|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. James Paice accordingly presented a Bill to create an offence of criminal trespass with a vehicle; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time on Friday 12 May, and to be printed [Bill 135].
David Mundell: The purpose of the amendments is to ensure a consistent approach to the devolved Administrations of the United Kingdom. Such consistency has not been evident in much of the debatewe seem to have moved away from the idea that there should be a coherent approach to the devolved Administrations. In Spain, there is something that is often called "asymmetric devolution," whereby different parts of the country are governed in different ways, but I do not accept that difference is needed for difference's sake.
In Scotland for the past six and a half years, the clear and accepted description of the Administration in the Scottish Parliament has been "the Scottish Executive." Were the equivalent body in Northern Ireland fully functioning, it would be called "the Northern Ireland Executive". It seems logical, coherent and beneficial to efforts to promote wider understanding of the functions of the devolved bodies that in Wales we replace the rather uncomfortable phrase, "Assembly Government" with "Executive."
To have a coherent system throughout the United Kingdom, with a Scottish Executive, a Northern Ireland Executive and a Welsh Executive, would allow and promote better understanding of what the Executives do, compared with the Assembly or Parliaments. Indeed, it would also assist debates in this House, because hon. Members' references to "the Executive" would be clearer. A degree of coherence that has not previously been evident would be brought to the whole package if the amendments were made.
As I am sure the Minister knows, the Select Committee on Welsh Affairs thought that "Executive" was a better term than "Assembly Government". The arguments advanced within the Committee have merit, which should commend them to the Minister. I hope that the amendments will be regarded as non-contentious and that they will attract Government support.
28 Feb 2006 : Column 134
Lembit Öpik (Montgomeryshire) (LD): Briefly, the hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) has made a coherent case for the amendment, but I counsel him against building up his hopes, as the hallmark of this Government on naming things is inconsistency. He will recall the debate in which the Government opposed a proposal to call the Welsh Assembly the Welsh Senedd, because they were worried that the public would mix up the political institution with the building. We now have the Welsh Assembly in a Welsh Senedd building, which is typical of the fuzzy logic that we have come to expect on naming. Here is my tuppenny-worth: consistency is needed, but we should also accept that we are aiming to establish a Welsh Government.
Mr. Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD): My hon. Friend will agree that it is important that the people of Wales should be able to distinguish between the Government and the Welsh Assembly. Too often, the Assembly has taken the blame for poor action by the Government. That contrasts with the golden age of Welsh devolution, in which a Liberal Democrat-led coalition delivered for Wales. The Labour Government, however, do not deliver for Wales.
Lembit Öpik: My hon. Friend has made a brilliant and insightful point, which doubtless makes the Minister's skin crawl as he remembers paradise lost and the brief halcyon era of the Welsh Assembly in which the Liberal Democrats led the way and ensured the only period of stability during the Assembly administration. He makes an important point, too, about the need to distinguish between the Government of Wales and the Assembly as an institution.
In conclusion, the hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale rightly pointed out that that can be achieved with his wording, but I would prefer the whole thing to be called the Senedd. On balance, I prefer the word "Government" to "Executive".
Adam Price (Carmarthen, East and Dinefwr) (PC): This is a modest demand, and a perfect opportunity for the Government to concede one amendment to the Opposition parties. We are only talking about a name changeit does not change the concrete constitutional settlement one iota, so I hope that the Under-Secretary will find it in his heart to offer us some charity. Names are importantwe know that is the case in Wales, which has a logocentric culturebecause they are part of the means by which people understand their political institutions. The separation of powers is one of the most important principles in the democratic tradition, and it has been enshrined belatedly but happily in the new settlement.
The problem is terminological inexactitude, which was cobbled together[Hon. Members: "Oh!]. All without notes, I hasten to add. An informal arrangement was cobbled together in about 2000, but it is now being formalised, unfortunately. The phrase is inelegant, infelicitous and inaccurate, and it does not allow us to clarify for the Welsh electorate where political responsibility lies. There is an important principle at the heart of accountability. The National
28 Feb 2006 : Column 135
Assembly for Wales includes all the parties that are represented, and its Government includes the party[Interruption.] I am reminded that it includes more than one party in coalition. We therefore require clarity on the issue.
I am all for constitutional innovation, but I could find only one other example of a national assembly Government in history. The Turkish republic had two Governments at one timean Ottoman Government in Istanbul and a national assembly Government in Ankara under Kemal Atatürk. That was a difficult period in Turkish history, and it is the one example in history of something like a national assembly Government. It is a misnomer and we should take the opportunity offered by the Bill to bury it. We do not have a United Kingdom Parliament Government. We do not have a Scottish Parliament Government. Why should we be left with the strange phrase, "Welsh Assembly Government"? It mystifies most of us, it will certainly mystify the Welsh electorate, and the Minister should accept this not unreasonable demand from the Opposition parties.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Nick Ainger): I have carefully considered the arguments advanced by the hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) and by the Welsh Affairs Committee in its report on the Bill. However, the Government do not agree that using the title "Welsh Assembly Government" will perpetuate confusion over the different roles of the Executive and the Legislature. Rather, changing the title at this stage is likely to cause even more confusion than keeping the names with which people are already familiar. As the hon. Member for Carmarthen, East and Dinefwr (Adam Price) said, the name has been in place for five or six years. People understand what the Welsh Assembly Government is, and a change to another name would cause confusion.
Hon. Members referred to the Scottish Executive. In Scotland, the term "Scottish Executive" has been used since devolution and it is now familiar and well understood, but the Government do not believe that that is a reason for changing a term that is now familiar in Wales. I see no problem. It has been argued that there is confusion between the Assembly and the Government. The term "Welsh Assembly Government" provides clarity. It is not a terminological inexactitude, as the hon. Member for Carmarthen, East and Dinefwr suggested. It is quite clear. We have no intention of changing the name, so I ask the hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale to withdraw his amendment.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|