| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Llwyd: I am talking about subsection (5), which is the subject of amendment No. 174. It states:
"The standing orders must include provision for securing that the Assembly may only pass a proposed Assembly Measure if the text of the proposed Assembly Measure is in both English and Welsh"—
Nick Ainger: I am not there yet.
Mr. Llwyd: I thought that the Minister had addressed that amendment. I will hold my fire.
Nick Ainger: For clarification, I was still addressing my remarks to amendment No. 170. I had not moved on to amendment No. 174.
Mr. Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): On subsection (2), the Minister said that the provision will be used rarely. Will he give a rough figure of how many times that might happen in a year?
Nick Ainger: I would imagine that it would not happen every year. It would be a rare occurrence, for something like a major animal health problem, such as an outbreak of foot and mouth. It is rare for us to truncate our scrutiny of a particular problem.
Amendments Nos. 172, 173 and 171 relate to private Assembly Measures, and I recognise the comments made by the hon. Member for Beaconsfield. The
24 Jan 2006 : Column 1355
provisions are similar to those that apply in this place to private and hybrid Bills, by which a special Committee is set up to take evidence. That is the thought behind them.
On amendment No. 174, we would be amazed if the Assembly did not produce its Measures in both languages. We have a simple reason for resisting the amendment. The Assembly may, on occasion, want to introduce a Measure on public health, for example, which lists dozens of micro-organisms known only by their Latin names. Would hon. Members want us to convert those into English and Welsh? Let me give the assurance, however, that we would expect any Measure to be produced in English and Welsh.
Mr. Grieve: At the risk of being pernickety, the wording of subsection (5), and the use of the expression
does not cover the possibility of the text being in Latin, because it is not one of the two languages specified? In those circumstances, the Minister would have to amend the legislation to say that the text does not have to be in either language, but some other.
Nick Ainger: All I can say to the hon. Gentleman on that point is that both he and the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) are seeking an assurance that the Measures would be published in both English and Welsh, as was the right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer), and I can give that assurance.
Bearing in mind what I have said previously and the assurances that I have given on amendment No. 174, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will withdraw his amendment.
Mr. Grieve: Short debates can often be the most interesting. The Minister has persuaded me completely—indeed, I do not think that I needed much persuasion—on amendments Nos. 171, 172, and 173 about the proposed private Assembly Measures. Clearly, the Standing Orders of the Welsh Assembly will have to make provision for dealing with private business.
The Minister has also persuaded me, so far as amendment No. 174 is concerned, that there are good reasons for not fettering the Assembly by requiring that it can produce texts only in English and Welsh. However, I recommend that he and his legal advisers look again at the provision, because I wonder whether it has the effect of requiring that texts can be in English or Welsh but nothing else. Perhaps I am wrong about that, and I should be greatly reassured if that were so, but my reading of the provision is that texts normally have to be in English and Welsh or in English or Welsh. That might create a problem if Latin terms are to be included.
The Minister has only half persuaded me on amendment No. 170. This debate has highlighted the odd situation that we are creating: defining as an Assembly Measure that which in this House we would consider to be either primary legislation or statutory instruments. The Minister makes a persuasive case for urgency if the Assembly is enacting what we would normally call a statutory instrument. After all, we
24 Jan 2006 : Column 1356
sometimes have to enact them urgently, and by their very nature a statutory instrument can in this House be passed rapidly. By virtue of the way in which the Welsh Assembly operates, however, statutory instruments are normally mulled over at considerably greater length, which was one argument for the original devolution proposals given to the Welsh.
Of course, if urgency is required, something can always be enacted by a statutory instrument in this place. It is clear that it is unacceptable that there should be short-circuiting of the primary legislative functions which could be transferred under the Order in Council procedure, as I think the Minister has acknowledged, but, as the Bill stands, there is a risk that that is exactly what could happen, which would defeat the entire object of the exercise of going through and enacting part 3.
Therefore, given the difficulty with the way in which we define Assembly Measures, I propose to consider the matter further, but I cannot rule out on Report our suggesting that some distinction must be drawn between different sorts of Assembly Measures. I urge the Government to consider that, because within the term "Assembly Measure" we are lumping together forms of legislation which in this House we treat very differently, both in their significance and in the way in which we proceed. With that in mind, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 97 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 98 and 99 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Llwyd: I beg to move amendment No. 125, in page 54, line 39, leave out paragraph (a).
The Temporary Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 158, in page 54, line 41, leave out paragraph (b).
No. 126, in page 54, line 43, leave out paragraph (c).
No. 175, in page 54, line 44, after 'England', insert 'and Wales'.
No. 176, in page 55, line 22, leave out subsection (8) and insert—
'(8) No order under this Section may be made unless a draft of the statutory instrument containing the order has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament.'.
6.45 pm
Mr. Llwyd: I rise to speak to amendments Nos. 125, 158 and 126, which stand in my name and those of my hon. Friends.
The reason why the amendments have been tabled is very simple. The first amendment would deal with subsection (1)(a), which says:
"if a proposed Assembly Measure contains provisions which the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe—
That is terrifically broad to a point that it is almost nonsense. I hope that in responding the Minister will give us some detail, because in the hands of an
24 Jan 2006 : Column 1357
unsympathetic Secretary of State it could be a tool to stamp on the Assembly and prevent it from proceeding in its normal democratic way. The notes on clauses are more obtuse than usual, so there is no help there. I press the Minister for as much detail as possible on that paragraph. I am sure that he will do his best to enlighten us in due course.
Amendment No. 126 relates to paragraph (c), which effectively gives the Secretary of State the same veto. It refers to whether a Measure
Again, my objection is that that is nebulous. We would like to know more. In all the various reports and the notes on clauses that I have read, I have seen nothing of any great help. The provision is extremely broad and, again, an unsympathetic holder of the office could easily pray in aid such a power to prevent any legislation.
By far the most concerning is paragraph (b), which is the subject of amendment No. 158. For the record, I shall read the paragraph. It also provides for a veto and would come into effect where any Measure might have
"a serious adverse impact on water resources in England, water supply in England or the quality of water in England".
I remember as a young boy going with my father to Tryweryn. I have the honour to represent that area now, and I shall deal briefly with the history of the drowning of the valley. I know some of the displaced people from the Tryweryn valley, and I know that never again will the people of Wales stand for such undemocratic, Mugabe-type dealings. Every single Member of Parliament from Wales was against the drowning of the valley, but it went ahead. I hope that we will never see such an event again, because I do not know what would happen, but this clause would enable it, and that is my concern.
The provision has touched a raw nerve, not just among people such as myself who support Plaid Cymru but among others, because once more they can see potential for conflict. The paragraph clearly refers to water resources in England, and I can easily envisage that in some years from now somebody might consider that there is a need to drown another valley in Wales. As that would be such a large planning operation, it would come under the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and then bypass the planning procedures in the Assembly. The Government could rely on that paragraph, among others, to ensure that the plan went ahead, whatever the view of the Welsh Assembly, which would be expressing the view of the Welsh people.
We have experienced that once already. I know families who were displaced and who still live in the Bala area. Most of the elderly people have now passed away, but some remain; their wounds are still open and they still feel a great deal of hurt. Subsection (1)(b) therefore touches a very raw nerve.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |