Examination of Witnesses (Questions 300
- 320)
TUESDAY 30 MARCH 1999
MR MARTYN
JONES, MP,
DR JULIAN
LEWIS, MP,
MR RICHARD
LIVSEY, CBE,
MP and MR
ELFYN LLWYD,
MP
Mr Stunell
300. I do not think we should discuss the
conclusions of this inquiry until we have completed it, but we
should clearly listen carefully to the evidence we are given.
But if I can just come back to my point about second-guessing
the Welsh Assembly, it does seem to me that one of the things
which it is important to do, as you all said, to make sure that
it is a successful move forward, is to avoid that second-guessing,
and, therefore, the relations with the Welsh Affairs Committee
are important. I was not really clear, from the answers that you
gave, how you saw that proceeding; maybe that is because you yourselves
are not clear, it is a very provisional situation that we are
in. But what are the necessary measures, perhaps to put it the
other way round, to minimise the situations in which you are treading
on their toes, or you perceive them to be treading on yours?
(Mr Jones) I think, Mr Stunell, it is very important
that we get procedures in place, but, of course, until the Assembly
is up and running, that is only half of the marriage, so to speak;
until the Assembly Members decide themselves on how they want
to liaise then I think we are in the dark, to a certain extent.
But I think there is goodwill on behalf of the Committee that
we would want to do that, and that we see that as our role, rather
than scrutinising what the Assembly is doing, rather than, as
you say, second-guessing, and I think that we see our role as
Westminster helping the Assembly. Can I just say, Chairman, that
we had as one of our inquiries in terms of finding out what our
role should be, because we had not really thought about it, certainly
I had not, as the Chairman. Until I started thinking about it,
I did not think there was a role for this Committee, for even
the Select Committee never mind the Welsh Grand Committee, because
I thought that we are devolving this power that it should stay
there. But once I had thought about it for some time, and we put
it to the National Assembly Advisory Group, which was set up with
all the political spectrum within Wales to advise on Standing
Orders for the Assembly, basically, but we thought, well, they
were there, let us use them, and we put it to them, what we thought
our role might be, and they absolutely endorsed, totally, the
view that I have expressed to you, Chairman, about this pre-legislative
process, and to act as an all-party conduit into this place and
out of it again, in terms of the sort of legislation which might
be, if you like, imposed on Wales from other Departments.
301. That sounds admirable, but then we
have had the example of how your Committee was able to do a really
useful job, setting about the Cardiff Bay Corporation when they
took a silly decision; is there not going to be a considerable
temptation for you to set about the Assembly, if it is perceived
that they have done something with which you disagree?
(Mr Jones) There might be a temptation, but I
do not think we should give way to it.
Chairman
302. But there is, of course, good reason
for you to have the former duty, because, as you have said, the
Assembly does not have primary legislative powers, and therefore
this House retains primary legislative powers, and therefore you
must hold the Government of this place to account, as Select Committees
do, in my view, admirably. So I think you have certainly made
a very good case for the continuation of the Welsh Affairs Select
Committee, but I do not want to pre-empt our findings.
(Mr Llwyd) In response to what Mr Stunell was
saying just now, I do believe that it is vitally important that
the contents of the so-called concordats are known as soon as
possible, because I think they are vitally important, and we are
all, at the moment, in the dark; perhaps if we had read them before
we came here we would all be a bit wiser, and I think the sooner
they are out in the open the better.
Mr Darvill
303. Can we turn to the subject of questions.
Welsh Questions, as you know, currently last for 25 minutes, once
every four weeks, and we note, from your Committee, that the "direct
responsibility of the Secretary of State for Wales will be much
reduced and a Question Time limited to those matters would be
a dull affair." This is from your Committee. In response
to that, the Clerk of the House has suggested, and I think it
necessary for the report, Mr Chairman, to read this out: "Based
on past practice and on the desirability of encouraging the House's
activities to be focused on matters for which UK Ministers are
responsible, I suggest the following statement of practice for
the consideration of the Committee:" and it goes on to say:
"Subject always to the discretion of the Chair, and in addition
to the established rules of order on the form and content of questions,
questions may not be tabled on matters for which responsibility
has been devolved by legislation to the Scottish Parliament, the
Northern Ireland Assembly or the Welsh Assembly unless the question—(a)
seeks information which the UK Government is empowered to require
of the devolved executive, or (b) relates to matters which—(i)
are included in legislative proposals introduced or to be introduced
in the UK Parliament, (ii) are subject to a concordat or other
instrument of liaison between the UK Government and the devolved
executive, or (iii) UK Government ministers have taken an official
interest in, or (c) otherwise presses for action by UK ministers
in areas in which they retain administrative powers." Do
you think it would be acceptable if, in addition to matters within
the responsibility of Ministers, questions were permitted to seek
information which the UK Government is empowered to require or
relates to matters included in legislative proposals, is subject
to a concordat or is an issue in which UK Ministers have taken
an official interest or presses for action in areas in which UK
Ministers retain administrative powers?
(Mr Jones) Speaking personally, Mr Darvill, yes,
I do, but, knowing the way this place works, I think that questions
will be asked on practically anything a Member wants to ask, and
they will get round whatever barriers are put in their way; whether
they will get a sensible answer, of course, is another matter.
Perhaps my colleagues would like to comment.
(Mr Llwyd) I am going to say something now which
will undoubtedly anger the Chair. There will, of course, be more
opportunities for even more Members of Parliament from English
constituencies to ask questions during Welsh Questions. That is
meant as a joke, Mr Chairman, in case it gets you worried.
Chairman
304. I wondered why it should provoke me;
it did not provoke me at all.
(Mr Llwyd) I see you are number one tomorrow.
Chairman: Indeed,
I do have question number one, but I think that the Member for
Plaid Cymru knows only too well, at the moment, the Conservative
and Unionist Party is a little limited in respect of those that
can ask questions representing a Welsh constituency in the United
Kingdom Parliament.
Mr Darvill
305. Really, although we have gone through
the formal part then, what changes, clearly Members will use any
opportunity to get in, but there will be a different aspect in
either the way that Ministers answer questions or Members put
them, and how do you see that affecting the role of Members in
this House generally?
(Mr Jones) I think it is going to make it more
difficult for Welsh Members, inevitably, because although Mr Llwyd
said earlier that our constituency workload is going to be less,
frankly, I think it is probably going to be more, since most other
Honourable Members' surgeries are full of people wanting local
government matters dealt with by them, I think they are going
to come and ask us for Assembly matters to be dealt with as well,
and we will have a sort of—I do not think it will reduce
our role at all. I just think this question is probably one of
the most difficult questions you are having to deal with, the
question of questions, because the Secretary of State for Wales,
who will be the only Minister left, presumably, will have to answer
questions which will be put to him by Members and will get round
whatever barriers the Table Office try to put in their way, and
will expect a reply. I think that, like a lot of other things,
this is going to evolve in all kinds of ways we cannot even imagine
at the moment. I hope that we still maintain a Welsh Question
Time, even though it might be quite frustrating and sometimes
quite boring, because I think that, if only for primary legislative
purposes, we, as Members of the UK Houses of Parliament, will
want to know what the Secretary of State will be planning to legislate
in, for example; so that is one area which needs to continue.
Chairman
306. Julian Lewis, I know, wants to come
in on this?
(Dr Lewis) I think this question of the question
session with the Secretary of State is going to cause immense
difficulties in the future, because, even leaving aside the issue
of what gets through the Table Office, we all know that supplementary
questions have only got to be linked to the primary question by
the merest connection in order to survive. And I, for one, can
see an outcome where the Secretary of State is put on the horns
of a dilemma, when he is answering questions, he is either going
to have to say "I'm sorry, I mustn't answer this, this is
outside my remit these days", or he is going to have to go
outside his remit and risk, what Mr Stunell is so concerned about,
second-guessing and treading on the toes of the Assembly. And
whereas we, as a specialised, consensual, cross-party committee,
might be expected to exercise a considerable degree of restraint
in our proceedings, when we are moving in those delicate areas,
when one is in the adversarial, single-party, as it were, environment
of Question Time in the Commons chamber itself, that sort of restraint
will not be there.
Chairman: Would our
witnesses not think that the occupant of the Chair might be helpful
in indicating that a particular question was out of order and
should be re-worded to bring it within order? I know, because
I myself occupy the Chair from time to time, that the Speaker,
or Chairman of Ways and Means, or Deputy Speakers, might assist
in these matters, and that after a time the House perhaps could
be better trained to ensure that matters relating to devolved
responsibilities are not asked and only matters relating to the
responsibilities of the Secretary of State are. Clive, would you
like to add to this?
Mr Efford
307. Can I just add to that, because one
of the things which might blur the edges there is, of course,
the Secretary of State has a responsibility to liaise with the
Assembly, and if questions are couched in those terms then that
might blur the edges?
(Mr Jones) Yes.
(Mr Livsey) I think we have to recognise that
the Secretary of State has a function in Cabinet and also to the
Assembly, as has been mentioned, and I think that it should be
quite easy for the Chair to interpret what is a question that
is acceptable and what is not. And I think, by convention, that
will develop, and I think it will be quite a lively question session
that will result from that.
(Dr Lewis) I have no doubt at all that the Speaker,
or Deputy Speaker, whoever was handling the matter, would very
quickly master what was within and without the Secretary of State's
brief. What I am concerned about is that, in the chamber as a
whole, knowing the way in which the individual political parties
get a vast range of their backbenchers to put down questions,
you would find the Speaker having to intervene very frequently
to correct people who, in their supplementaries, had gone beyond
what was acceptable under the new order of things. And I think
it would be a very long time indeed before the vast majority of
backbenchers who would find themselves asking questions and supplementaries
on these subjects would themselves be sufficiently trained that
the Speaker was not constantly having to come into play to correct
them, and I think this would be an embarrassment.
Chairman: I am not
sure that Dr Lewis should have suggested that the party machine
gets backbench Members to table Parliamentary Questions.
Mr Gardiner: He obviously
speaks for his own, Chair.
Chairman
308. That is a most outrageous remark.
(Dr Lewis) I withdraw, Mr Chairman; nothing was
further from my mind.
(Mr Llwyd) I have to say, I picked up on that
as well, Mr Chairman, we do not have a vast range of Members either.
(Mr Livsey) Mr Chairman, there is one point, if
you will allow me, and it is this, that we have discussed what
would affect the Secretary of State and at Question Time the Secretary
of State; there are a number of other topics outwith the remit
of the Secretary of State, like rail services in Wales, like the
MoD, and matters of that kind, which obviously will have to go
through the normal channels here. But I am just pointing up, there
are a number of major issues which are not within the functions
of the Welsh Assembly at the present time and yet cause us great
concern.
(Mr Llwyd) And social security, of course.
309. Can I put a question to you, quite
a difficult one, I do not think we have tackled this precisely
yet. The Government envisages that legislation should continue
to be made for England and Wales, although, as a general principle,
the Government expects Bills that confer new powers and relate
to the Assembly's functions will provide for the powers to be
exercised separately and differently in Wales, and to be exercised
by the Assembly. Do you, as members of the Welsh Affairs Select
Committee, think that there is a case for increasing the amount
of legislation relating solely to Wales and providing special
Parliamentary procedures for it?
(Mr Jones) As you say, Chairman, it is quite a
difficult question. I think a lot of the questions that we have
been asked are crystal ball questions. I think that it is probably
inevitable that that will happen, I think that the legislation
produced by other Departments, other than the Welsh Office, which
will not exist, will tend to become split, I think that is probably
the case, because the legislation will have to recognise the role
of the Assembly, and I think even that, just that factor alone,
will create that, and I would think that evolution will create
the need for perhaps separate processes. I will see if I can give
another plug for the Welsh Affairs Select Committee, Chairman,
in its pre-legislative role, which Select Committees are, I think,
quite rightly, doing at the moment, in terms of the present Government's
policies, which I think are very good in this regard, that we,
as a Select Committee, or whatever this committee that we are
proposing is called, would have a role of a pre-legislative nature,
and that might actually influence Government later in the process
to actually produce separate legislation.
310. What I am trying to do is, and, again,
then perhaps Mr Llwyd can come back, go back to what we were discussing
some time ago, when you introduced the title of a territorial
committee, and you quite rightly pointed out that the Study of
Parliament Group suggested superseding the Welsh Affairs Select
Committee and the Grand Committee by a Welsh territorial committee.
What you are saying to us is that you would not particularly like
to go down that path, you would like, if anything, modestly to
expand the duties of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee, to take
in what the Study of Parliament Group thought could be dealt with
by a new committee, which was the Welsh territorial committee;
am I correct?
(Mr Jones) I think you have put it very nicely,
Chairman.
(Mr Llwyd) Just returning briefly, Mr Chairman,
to your question about the need for specifically Welsh legislation,
or whatever, of course, there is a precedent for it, because,
over the years, we have seen particularly Scottish legislation,
one, for example, White Paper being issued on the floor of the
House, and then the next one being for a Scottish model, and legislation,
very often, being substantially different, and also, of course,
in the context of the north of Ireland. So I do not think it is
going to create insurmountable difficulty, and I do believe there
will be a growing demand or need for it.
(Mr Livsey) Absolutely.
311. Thank you very much. There is one final
question I would like to ask, and then I am going to ask you if
there are any matters any of you would like to put to us, before
we bring the session to an end. And I suppose I can say this with
a certain equanimity, as I am an English Member of Parliament
and perhaps I am seeking, as Chairman of this Committee, your
views; it is really linking up to what we said about evolution,
to devolution, at the beginning of this meeting. Do you think
devolution in itself makes it desirable for new arrangements for
considering matters relating solely to England, and I would hope
you would go beyond what Richard Livsey, I think, said about regional
affairs committees for the regions of the United Kingdom; are
you concerned for England that they will not have the sort of
voice that Wales will have, following devolution, that Scotland
will have, with its new Parliament, and, of course, the people
of Ulster will have, in respect of their Assembly in Belfast?
(Mr Jones) Chairman, I think this is one we will
have individual opinions on, and I think it is something that
we have not considered as a Committee. I think there is a very
good case for English regional procedures, and it is something
I would certainly support.
(Mr Llwyd) I think that, in the European context,
the danger is that some regions of England will be left behind,
because, obviously, it is very much a lobbying process and a recognition
from Brussels of the need for action to be taken in a part of
the UK, or whatever; and I feel that it is almost inevitable that
there will be a tendency to regionalise within England. I would
go further than that and I would say that I would like to see
a Welsh Parliament, clearly, that is what our Party stands for,
but I also think, at some point, there will have to be the question
whether there will be an English Parliament as well, because,
inevitably, there is a Scottish Parliament, there may evolve in
the coming years, I would hope, a call for a Welsh Parliament;
at the same time, I think, following the regional route, pro
tem, on to, I hope, an English Parliament as well, and I sincerely
hope that we will all work very well in partnership.
(Dr Lewis) I go back to the remark I made earlier
about the coming of the large county councils under the Redcliffe
Maude reforms of the 1970s. I remember thinking at the time that
they were a bad idea and wondering how long they would last; they
lasted quite a long time, but eventually they were recognised
as being a bad idea and got rid of. In the meantime, my Party,
accepting the democratic mandate that they have, did its best
to stand for them and make them work. My view is exactly parallel
with this. I believe that the Welsh Assembly is a mistake; had
I still been resident in Wales I would have voted against it.
I believe it has a very slim and slender mandate from the people
of Wales to exist, it is in existence, I and my party will do
everything we can to make it work; but, at the end of the day,
I wish it had not happened and I would not wish to reinforce it
by having a parallel institution for England.
312. A very succinct presentation. Richard
Livsey?
(Mr Livsey) Mr Chairman, as an unashamed and unabashed
federalist, I see the situation as a multi-speed one at the moment,
as it would appear that Scotland has a Parliament, Wales does
not have a Parliament. I wish to see Wales having a Parliament,
with greater powers, and I believe that when one gets into that
situation, with regional government in England, which should have,
in my view, considerable powers, that will be the point where
Members of this House will vote purely on those regional matters.
But I think we are in an evolution, as someone has famously said,
in terms of a process, at the moment, which eventually will lead
to that.
Chairman: I can only
say, from the Chair, that you have, in those four briefish presentations,
just now, I think, highlighted the problems facing this Committee
in dealing with devolution. Are there any other matters that any
colleague on the Committee would like to put to our witnesses?
Keith Darvill.
Mr Darvill
313. Just a question of general debate;
do you think it would be practical, in this House, to restrict
to debate on devolved matters within the UK Parliament? I am thinking
about not only, we were talking about questions earlier, but of
course there is the question of Adjournment Debates, and so forth;
have you given any thought to that?
(Mr Jones) I think it would be practical; whether
it is actually advisable is something else again. We are still
the UK Parliament, even after May 7, and really it depends on
the Chair, not just our Chair here but the Chair of the chamber,
the Speaker, as to whether the view is taken to have as wide a
range of debates as possible. My own view is that I would be very
worried if those kinds of debates took the form of second-guessing
what the Assembly or the Parliament was doing.
(Mr Llwyd) I agree entirely with the Chairman's
view that there has to be a strict demarcation, otherwise there
will be debates in this House that cannot possibly have any possible
influence, so, in fact, virtually no point at all. And, worse
still, coming back to what Mr Stunell said earlier on, it is that
question of second-guessing or interfering with another competence,
and I would hope that the authorities will be fairly firm on this,
otherwise we will be going in all kinds of directions, without
really knowing where we are going.
314. So you would be suggesting that this
Committee, in its report, actually would be proposing some restriction?
(Mr Llwyd) I think that the other side of the
coin is this, is it not, that we will be having debates in this
chamber which necessarily conclude one way or the other, but those
conclusions are not enforceable, per se, by this chamber
because they are a matter of policy for another, and I find that
difficult to reconcile.
315. This is the nub of it. As a Committee,
we have got to consider in our report how the House will work,
and if debates are not answered properly, or they cover areas
which are in conflict with the Assembly, and that brings both
the Assembly or this House into disrepute, then we should be thinking
about it and covering it in our report; that is why I am interested
to see what your views are on this particular matter?
(Mr Livsey) To try to be helpful, Mr Chairman,
I think there ought to be a distinction drawn between topics,
issues, which clearly would be in the province of the Welsh Assembly,
and those matters which refer perhaps to individuals who have
received an injustice, or a matter of conscience, or a matter
of that type, or perhaps has been done down, who knows, by the
Department of Social Security, or something of that kind. And
I think it is possible to draw some guidelines along those sorts
of lines.
316. So you would think that we ought to
be considering guidelines from this Committee, or recommendations,
in that respect?
(Mr Livsey) I think it would be very helpful,
yes, I do.
Chairman
317. Another difficult task. Can I put a
final question to you, from the—Julian, yes, I had promised
you.
(Dr Lewis) Chairman, I think this is a very important
question, I am glad you have asked it, and I think it pinpoints
the sorts of difficulties here, because the logic of the situation
is, as I think you are suggesting, that there will need to be
some sort of restriction on what debates can be held at the Westminster
end, and I think that is very unfortunate, for two reasons. One
is, it is a very sad state of affairs, if we, in the United Kingdom
Parliament, cannot freely debate things that are going on in what
is still part of the United Kingdom; and, secondly, if there is
less debate of that sort in the Westminster Parliament, there
will be less understanding in the rest of the United Kingdom about
the concerns of Wales. But it is another of these dilemmas which
is inescapable from the process which was set in train by the
result of the referendum.
Mr Darvill: I was
not trying to imply any particular thing, I really wanted to hear
your views, so that we can consider all of them when we are making
our report.
Chairman
318. Chairman, to put to you a final question
from myself, in the long term, do you believe and your Committee
believe that it would be desirable to establish a constitutional
affairs committee of this House?
(Mr Jones) I think, probably, yes, Chairman, but
I would not like to subsume the Select Committee's role into that
committee, I think it would have to be a separate body, I think
it would not work otherwise.
319. This really would be, Mr Jones, to
enable this House, I put it forward as a suggestion, to monitor
the impact of devolution from all those other countries that are
part of the United Kingdom, which have one form or another of
devolved government, and, of course, to see the impact upon the
remainder of the Kingdom, namely England?
(Mr Llwyd) I think it is actually going to become
necessary, as time goes by, and I would add to that, of course,
the fact that we will have the Council of the Isles as well, which
is a body which will encompass all the countries, and I have a
feeling that it would not be a bad thing at all to be able to
measure how things are developing and to see whether they are,
in fact, developing as they should, or whatever.
(Mr Livsey) Mr Chairman, could I endorse what
Mr Llwyd just said. The Council of the Isles, I think, will become
increasingly important, but I do believe that because we have
no written constitution and that things are evolving particularly
at the moment then it will be necessary to have such a committee.
(Dr Lewis) I can only answer like the Irishman:
if I were you, I would not be starting from here.
320. Are there any matters, Mr Jones, that
you or colleagues from your Committee would like to draw to our
attention, before we complete this session?
(Mr Jones) Chairman, only that I would like to
stress two or three points, crucial points, about this. One is,
as I said at the beginning, that we are going to have to change
the Standing Orders of the Select Committee in any case, there
is at least one point there. Welsh devolution is very different
from the Scottish model. I think we should have a general principle,
as a House of Commons, that we should not seek to undermine the
spirit of devolution, but that we should end up with more scrutiny
and not less. And I think that if we just allow things to evolve
there is always a danger that Government, not Parliament, will
make the decisions at the end of the day, and I think that we
owe it to ourselves, as Members of Parliament, to make sure that
we set up what we want to set up.
Chairman: I think
that is an extremely good note to finish on, particularly as the
Procedure Committee is here to ensure that Parliament can properly
scrutinise any legislation that the Government of the day brings
before Parliament. As I say, I find your remarks, Mr Jones, very
apposite indeed. Can I thank you, and can I thank Elfyn Llwyd,
Plaid Cymru, can I thank Julian Lewis, a Conservative member of
your Committee, and Richard Livsey, the Liberal Democrat, very
much indeed for the excellent evidence that you have given to
us today. We thank you for the assistance in the difficult inquiry
which we are undertaking. Thank you very much.
|
