Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Grieve: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman could answer this question: is it not a feature of our ministerial system that Ministers are accountable for the actions of their officials? That is a central pillar. In those circumstances, how can the Secretary of State for Wales, or what is left of him, be answerable for the actions of
his officials when he does not have any responsibility for them, as they are within the domain of another Minister in another place?
Huw Irranca-Davies: The hon. Gentleman raises an issue that can be dealt with very simply. For the purpose of Welsh questions, the Minister will be here at the Dispatch Box. For the purpose of Welsh issues, I as a Welsh Member will raise them directly with him. There is no confusion, except on the part of the Opposition.
Mr. Evans: Does the hon. Gentleman support the decision that one person ought to do the job of Leader of the House of Commons and also the job of Secretary of State for Wales?
Huw Irranca-Davies: Indeed. I have no difficulties with that. It was a policy advanced by the Opposition. Let me elaborate. I was one of the signatories supporting the retention of a Secretary of State for Wales. That is why I am happy, since Thursday evening when the position was made clear, and from subsequent discussions with the Wales Office, that that remains in place.
Mr. Evans: I am interested in the hon. Gentleman's response. The early-day motion that he signed stated:
Huw Irranca-Davies: Not only can I read an early-day motion, I can be instrumental in drawing one up. The Secretary of State retains his position as an individual Cabinet member. He is also Leader of the House of Commons. I suggest to the hon. Gentleman that there are advantages for some of us with Welsh seats in having a Leader of the House who is also Secretary of State for Wales.
Mr. Bryant: My hon. Friend knows that some Welsh nationalists and, I think, Scottish nationalists, have been arguing that the major constitutional follow-on in Wales from last week is that full law-making powers should be given to the Welsh Assembly. Does he believe that, if we were ever to go down that route, we should have a referendum?
Huw Irranca-Davies: Absolutely and categorically. I shall return to that in a moment. It is important to the reshuffle and what it meant in the eyes of Back Benchers for constitutional issues for Wales, and what it seemed to mean for Opposition Members, particularly in the nationalist community.
How did the nationalists, the Tories and everybody else who jumped on the passing bandwagon manage to get it so wrong, as was exemplified once again today from the Opposition Front Bench? It is a problem familiar to all those who leap to conclusions, rather than
waiting for the full story to emerge. It is a condition referred to in political, if not clinical, circles as premature extrapolation.
Mr. Francis Maude (Horsham): The hon. Gentleman scoffs at people, who, he says, have got it wrong. That includes almost every observer of the political scene, as well as almost every participant in the political scene, including many newly appointed Ministers. Does it occur to him that the reason why people are confused about the situation is that it is the most God-awful mess?
Huw Irranca-Davies: I can only speak from a personal perspective. At the moment when several thousand jobs in my constituency were at risk, I had no difficulty knowing where to address my concernsand that was on the evening of the announcement. I assume that the right hon. Gentleman was present earlier when I intervened. It may be a good idea to provide an aide mémoire or idiot's guide to clarify the current position.
Mr. Bercow: It is not entirely clear to me which is the more striking phenomenon: the hon. Gentleman's loyalty or his ambition. Doubtless that will become clear in due course. I understand his focus on Welsh matters. Given that he is one of a handful of defenders of the Government present today, can he answer the straightforward question whether the Scotland Office is former or current?
Huw Irranca-Davies: The answer has already been given by the Secretary of State, who is far worthier than I to give it. The hon. Gentleman directs his question to the wrong person, but I can tell him categorically with respect to the Wales Office, which seems to be a source of confusion among Opposition Members, that the Secretary of State's position still exists and that he is an independent Minister.
What are the constitutional implications of the reshuffle for Wales? At present, despite the speculation in the press, they are zerozilch, nothing. The Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary continue in their roles and, at Welsh questions, the House will have a Welsh Minister at the Dispatch Box. Their staff can sleep secure in their jobs. [Laughter.] For accuracy in Hansard, I should rephrase that. The staff will sleep well in their beds after completing a hard day's work at the Wales Office. In the Welsh Grand Committee and at the Welsh Affairs Committee, the Secretary of State for Wales, my right hon. Friend the Member for Neath (Peter Hain) and the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Islwyn (Mr. Touhig), will display their customary surefootedness. When issues in Welsh constituencies arise, I and fellow Members will know on which door to knockGwydr house is still standing.
Meanwhile, the Richard commission continues with its work, taking soundings on the future of the Welsh Assembly, the powers it should have, whether it should have more, when it should have more powers and so on. Does the reshuffle have any impact on the Richard commission? Not immediately. The commission should not discard the evidence that it has taken so far, because at this time nothing has changed.
One would not believe that if one read the letter from a leading nationalist figure, a former Member of the House and the Assembly, Cynog Dafis, in The Western
Mail today. Its relevance is such that the House may allow me to read a short extract. He writes that "It follows"from the reshuffle
The nationalist camp should come clean about their aspirations and be honest with the people of Wales. Their vision is not of a strong and powerful Wales within the United Kingdom, but of an independent Wales. They should not hide behind calls for increased powers in the National Assembly. They should come out of the closet, be proud of the ideals on which their party was built, be proud to be nationalists, and stop hiding behind a smokescreen of clever words and pseudo-socialism.
There may well come a time when increased powers for the Assembly are appropriate. I believe that that time will come, but we should not rush at it. We should take one step at a time. Let us prove to the people of Wales that the Assembly can maximise the powers that it currently possesses. Then, and only then, let us argue the case for more powers. If we are to go forward with further devolution of powersnot after a reshuffle, and I am one of those who believe that that will and should happenlet us go forward with the backing of the people of Wales. There is no consensus at present, but that may change, and it may change sooner rather than later.
For now, the existing profitable partnership continuesa Labour Secretary of State for Wales and a Wales Office that works closely with the Labour Welsh Assembly Government. I make no apologies for emphasising the Labour nature of those positions and institutions, if for no other reason than to remind the Lib Dems of their futile and shameless showboating as a minor coalition partner in the Assembly. It was credit for everything and blame for nothing.
Those Labour politicians and Governments, working closely together for the betterment of the people of Wales, will continue, following the Government announcements. That partnership has delivered devolution, objective 1 funding, a Children's Commissioner for Wales, welfare to work targeted at the areas of highest unemployment and economic inactivity, massive investment in schools and hospitals, financial settlements year after year that far outstrip any hypothetical tinkering with the Barnett formula, retention of community health councils, the national minimum wage and huge advances in workers rights. This is a very Welsh and very Labour partnership, and it is a very fruitful one for the people of Wales.
The motion suggests that the reshuffle is a shambles. I suggest without fear of sensible contradiction that the motion is a sham, and I urge the House to reject it
emphatically. The reshuffle has, in constitutional terms, provided this country with an opportunity to move confidently forward with reforms that were so long overdue that the bailiffs were coming to enforce them. The Tories would have us tear up constitutional reforms and return to a golden age of yesteryear. I regard those views fondly, sentimentalists as Opposition Members are, living in a world gone by. The nationalists would have us tear up the Government of Wales Act 1998 and put in its place measures to introduce independencea word that they only whisper. Even though that word is only whispered nowadays in dark corners of nationalist meetings, I look on nationalists fondly, romantics that they are, living in a world that will never be. One party is in the past; another in a fantasy future.While I look with tenderness on the misplaced aspirations on the Opposition Benches, I look for realism and direction from the Government. The ongoing constitutional arrangements continue to provide the very best for the people of Wales while recognising that devolution within the parameters of the Government of Wales Act is fluid and not fixed over time.
Next Section
| Index | Home Page |