Viva el presidente?

Blogging Assembly Members are claiming a victory in a battle with presiding officer Lord Dafydd Elis-Thomas against 'censorship’ of their websites.
It's not been a good week for the PO who found himself at the centre of a row over a public snub for the Israeli ambassador.
Now AMs are ganging up against his plans to clampdown on their expenses.

Politicians sought legal advice from counsel in a row with the Assembly Commission, which is led by the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy AM, over the use of office expenses to air their views on the internet in blogs.
The legal advice said new rules set out in the official guidance would not satisfy the requirements of the Human Rights Act because they lack ‘clarity and certainty’.
Counsel concluded that the commission would also be vulnerable to judicial review if it imposed the guidelines on AMs.
And any decision to refuse an allowance would also be open to legal challenge.
AMs complained that the new rules effectively gagged 'political' content on the blogs if funded via their expenses, or administrated by their staff.
Counsel warned that the commission’s guidance ‘seems to lack any logical basis and to be unworkable’.
“These difficulties are of a scale that I advise that a claim that the guidance was in breach would probably succeed and certainly the prudent course is to avoid any proceedings.
“If all political activity is prohibited how can that be distinguished from Assembly business: is there a category of Assembly business which is clearly not political?”
Rhondda AM Leighton Andrews, who called for the counsel’s opinion, said: “This is a victory for common sense and freedom of speech.
“All AMs are able once again to communicate openly and honestly with their constituents, without fear of repercussion.”
The Assembly Commission confirmed it would now consult on replacement
guidelines..
A commission spokesperson said: “The commission’s right to place restrictions on the content of AMs’ web-sites paid for by public money has been supported by independent legal advice but legal criticism of the particular guidelines issued means that they will have to be withdrawn, redrafted and consulted on.”