| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Hain: I expect that it does. It is valuable that my right hon. Friend has put that on the record. He made the point powerfully.
Mr. Livsey: May I thank the Minister for his announcement about SRM materials and expenditure? It was a helpful statement.
Mr. Hain: I am grateful for that kindly intervention.
Amendment No. 520 relates to the functions of the WDA and its organisational structure. Although I appreciate the concern of the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, and that of his hon. Friends, I cannot agree that the level of detail is a matter for legislation.
I understand and share the view that the needs of rural areas throughout Wales should be very much part of the focus of the exercise of enlarging the agency's functions that we are undertaking. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already spoken of his wish to see a rural policy unit established within the agency, possibly to be located within one of the regional directorates. It is inconceivable that the rural policy unit--this may be of particular interest to the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Öpik)--could be located in Cardiff. It is a matter for the agency, which is currently reviewing all those issues.
My hon. Friend the Member for Clwyd, West was concerned that there might be a lack of focus for the new agency, and that agriculture may lose out as a result. I can assure him that that should not happen. I hope that all that I have said so far will go towards ensuring that it does not.
There is a problem with ring-fencing. Although my hon. Friend raised the matter, the hon. Member for Ynys Mon (Mr. Jones) replied adequately to it.
It is important that we do not compartmentalise rural policy. One of the advantages of the proposals, as my hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Mr. Caton) said, is that rural policy will assume centre stage in the economic powerhouse. Instead of being confined to one particular but important part of Wales dominated by agriculture, it will be part of the major strategic objectives of the agency as it drives forward its economic strategy, as set by the assembly.
The hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) asked constructive questions--I must stop praising him, as it will get him pushed off the Front Bench--about regional aid and the definition. Those important points are relevant to Wales's needs, where gross domestic product is, of course, the key factor, and where there is much hidden joblessness. We are pursuing this vigorously with the European Union.
The hon. Gentleman also asked whether the WDA's remit sufficiently covered rural areas. I think that it does, but it will be for the assembly to hold the new agency to account and ensure that it does. I am confident that, with huge representation from rural areas, that will occur. He asked why the Wales tourist board is not coming under the powerhouse agency. I am not sure that that is a matter for this debate. We decided that the tourist board has enormous responsibilities in the coming two years with the summit, the World cup and other initiatives. It will, of course, be for the assembly to decide whether some reorganisation is necessary or desirable in future. We have set clear new targets for investment to spread not just westward but up the valleys and into much of the neglected rural areas.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli raised important points about money. There will be a budget of £200 million for the new powerhouse agency, bringing together the existing budgets. He raised important points about extending powers and social development functions to all areas. That will have to be taken into account by the assembly. His points will be carefully examined.
All the points raised by the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire will be addressed in the assembly's economic powers. In the light of those comments, I hope that the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy will withdraw the amendment.
Mr. Llwyd:
We have had a good and useful debate, although I believe that the Minister is wrong about agriculture. However, his response has been positive and I therefore beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
It being half-past Eight o'clock, The Chairman, pursuant to the Order [15 January] and the Resolution [this day], put forthwith the Question necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded at that hour.
Clause 118 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 119 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Schedule 9 agreed to.
Clause 120 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Question proposed, That this schedule be the Tenth schedule to the Bill.
Mr. Denzil Davies:
We have already debated schedule 10 in relation to the definition of the word "business". My hon. Friend the Minister was asked why it was necessary to include
I hope that my hon. Friend will be able to say why it is necessary for
The WDA then moved to some kind of partnership agreement, although I was never quite clear what the difference between a joint venture and a partnership was. Those agreements are probably illegal as well. I do not know whether this is an attempt to cure that illegality--probably not--but will my hon. Friend explain why it is necessary to have the
Mr. Rowlands:
I have listened to my hon. Friend the Minister's replies to a succession of amendments and watched the extension of the WDA's role, and I want to enter a caveat. I understand that the economy and the world are changing, but one of the qualities of the WDA was its industrial focus. I can remember the old-fashioned standard industrial classifications. Do I now understand that all that has been swept aside?
Mr. Hain:
My hon. Friend the Member for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney (Mr. Rowlands) asks a relevant question. We have defined business in a broad way--as we saw in the previous debate, agriculture is included in a certain context--precisely to recognise that, with the development of modern economies, there is a great deal of overlapping between the different areas, which previously may have been segmented off into traditional categories. We wanted to ensure that the new powerhouse drove forward the Welsh economy and that it had sufficient functions and powers to deal coherently with all the different sectors of the Welsh economy.
I reassure my right hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies) that there is certainly no intention to introduce any back-door method of legitimising illegal agreements. He is right to suspect that that is not the case. I am sorry that I did not respond to the question earlier,
but I did run out of time. The specific reason why Government Departments or any local or other public authority are included is that it may be necessary, as happens in the case of local authorities, for them to enter into an agreement with a private operator or a joint consortium. I think, for example, of waste management companies. They may then receive WDA support or advice or business services. The same is true for a Government Department. We wanted to ensure that we allowed the new powerhouse to engage in such activity and not be prevented from doing so. That is the purpose of including the reference in the schedule.
Question put and agreed to.
Schedule 10 agreed to.
Clause 121 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Hain:
I beg to move amendment No. 490, in page 104, leave out lines 42 to 44.
"the activities of any government department or any local or other public authority"
in the schedule. The Committee will recall that "business" is now defined not only as
"activities (whether or not with a view to profit)"
but as the
"activities of any government department or any local or other public authority".
25 Feb 1998 : Column 444
I do not criticise my hon. Friend for not dealing with the matter, because time ran out. However, I, the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) and others asked why on earth a Government Department, perhaps Her Majesty's Treasury--who knows, the public sector borrowing requirement may flip over again; we do not know--should stand outside the WDA with a tin can looking for money. This is a drafting matter. Why is it necessary to include a Government Department? I can understand the need to include a local authority a little better than a Government Department, but why is it necessary to include a public authority?
According to the definition, everyone in the world will now be able to rattle a tin can to obtain money from the WDA. The difficulty is that it has only £200 million. We were told that if it is to satisfy all the requirements built into the legislation, the money will have to come from somewhere else.
"any government department or any local or other public authority"
to be included in the definition as recipients of money. It may well be that this is a back-door way of legitimatising the joint venture agreements that the WDA had with local authorities. They were clearly illegal right from the beginning. It was not necessary to pay the large sums that some councils did to silks in Wales to tell them that they were illegal.
"activities of any government department or any local or other public authority"
included in the definition of "business"?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |