| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Hague: My hon. Friend is right. It is a novelty and it will happen in Scotland and Wales. It will be a popular procedure, it will be widely appreciated and it will enable
my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to point to the many successes of Government policy and the improving situation in so many aspects of the Welsh economy, to which Opposition Members are always determined not to refer.
Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East): Although he was a youngster at the time, the Secretary of State may recall that in 1979, after the referendum, the incoming Conservative Secretary of State, Lord Crickhowell, said that he would consult about various proposals, including a forum for Wales. It was assumed at the time that specific legislative proposals--institutional proposals--would follow. Sixteen years have passed; this is it. If it is a revamped talking shop, it is a peripatetic talking shop. Surely it will go down in the "Guinness Book of Records" as the longest recorded gestation period of a mouse.
Mr. Hague: What we are seeing is a genuine attempt to improve the workings of the Welsh Grand Committee. At present, its workings are not regarded as satisfactory by people on either side of the House or any party in it. We shall be able to make the proceedings of the Committee more meaningful and more topical, and to ensure that a greater variety of matters can be raised and that particular constituency matters can be raised. Those are proposals that deserve a warm welcome in the House.
Mr. Ian Bruce (South Dorset): Will my right hon. Friend confirm that those changes in the Standing Orders of the Welsh Grand Committee mean that more subjects can be raised--indeed, all subjects to do with the United Kingdom? Perhaps more importantly, can he contrast the cost of that sort of Welsh Grand Committee with that of a directly elected Parliament, which would have no more powers than the Committee would have anyway?
Mr. Hague: My hon. Friend is right. A far greater range of topics can be raised, and they can be raised by Welsh Members of Parliament in their role as Members of Parliament in this House in the United Kingdom Parliament. Such proceedings will have an additional cost, but the cost of having a completely separate assembly for no obvious purpose would be vastly greater. The direct costs to the taxpayer would be vastly greater, as well as the costs to the Welsh economy in lost inward investment and jobs, from the people who would be frightened away by the prospect of a fracturing of the United Kingdom-- or the Balkanisation of the United Kingdom, as one Opposition Member referred to it not long ago.
Mr. Ted Rowlands (Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney): Even in these modest proposals, is it not an assumption that there are distinctive policies that should be followed in Wales for the needs of Wales? If, as a result of all his listening, the Secretary of State finds out, for example, that nursery vouchers have no support in Wales, will he be willing to change the policy?
Mr. Hague: Of course, there is often a need for distinctive policies in Wales. I and my predecessors have pursued distinctive policies, which are different from policies for England in several respects. The Welsh Grand Committee is an additional forum for discussing what those differences should be.
Mr. Alan Williams (Swansea, West): The Secretary of State's proposals are to be welcomed in the spirit that any
change is bound to be preferable to what we have at the moment. In pursuit of his greater topicality, why is he introducing a system in which, unlike on the Floor of the House where questions can be tabled two days before, he will require 10 sitting days' notice, which is two calendar weeks?
In addition to the minimum four meetings that the right hon. Gentleman specified, will he consider the possibility of another four, to consider the reports of the Select Committee on Welsh Affairs, which are never debated?
Finally, since he refuses to let the Committee have any legislative functions, does he recognise that, although legislation is not separate for Wales in most instances, there are Welsh dimensions, so the Welsh Grand Committee could provide a useful function as a Special Standing Committee? We could hear evidence from experts and others on the Welsh aspects prior to dealing with legislation on the Floor of the House.
Mr. Hague:
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his constructive welcome for the proposals. On oral questions, the rule would be the same as it is on the Floor of the House, that is, 10 days' notice of an oral question. Written questions can, in any case, be submitted for answer in two days or more and the proposal will not interfere with that procedure. I envisage that there would be scope for supplementary questions at the meetings and not merely for the questions tabled on the Order Paper.
As to the other subjects that could be debated, for instance the Select Committee reports, there need be no restrictions, as there are no restrictions now, on the subjects that the Committee could discuss. That would be for discussion between the usual channels. Of course, members of the Grand Committee must have a say in what the business of that Committee should be. I envisage that the two, three or more meetings that will be additional to the four timetabled meetings would be used to discuss some of the matters to which the right hon. Gentleman referred.
Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones (Ynys Mon):
Is not the Secretary of State aware that this timid little mouse of a statement is totally irrelevant to the needs of the people of Wales? He needs to address his mind to the enormous democratic deficit in our country, given that he is a member of a Government who have been rejected four times since 1979. Is not it right that the people of Wales, far from wanting a tarted-up talking shop like his proposal, are looking forward to the day when they can have a real Parliament in which real decisions are taken-- a Parliament with legislative powers that will respond to the wishes of the people of Wales, not those of a Conservative Government who have been rejected by them?
Mr. Hague:
The hon. Gentleman and I have an obvious difference of view: I believe in the United Kingdom and he does not. I believe that the Government of the United Kingdom are elected by the people of England, of Scotland, of Wales and of Northern Ireland, and that that should continue to be the position. I do not think that we shall be able to reconcile that fundamental difference of view, but I would have hoped that the hon. Gentleman could have found it in himself to give a stronger welcome for what will be a distinctive improvement in the workings of Parliament for Welsh Members. They will be able to raise a wider range of issues and more
Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West):
Has the Secretary of State noticed what happened on the two most recent occasions on which public opinion in Wales was measured? Conservatives managed to win 4 per cent. of the council seats, and at the Islwyn by-election they secured 3.9 per cent. of the total vote, narrowly beating the Natural Law yogic flyers and Lord Sutch's Loony party. Now that the Conservatives have established themselves as the prime loony party in Wales, how can they claim the right to dominate Welsh legislation-- legislation that affects Wales alone? When 85 per cent. of Welsh Members signed amendments to Bills on the Welsh language and on Welsh local government, their opinions were swept aside by the dominance of Members from other parts of the United Kingdom, whose constituents were not affected in any way by the legislation. Is not that a travesty of democracy?
Mr. Hague:
The hon. Gentleman knows that we all live and work in a United Kingdom Parliament. If he does not believe in a United Kingdom Parliament--and that is the implication of what he is saying--he had better say so.
Mr. Flynn indicated dissent.
Mr. Hague:
I think that the hon. Gentleman does not believe in a United Kingdom Parliament; we have got that clear, because he is shaking his head. Those of us who believe in a United Kingdom Parliament--I happen to think that the great majority of the people of Wales believe in one--should be concentrating on ensuring that that Parliament works well. My proposals will ensure that it works better for Welsh affairs.
Mr. Peter Hain (Neath):
Surely the announcement is a panic reaction to the overwhelming support for Labour's policy for an elected assembly in Wales. [Laughter.] Yes it is. Why does not the Secretary of State admit that he is adopting the same old English establishment approach to demands for constitutional reform? We have seen that reaction over votes for working-class citizens and over votes for women. First, people deride such demands as loony. Then, when the pressure keeps coming, they resist forcibly. Then they try to buy the protesters off, which is what this pathetic proposal is about. Finally they cave in, and when they have done so, nobody ever admits to having opposed the demands in the first place. Why does not the Secretary of State short-circuit that miserable process and grant the Welsh people's demand for an elected assembly now?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |