| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mrs. Maria Fyfe (Glasgow, Maryhill): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Winterton: I shall give way, and then establish my position and that of the Committee.
Mrs. Fyfe: Although there may be some expressions of a backlash against devolution outside the House, has the hon. Gentleman noticed that, today, such a backlash has not been evident in the Chamber? Most hon. Members in this debate represent constituencies in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and the few English Members here do not seem to have seen the debate as an opportunity of expressing opposition to the consequences of devolution. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the way in which some of the media has attempted to stir up opposition to devolution has been very misguided?
Mr. Winterton: I shall allow hon. Members to draw their own conclusions on that matter and state my own position--which is that I do not support the cause of an English Parliament. Such an institution would weaken the Union. It would be too powerful and would steamroller the constituent parts. Moreover, I believe that it is harmful and artificial for nations to define themselves--and regard their national interests--as opposed to each other: the English, the Welsh, the Scots and the Irish must work together, both in Europe and in the world as a whole. Over the years, surely, the history of the United Kingdom has been one of intermarriage, mobility and flexibility.
I do not want to witness the further fragmentation--
Mr. Browne:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Winterton:
No, I shall not. The hon. Gentleman has spoken frequently.
Mr. Winterton:
I shall not give way to the hon. Member for Paisley, South (Mr. Alexander) either.
I do not want to witness the further fragmentation of the Union of the United Kingdom by the introduction of regional governments or assemblies. Regionalism, in my view, does not have a place in our country's history and traditions, and I most certainly hope that it will not have a place in the future of the United Kingdom. We must, however, find ways of being fair to England. The devolution settlement that we now have means that
Westminster Members--be they English, Scottish or Welsh--should not interfere in matters that are the responsibility of the devolved legislatures. We should recognise that, and I agree with it. However, I go further.
I believe--I think that this will be welcomed by many who support the Welsh national party, the Scottish National party and other national parties--that, although in principle Westminster retains the right to legislate on devolved matters, we should not exercise that right unless we are requested to do so. However, under that very settlement, Scottish Members of the United Kingdom Parliament may find themselves holding the balance of power when legislation dealing with England and Wales, or even England alone, is before the House of Commons, even when the legislation is on matters whose equivalents are devolved to Scotland or within the power of the National Assembly for Wales.
In other words, my esteemed colleague on the Committee, the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South, for example, may not be able to vote on the structure of local government in Scotland, whereas he may cast the crucial vote that determines the structure of local government in England. I say quite openly that surely that would not be fair.
Mr. Elfyn Llwyd (Meirionnydd Nant Conwy):
Does the hon. Gentleman remember chairing the Standing Committee's proceedings on the Welsh Language Act 1993, when he cast his vote against an amendment that I tabled on Welsh jury trials?
Mr. Winterton:
I do indeed. I also remember that, on every occasion, I attempted to introduce sittings that I was chairing in the Welsh language. I tell the hon. Gentleman, for whom I have great affection, regard and respect, that as he knows--and as the Deputy Speaker would be very quick to tell the House, if he were asked--as a Committee Chairman, I operate in accordance with precedent. Regardless of whether I liked the hon. Gentleman's amendment, I had to vote as I did, in accordance with precedent.
Mr. Winterton:
The hon. Member for Paisley, South is looking pregnant. Would he like to intervene?
Mr. Alexander:
I thank the hon. Gentleman for the gracious manner in which he gave way. Will he confirm that there has never been an occasion when the Conservative party has had a majority in England and Wales while Labour has commanded a majority inthe House throughout the United Kingdom? My understanding is that at no point during this century has that been the case. I welcome his concession of rejecting an English Parliament. Other than the physical architecture, what is the difference between an English Parliament and the proposals advanced by Conservative Front Benchers--of English votes for English laws?
Mr. Winterton:
I am not sure that I can give an answer off the cuff, although in the previous Parliament when the
Dr. Norman A. Godman (Greenock and Inverclyde):
And the Unionists.
Mr. Winterton:
As Chairman of the Procedure Committee, I am looking at how the procedures of the House are influenced by the devolution that has taken place. I do not wish to trade across the Floor of the House statistics relating to what the position might have been under a particular Government and what influence the Welsh Members, Scottish Members or, as the hon. Member for Greenock and Inverclyde (Dr. Godman) says from a sedentary position, Northern Ireland Members may have had.
It is no solution to say that the number of Scottish seats will soon be reduced and that it is extremely unlikely that the Scots will hold the balance of power as they did in the 1974 Parliament. I was there, although I was not very senior or very experienced. As the hon. Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Mr. Moore) said when the Scottish Affairs Committee gave evidence to our Committee--I paraphrase him--such matters are best dealt with before there is danger of conflict, when it is possible to determine them without rancour. Those were very wise words.
Debate is not a problem. We are a United Kingdom Parliament, even on matters that are of more concern to one part than another. We can learn from one another. That is why the Grand Committees should go. The English way of doing things may not be the best, hard though it is for me to say that, but this House is not just about debate--it is about taking decisions. That is very important. The procedures of the House must be seen to be fair on that. It is not just a matter of fairness to England. When we take decisions that affect a specific part of the United Kingdom, we need to have a system that gives Members from that area ample opportunity to have their say.
That brings me back to the points made by the right hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross. In our report we suggest--tentatively, as one colleague on the Committee may well add if he catches your eye,Mr. Deputy Speaker--that one way of giving Members from the region affected a say would be for Bills to be certified by Madam Speaker as relating exclusively to England, Wales, Scotland or, in due course one hopes, Northern Ireland. The normal presumption would be that such Bills would be debated in Committees containing a substantial proportion of Members from the area concerned. The Leader of the House seemed to feel that we were suggesting that all Members representing England would serve on such Committees. That is not the case. The Government would be able to override them, but if they did so it would be transparent and obvious to all. We do not pretend that that is the only solution or even the best that can be found, but I would be reassured to have some sign that the Government were also seeking solutions to the problems that I have outlined.
I am somewhat disappointed by the section of the Government's reply relating to legislation. In our report we made it clear that our proposals were tentative. We are
learning as we go into devolution. The Government have dealt with the detail of our proposal without addressing the concerns that underlie it. It could be argued that the gradual approach--it says that the future will be shaped in reaction to devolution rather than beginning by thinking about abstract concepts such as fairness--is an inherently English approach. It was Louis MacNeice--born in Belfast--who observed:
The Scots may have resented the influence of England in the United Kingdom and felt that their aspirations were thwarted by English domination. Now there is a danger that the largest and most populated part of the Union will feel itself controlled by the devolved Administrations. The issue of whether beef on the bone is safe to eat is, as it were, but a taste of things to come.
I want devolution to be a success. I do not want to have to echo Dr. Johnson and say:
"They don't want any philosopher-Kings in England".
I am content to accept a devolution settlement that leaves room for negotiation and adjustment, but there needs to be some concept of fairness underlying the development.
"Seeing England, madam, is only seeing a worse Scotland."
We need means for English Members to take those decisions that affect England alone. If we find such a mechanism now, we may avoid much unnecessary conflict in the future--and Parliament will be the better for it.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |