll be able to add let down former Plaid supporters to that list as students in places like Swansea West switch. If we let them carry on thinking they could trust Plaid, then the Lib Dems would have something to say sorry for.

For the record – and I think it’s important the difference is made – I’m not blogging as the PPC for Cardiff West I stood down nearly a year ago. I don’t hold a single external facing role in the party. One of the boons of FOI is that it’s easier for people who don’t work in the assembly to get information about it.

* yes its the same Simon Thomas who is now a SpAd. That blog is an especially bitter read.

Related posts:

1. Facing two ways
2. Plaid’s distraction techniques will not wash with Welsh students
3. Labour and Tories will leave students with £44,000 debts says Clegg