Nick
Ainger: I referred to
that.
Mr.
Jones: The Minister says that that is the
case. Will the
Minister also explain why it was decided to pursue the procedure
provided for in paragraph 31(8) of schedule 11 to the 2006
Act—that is, the Assembly recommendation route—rather
than the parliamentary route, which is provided for in paragraph 31(7)?
At first sight, it appears to me that using the parliamentary procedure
would have been more convenient and perhaps more logical, but I am sure
that there is an explanation, which I look forward to
hearing. The effect
of paragraph 3 of schedule 2 to theorder is to transfer the
competence for the making of subordinate legislation
in respect of travel concessions—that is, legislation relating
the Travel Concessions (Eligibility) Act 2002 and the Enterprise Act
2002—to the Assembly. Will the Minister please explain why the
decision was taken to transfer such functions and why that transfer
could not have been provided for in the 2006 Act itself, given that it
has only recently passed through Parliament?
Paragraph 4 of schedule 2
provides for additional functions to be subject to scrutiny by the
Assembly. A large number of such functions are inserted into tables 1
and 2 in paragraph 35 of schedule 11 to the 2006 Act as a result of the
order. Will the Minister please explain why such scrutiny powers were
not included in the Act when it was considered originally by
Parliament? Subject
to the answers to those somewhat technical questions, I once again
commend the Wales Office officials on what must have been an
extraordinarily difficult task. I trust that the new Assembly, when it
is constituted, will appreciate that hard work.
I shall turn briefly to the
shorter of the two statutory instruments—that is, the
regulations on access to election documents. These are clearly
desirable and sensible measures, providing as they do for the important
issue of access to and inspection of documents that will be in the
custody of local electoral registration officers, rather than the
National Assembly as previously.
I have only one question, and I
hope the Minister can help me. It relates to the cost of
producingcopy marked registers and other documents,
whichare important tools to all political parties. Is it
intended—as I hope would be the case—that a uniform
pricing system will be prescribed in respect of the production of such
documents? It would be unfortunate and, I would suggest, wrong if
individual local authorities were to be entitled to impose their own
pricing regimes in respect of producing such
documents, given their importance to political
parties as part of the political
process. I have no
other observations to make, except to thank the Minister once again for
his clear explanation of the draft
instruments.
10.51
am Mr.
Elfyn Llwyd (Meirionnydd Nant Conwy) (PC): I have one or
two brief questions. Following the points made by the hon. Member for
Clwyd, West, am I correct in thinking that the transitional provisions
referred to in paragraph 4 of the order in relation to the Transport
(Wales) Act 2006 and the Commissioner for Older People (Wales) Act 2006
would mostly have been transacted after the passage of the Government
of Wales Act 2006? If so, the Government could not have done it any
other way, but I would not mind seeing if my understanding is correct
there. The hon.
Member for Clwyd, West, makes a valid point about the cost of producing
electoral documents for those who require them. Can the Minister also
say how long electoral officers will be required to retain them? The
Conservative spokesman also made a point about standard fees, which are
vital matters in any election scenario.
I am sure that the Minister
will respond in due course on those points. Apart from that, I echo
what the hon. Member for Clwyd, West says: a lot of work has gone into
this order. In the light of what I said earlier, I believe that much of
it does could not have been done sooner. I do not entirely agree with
the hon. Gentleman about the usefulness of the notes. Perhaps I am a
bit behind on these matters, but some of them were not exactly the most
useful that I have seen in my life. Having said that, I am sure that
every effort was made to assist us, and having no further comments I do
not wish to delay the Committee further. I am pleased that the order
has been laid; it is totally
non-contentious.
10.53
am
Mr.
Bone: What is the Government’s view on why more
power is being given to the Executive and Ministers, and taken away
from the Assembly? I thought that the whole point of devolution was to
get government closer to the people. If we were talking about this
Parliament, I would be arguing strongly as a matter of principle for
powers to be taken from the Executive and returned to
Parliament. On the
technical issue, the Minister’s opening remarks covered the
situation regarding the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments fairly
rapidly. Could he go over that in a little more detail, as it is
unusual for the Committee to correct a draft statutory instrument? I
was not quite clear whether it was corrected before coming for
consideration to the Committee, or by the Committee itself. I would
likean explanation of the actual differences that the
Committee, or the counsel to the Committee,picked
up. My last point is
on the draft regulations. Do they follow exactly the regulations
applicable in England in relation to electoral law and the marked
electoral register, or are there differences? Were
those differences, if any, decided on by the UK Government, or were the
views of the Assembly taken into account?
10.54
am Mark
Williams (Ceredigion) (LD): I welcome you to the Chair,
Mr. Martlew. I shall be brief, surrounded as I am by
incisive legal brains. I shall make some general observations about the
orders, although the Minister has gone some way to allaying some of my
concerns. I
appreciate that many of the changes are procedural and are a
consequence of the passage of the Government of Wales Act 2006. Like
the hon. Member for Clwyd, West, I question why many of the changes
could not have been made by the Act rather than through statutory
instrument. The hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy made a valid
point about legislation that has been passed subsequently, but many of
the changes are to legislation that was passedmore than 10
years ago, such as the Disability Discrimination Act, the Local
Government Act and the Sex Discrimination Act. That we are now
confronted with a huge volume of modifications to those Acts suggests
that there were some omissions from the Government of Wales Bill.
Provisions that we are briefly considering now could have been debated
more fully and amended at the Committee stage. I should be interested
to hear the Minister’s viewson
that. My other concern
is general and echoes the point that the hon. Member for Wellingborough
made. The provisions transfer powers from Assembly Members to Assembly
Ministers. Many will be legitimate transfers, but there is a general
concern that power is moving from the Assembly to the Executive. The
Assembly must be consulted and allowed to vote on decisions wherever
possible; the creation of the Executive, which I support, must not lead
to seepage of power away from elected Members to Ministers.
The Minister alluded to the
fact that the issues that we are discussing will impact on the way in
which the Assembly operates. The Assembly has now been dissolved, as we
are in an election period. Will the Minister reiterate the timetable,
as we are debating the matter during an election period? Otherwise, I
support what the Minister said.
Mr.
Llwyd: On a point of order, Mr. Martlew. To
correct the hon. Gentleman, the Assembly is not dissolved; it is
dissolved only a minute before the vote is
counted.
The
Chairman: That is not a matter for the Chairman—not
this Chairman,
anyway.
Mark
Williams: I stand corrected and thank the hon. Gentleman
for his
intervention. 10.57
am
Nick
Ainger: I am grateful to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd
Nant Conwy for making that point. He is absolutely correct. The
statutory instruments are therefore not covered by what used to be
called purdah, which, in these politically correct days, is called the
pre-election period. I
am grateful for the comments of the hon. Member for Clwyd, West. He is
quite right; an awful lot of work has been done by officials, which is
why it has taken so
long to bring the statutory instruments before the House. I am grateful
that he and other hon. Members have recognised that, although I would
have hoped that the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy would be a
little more supportive on the
detail. A number of
questions have been asked and I shall try to respond to them. If I do
not respond to all of them, I shall write to hon. Members. A number of
colleagues made the point that the legislation givesthe
impression that powers will be concentrated in the hands of a few
Ministers. That is true; when we had the debates on what became the
Government of Wales Act 2006, every party in the House recognised the
need for a separate Executive and legislature. The provisions merely
confirm that. The Executive functions that already rest with the
Assembly Ministers will not be changed. It is clear that the power lies
with the Ministers and that they are directly accountable to the
Assembly. All parties thought that that was a good move, so I am
surprised that some colleagues have raised that issue today.
The hon. Member for Clwyd,
West, asked about the Counsel General and why he or she was not to be
subject to the provisions of the Race Relations Act or the Disability
Discrimination Act. The reason is that he or she will be part of the
Assembly Government in the same way as any other Minister or the First
Minister. Therefore, it is a political appointment and it will be
consistent with the other appointments of the First Minister, the other
Welsh Ministers and even the deputy Welsh Ministers, if they are
appointed. The Counsel General will be treated in exactly the
sameway as the other members of the Welsh Assembly
Government. The hon.
Gentleman also asked about the diversion of functions order and why it
went through the Assembly process, through to the Privy Council, rather
than through the parliamentary process. Both options were available,
but as the order deals with the diversion of functions to the Assembly,
it was suitable for the Assembly to consider it. I am sure that the
usual channels would prefer that, bearing in mind the level of business
that has to go through this House. Where it is possible to go through a
proper, democratically accountable process, which the Assembly follows
as we do here, it can be an advantage to see that sort of business
going through the Assembly, because it is basically an internal issue
for the Assembly. The
hon. Gentleman also asked about schedule 2 to the order—the
transitional provisions—and asked why they were not in the 2006
Act itself. Basically, as the hon. Gentleman indicated, an awful lot of
work has been done in cross-referencing legislation and so on. A
further trawl of legislation turned up more enactments where
transitional provisions were needed, which were not originally picked
up when the Government of Wales Bill was laid before the
House. In relation to
the draft regulations, the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy asked
how long the marked register and other documents have to be kept; the
answer is that they have to be retained for one year.
It is important that those people who want to see them are aware of
that. The costs are basically the same costs that apply now; they apply
across Wales and across England. For the information in data form,
there is an initial cost of £20 plus £1.50 per 1,000
entries, or part thereof, so it is possible to have a breakdown for
particular wards and so on. Alternatively, in printed form the cost is
£10 plus £5 per 1,000 entries, or part thereof. Again,
those charges will apply across
Wales. The hon. Member
for Wellingborough asked about the access to election documents, and
whether they were similar to those in England. I am advised that the
answer is essentially no. However, the regulations work by applying the
provisions in the regulations covering parliamentary elections,
modified only so far as to reflect the different document used in the
Assembly elections. In principle, therefore, they are the same, but in
fact, because different references are made, they are slightly
different. The hon.
Member for Ceredigion asked why there are so many changes happening
now. Basically, it is because these are purely consequential and
transitional arrangements following on from the enactment of the
Government of Wales Act 2006, and they are often simple textual
amendments to Acts resulting from the policy that we have agreed that
the matters in question should lie with the Assembly Ministers rather
than with the Assembly.
I think that I have covered all
the
questions—
Mr.
Bone: Will the Minister deal with the point about the
Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments?
Nick
Ainger: The problem was spotted by one of the staff of the
Joint Committee. The Joint Committee looks for any inaccuracies or
errors, typographical or otherwise, before an order goes before the
Committee. The error, which related to the commencement date and was
nothing major, was spotted before then. That was all it was. I hope
that reassures hon.
Gentleman. Mr.
David Jones: There was one further point,
which related to the use of the term
“Cabinet”.
Nick
Ainger: That is a very important point. I had better write
to the hon. Gentleman about
it. Question put
and agreed
to. Resolved, That
the Committee has considered the draft Government of Wales Act 2006
(Consequential Modifications and Transitional Provisions) Order
2007.
Resolved,
That the Committee has
considered the draft Representation of the People (National Assembly
for Wales) (Access to Election Documents) Regulations
2007.—[Nick
Ainger.] Committee
rose at six minutes past Eleven
o’clock.
| 
