| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Llew Smith (Blaenau Gwent) (Lab): My hon. Friend says that the Welsh Assembly and devolution have had a beneficial effect on Wales. Does he believe that that applies to the health service in Wales?
Ian Lucas: There are problems in the health service in Wales, which are familiar. They are deep-seated and reflect the poorer state of health of people in Wales, which is of long-standing. The problems in the health service in Wales predate devolution. The structures for dealing with the problems of the health service in Wales differ from the structures in England. One of the benefits of devolution is that we have different systems operating in England and Wales, but where there are examples of better systems working more successfully in England, we must not be afraid of copying them in Wales.
I wanted to reflect on the changes that devolution has made in Wales. There was a surge in the national identity of Wales following the introduction of devolution—an expression of identity that added hugely to the positive feel in the country. It has influenced my views on regional devolution in England. I am from north-east England, which has a strong regional identity that would be greatly complemented by the introduction of a regional assembly. I hope that it will be one of the first areas to have its own assembly following the vote later this year.
Devolution has brought material benefits. It has corresponded with a huge decline in unemployment in my constituency, which is well under 3 per cent. now, compared with a high of 20 per cent. way back in 1983. Unemployment in my constituency has halved since 1997. Devolution and the work of organisations such as the Welsh Development Agency in promoting Wales are an effective way of bringing investment to Wales. I recall an advertisement that I saw on a British Airways flight recently that promoted Wales as a good place for investment and the identity of Wales. That was reflected in my constituency by Sharp Manufacturing announcing only last year that its European base for the production of photovoltaic cells for the European
market was to be in Wrexham, in competition with possible sites in Spain, Germany and France. Material benefits have resulted from devolution.One complication that may be peculiar to my area, the north-east of Wales, is the effect of devolution on the delivery of public services to my constituents. That is the topic on which I shall concentrate. Wales has distinct regions, one of which is north-east Wales, which has a peculiarly close connection with north-west England. The example that I often cite is the Welsh edition of the Daily Post, which is read throughout north Wales and whose back pages carry news about Liverpool, Everton and Manchester United, matters of some interest to my constituents. Meanwhile, The Western Mail, which describes itself as the national newspaper for Wales but is rarely read in my constituency other than by politicians, concentrates on rugby on its back pages, which is of less interest in my constituency than perhaps it is in south Wales. That reflects the different perspectives of my constituents.
Service delivery in my area perhaps reflects the close links between north-east Wales and north-west England. Telephone exchanges in England serve my constituents in Wrexham, some of my constituents attend school in England and many students from my area attend universities throughout the United Kingdom. Many of the specialist medical services that are delivered to my constituents are delivered from England and include vital services such as children's services, cancer services and orthopaedic services. Doctors who work in my constituency are commonly employed on joint contracts with hospitals in England.
I raise these issues in this House and with Ministers from the National Assembly for Wales, but the complications that can be caused by that situation are not always fully appreciated. As a result of devolution, some of my constituents sit in a hospital waiting room next to patients from England to see the same doctor for the same condition, but are told that they must wait longer for treatment than if they were from England. It is equally true that I pay less for prescriptions than my colleagues from England and that patients from Wales will pay nothing for prescriptions by 2007.
The Government do not fully appreciate the position on the ground, and that was certainly reflected by my experience of the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003, which introduced foundation hospitals in England, while the National Assembly for Wales decided that it did not wish to introduce them in Wales. But it was not fully appreciated at the time in either London or Cardiff that one English hospital, the Countess of Chester hospital, which was in the first wave of hospitals to apply for foundation trust status, which it has since secured, serves not only patients in Cheshire and across north-west England, but my constituents in Wrexham and Flintshire. As patients are entitled to be represented on the board of foundation hospitals, one would expect patients from Wrexham and Flintshire to be so represented, but the Bill, as originally drafted, allowed only patients from England to be represented.
That was clearly wrong, so I worked with my hon. Friends the Members for Alyn and Deeside (Mark Tami) and for Delyn (Mr. Hanson) to secure an amendment to the Bill to allow patients from Wales to
be represented on the board of foundation hospitals. To their credit, the Westminster Government and the Welsh Assembly Government in Cardiff agreed to the amendment and the Act now protects the interests of patients from Wales.That example is important because it reflects the role of MPs from Wales in this House, but it also shows that neither the Welsh Assembly nor Westminster fully understood how services were being delivered in north-east Wales. For Westminster and for Cardiff, England and Wales were entirely distinct and could be dealt with entirely separately, but that is not the reality.
In my pragmatic view, politics is about dealing with reality. In that case, neither Government understood that health services in north-east Wales are delivered from England and Wales and cannot be disentangled, and that is true of England and Wales generally. They are distinct countries, but irrevocably linked.
The strength of the current devolution settlement is that it reflects that reality. Devolution works best when it reflects the position on the ground, and it works worst when it seeks to foster difference for its own sake. Only yesterday, in the debate on the Higher Education Bill, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, Central (Mr. Jones) raised the effect of that Bill on Wales. There are still substantial difficulties in the way in which the Bill will affect higher education for my constituents.
In my constituency, the North East Wales institute of higher education, an excellent institution that works hard to attract students from poorer backgrounds, takes around 60 per cent. of its students from Wales and 40 per cent. from England. From 2006, when the Bill becomes law, that institution will not be able to charge students top-up fees, unlike higher education institutions in England. The result will be twofold. First, it will be necessary for the National Assembly to make up the shortfall in income for the cohort of students commencing in 2006 for, I believe, a full three years. Secondly, it will be much cheaper for English students to study in Wales than in England because they will not pay top-up fees in Wales. As in the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act, that policy is not a real and practical one reflecting the long-established and important freedom of students to study wherever they wish in the UK.
Because I want the devolution settlement to work, I want the Assembly in Cardiff and the Westminster Parliament to work closer together. There needs to be input from Westminster because policy in Wales is affected by what happens in England. The Higher Education Bill is a classic example of that. But there also needs to be input from Cardiff bay, because education policy needs to be integrated into the more general thrust of policy in Wales. There are very different developments in education in the secondary sector in Wales, including the Welsh baccalaureate, which reflect the different make-up and needs of the Welsh economy and some of the past deficiencies of secondary education in Wales.
In an effort to try to develop that integration further, for the past two years I have been suggesting that Westminster Members of Parliament and Assembly Members need to work together on joint committees to consider draft legislation that affects Wales. I welcome the views of the Welsh Affairs Committee on the matter,
and the work that it has already done to take the proposal forward. I understand that the Presiding Officer in the National Assembly is considering the next stage.If the Higher Education Bill and the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act had been considered at an early stage in draft by such a joint committee, some of the problems that still exist in the legislation would have been avoided. I spoke in a debate a few weeks ago on the benefits of draft legislation, to which my good hon. Friend the Deputy Leader of the House responded, and those benefits are especially evident in helping the devolution settlement to work better. The current settlement works very well between the Executive in Wales, the Welsh Assembly Government, and the Executive here, the office of the Secretary of State for Wales, but it should be improved by developing better relations between Assembly Members and Back-Bench Members of Parliament.
The further separation of England and Wales would not help the operation of the devolution settlement, but it would hinder the delivery of services, choice and efficiency. The strongest argument for giving primary legislative powers to the Assembly would be if the Assembly wanted to do a particular thing, but could not do it without them. I still await an explanation of the particular policy that the Assembly wishes to deliver but cannot because of the current settlement. I am also yet to hear an example of a service that the National Assembly fails to deliver well because of Westminster's input. On the contrary, services are delivered better when the working relationship between Westminster and Cardiff bay is close.
Some say that the current constitutional settlement uniquely disadvantages Wales, but I see no evidence for that. It provides huge benefits for Wales, promotes Wales in a way in which it has never been promoted before and enables policy to be devised and implemented much closer to the people of Wales. The Assembly can therefore be much more responsive than Westminster, but the current settlement also reflects Wales's close links to England, which allows services to be delivered efficiently. I therefore conclude that Wales is uniquely placed within the UK, and that that is to its advantage.
One of the most difficult relationships to manage in any non-unitary state is that between central Government and nations or regions. It can lead to paralysis in Government—in Germany and Spain, for example, there is frustration that the Government cannot bring about change because of inertia. In contrast, the settlement under the Government of Wales Act 1998 is remarkably flexible. I asked the Secretary of State for Wales which functions have been transferred to the National Assembly since 1998, and his written answer states:
- "The functions are too numerous to list".—[Official Report, 15 January 2004; Vol. 416, c. 825W.]
It is time to end the lazy thinking on the Assembly's powers. If there is a case for the transfer of further powers, let it be argued. If there is a case for the
Assembly having primary legislative power, let us hear a positive argument saying why it should happen and what the advantages would be for the people of Wales and Wrexham. Let those who suggest that it would be better for the people of Wrexham if further separation between England and Wales took place put their case openly. Let us not have the lazy argument that the Assembly should have primary legislative powers because the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly have them. Those institutions are in entirely different positions, and have different legal systems and separate statute books. A system appropriate to Scotland may not be appropriate to Wales.If it is said that the current settlement is failing and needs to be changed, let the people of Wales be asked about the matter. The White Paper, "The Government's Proposals for a Welsh Assembly", which was published in 1997, clearly states:
- "Wales will remain an integral part of the United Kingdom. Wales and England will continue to share a common legal system and Parliament will continue to pass new legislation for Wales."
Devolution is a success story, and it can be made more successful by Cardiff bay and Westminster working more closely together. What threatens its success is the desire of some to separate that which is joined and to do so without the consent of the people of Wales. If devolution is to retain the confidence of the people of Wales, such a situation must be avoided at all costs.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |