Nia
Griffith: Absolutely. I agree with my right hon. Friend
100 per cent.. There are so many advantages, whether it is the cost of
office accommodation, the quality of life or the excellent schools, and
they should bring people rushing to Wales. It is absolutely mad that we
are going the other way. It is not always easy to
create quality jobs, particularly in the private sector, but it seems
positively perverse to take away quality public sector jobs from those
areas. Huge efforts have been made in the past to devolve jobs, for
example by setting up the Driver and Vehicle Licensing
Agencyin Swansea and the passport office in Newport. We should
seek to retain our quality public sector jobs and to try to bring more
public and private sector jobs to the less well off areas of Wales.
That is the way to maintain the stable economy championed in the
Queen’s Speech.
The Climate Change and
Sustainable Energy Bill is an integral part of the Queen’s
Speech, and it indicates the Government’s recognition of the
climate change problem and the determination of the Secretary of State
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to take a lead in tackling the
problem. However, there are no easy answers to climate change. We must
share ideas and best practice and make tackling climate change a
priority for all Departments, whether they are in Westminster or in
Cardiff. We must
improve energy efficiency in existing homes and in new-build, develop
renewable energy, improve public transport systems and help industry to
reduce its carbon footprint. However, we must deal with industry
sensitively and create a level playing field. We must not penalise our
industry, so that big producers, for example steel companies, are
forced to go to countries where standards are much lower. That would
not help the problem of global warming. We must work sensitively
alongside industry to examine the best practice that industry considers
feasible in our areas. We must ensure that the emissions trading scheme
works fairly for our factories and for those in Europe. As we are
considering the global perspective, we must ensure that the scheme does
not penalise our companies and our work force because of what happens
in the rest of the world.
As we move forward with the
climate change agenda, it is essential that we think carefully about
what we are doing, and that we do not implement legislation we then
regret. We must think through every single step and we must be totally
committed to achieving an effective solution to the
problem.
2.49
pm
Mr.
Roger Williams: It is a great pleasure to follow the hon.
Member for Llanelli (Nia Griffith), particularly because of her
measured and thoughtful contribution on Second Reading of the Offender
Management Bill on Monday.
On an optimistic note, I note a
spring in the step of my constituents and a smile on their faces. When
I ask why, they tell me it is because they now have Orders in Council,
which they consider to be a tremendous contribution to their well-being
and quality of life. I wonder what the last Government of Wales Bill
achieved. It could have achieved so much and given the people of Wales
real legislative powers and equivalence to Scotland.
I want to say a few words about
Bills that appear in the Queen’s Speech that need our attention,
then something about a number of Bills that do not appear,
and then a little about the economy in Wales, because the Queen’s
Speech says that it is the Government’s intention to produce a
stable and sustainable economy.
I turn first to the
Offender Management Bill, which had its Second Reading on Monday. A
number of hon. Members will have received representations on it from
trade unions. I am particularly concerned about howit will be
delivered in rural areas. My hon. Friendthe Member for
Ceredigion (Mark Williams) asked whether the Mental Health Bill had
been rural-proofed. I would ask whether the Offender Management Bill
has been rural-proofed, because setting central delivery targets for
the public service or the voluntary sector does not seem to take
account of whether private sector or voluntary organisations are
present in an area or whether those sectors would want to operate in
that area.
Contestability is all very well
and good, but therehas to be somebody to contest it. The
Dyfed-Powys probation service operates to a good standard in the area
that I represent, both in supporting offenders and ensuring that they
get back to a more positive and constructive role in life, and in
protecting the public. That is not to say that there cannot be
improvements. Indeed, the probation service works well with the
voluntary sector but it is unrealistic to set targets of20 per
cent. and 30 per cent. I shall develop that theme in a
minute.
Mrs.
Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con): The hon.
Gentleman knows that I hold the matter close to my heart, having
watched the legislation gestating over three years and then found that
it was not worth waiting for when it came. Does he agree that the Bill
does not address one of the fundamental problems that faces the
probation service, namely that it is overwhelmed? There are too many
offenders who have been released from prison too early with inadequate
assessment beforehand, and nothing in the legislation will help us in
Wales or other parts of the United Kingdom.
Mr.
Williams: I agree that there is little in the Bill that
will lead to an improvement in the probation service or its capacity to
deal with the task that it faces. Some hon. Members will have received
a briefing note from Turning Point, an excellent charity that deals,
among other things, with drug and alcohol abuse. As I cast around my
constituency, I fail to find evidence that Turning Point does any work
there, or in the whole of mid-Wales. It is the same with a lot of
national charitable organisations. I do not know whether they have not
received an invitation, but they certainly do not seem to be keen to
work in sparsely populated areas and to address circumstances that they
are not used to dealing
with. I do not believe
that there is the capacity in rural areas to involve the private sector
or the charitable sector to the degree that the Bill requires in terms
of contestability. I was unable to speak in the Second Reading debate,
but I would ask the Under-Secretary of State to make representations on
behalf of rural Wales to ensure that we do not lose the good work that
is going on by trying to achieve a target that may prove difficult to
meet and, if it is met, will offer only a superficial
solution.
I welcome
the Climate Change Bill, and I endorse many of the comments that the
hon. Member for Llanelli made about it, too. The Government must set
firm and clear targets, and clear targets on an annual basis. It is
only by achieving those, step by step, year by year, that we will
achieve the 60 per cent. reduction in carbon emissions by 2050 that
most people agree is the minimum needed to ameliorate climate
change. The
Government seem to be moving away from annual fixed targets. They seem
to enjoy setting targets for other people, but do not enjoy it so much
when targets are set for themselves. The discipline of annual targets
will make it better and easier to achieve the ultimate target of a 60
per cent. reduction in carbon emissions.
As to pieces of legislation
that did not appear in the Queen’s Speech, my hon. Friend the
Member for Ceredigion has already talked about the marine Bill. Wales
is not exactly surrounded by water, but has a lot of coastal length for
its size. We depend on good coastal environments for tourism, our
fishing fleets and many of the other activities that make Wales such an
attractive place to visit. As I understand it, the Government will now
include a draft marine Bill in a White Paper that may be issued before
the next Queen’s Speech is delivered.
One of the Bills that I
anticipated seeing in the Queen’s Speech was the coroners Bill.
A number of hon. Members with whom I have been working in the House had
constituents who died in the Marchioness disaster on the Thames. The
way that that coroners’ inquest was carried out left a lot to be
desired. The impact of a coroners Bill, which would give us full-time,
dedicated, highly trained coroners, who are not only efficient and
effective in doing their business but have the skills to deal with the
bereaved people in a sympathetic and caring way, should be an
objectivefor us all.
There was one element of the
coroners Bill that had pre-legislative scrutiny, which indicated that
there might be only three coroners for Wales. I would not agree with
that. Obviously I would object to it because it would not give Wales
enough coverage. At the same time, I would support the
Government’s determination to give us a coroners service that is
fit for purpose for this century.
I want to mention three
elements that impact on the economy of Wales and that of my
constituency in particular. The first concerns British Waterways and
the cuts that it is experiencing as a result of financial mismanagement
by DEFRA. When the Minister answered my oral question at the beginning
of this Committee, he indicated that it would have no Barnett
implications in terms of the changes of the DEFRA budget. However, I do
not agree with that, and I think that perhaps he may have been—I
was going to say misinformed, but that would be too strong—not
briefed exactly accurately. The amount of money that British Waterways
gets does not depend at all on the Barnett formula, because it does not
get money from the Welsh Assembly; money is delivered to British
Waterways as a whole. However, the Scottish Parliament makes a
contribution to British Waterways, so the Barnett formula in Scotland
has had some effect.
To give a flavour of
what I am talking about, throughout the UK there are 300 million visits
to the 2,000 miles of inland waterway network that are
accessible and attractive. They are nearby destinations for day trips
and holidays, and attract people to stay in this country for holidays
rather than flying abroad and creating all the carbon emissions that
give us such great concern through the aviation industry. I can say
that without contradiction, without my hon. Friend the Member for
Montgomeryshire being here. It is because of poor financial management
that DEFRA has been unable to meet its financial obligations to British
Waterways this year. Realisation came in March 2006, when the first cut
to the British Waterways budget was made. Since then, the
Department’s financial position has worsened because of its
mishandling of the single farm payment scheme, avian influenza and
preparedness for undefined emergencies. There was a cut, in March, of
7.5 per cent., which equates to£4.5 million, and later
on a further cut of 5 per cent., equating to £3
million. What effect
will that have in Wales? At the moment, six to 10 posts will be lost
from the Wales and border counties business unit, which is responsible
for administering Wales. That represents a 10 per cent. reduction in
the business unit’s office-based staff, and a likely reduction
of two posts in Wales. The employment cuts are
serious—particularly for the individuals involved, but they also
represent a loss of expertise, because British Waterways has been good
at putting partnerships together that involve other organisations such
as local authorities, at obtaining lottery grants to maximise the
receipts of Government money, and at increasing its
income. In my
constituency, the Monmouthshire and Brecon canal runs for 32 miles
between Brecon and Pontypool. The right hon. Member for Torfaen is not
here, butI believe that the canal extends almost into his
constituency. Since 1968, it has gradually been restored by British
Waterways with the support of the national park and others, and it was
reopened to the public in 1970. I have received a huge number of
representations, not only from narrow boat hire operators and canal
trip operators, but from the many hotels and pubs that are situated
along the canal and which depend on its use for the success of their
business. When I
first knew it, the canal was a dirty ditch that mothers told their
children not to go near, because it was polluted and dangerous, whereas
it now provides wonderful opportunities for walking and for leisure and
enjoyment. It would be a huge pity if such a wonderful facility fell
once again into disrepair, as it did at the beginning of the last
century. Will the
Under-Secretary therefore make representations for money to be found
from the Contingencies Fund, in order to safeguard a wonderful
organisation that has made good use of public money? There has been no
criticism of British Waterways or of its use of public funds.
A number of hon. Members have
mentioned HMRC, which has offices up and down Wales. I have spoken to
the employees in Brecon, of whom there are 32, and who provide a
magnificent service to small and medium-sized businesses. Throughout
mid-Wales there are businesses employing just one person, or at any
rate fewer than five, and there is very little time or resource to take
advice on tax matters that concern them. The tax office is currently
open and accessible to them, but there is fear that that will not
continue.
I have been told that
consultation is happening on how those employees do their
work—for example, as to the use of a task-based system in
examining self-assessment forms. That system, however, was the cause of
the concern about the Rural Payments Agency and the single farm payment
fiasco. Instead of looking at the whole application, officers looked
only at part. I am told that the system may be introduced into HMRC. If
so, then when we consult on the HMRC offices, it will not be possible
to make our case. We need to be involved at an early stage, and I am
pleased that the Under-Secretary is talking to the Paymaster General.
My office is trying to put together an all-party group to meet her,
too, because this issue affects the whole of Wales regardless of
political
parties. Finally, I
understand that in my constituency all but two post offices are defined
as rural. We were not terribly badly affected by the reinvention scheme
that affected urban post offices. However, although the announcement on
Thursday could affect rural and urban post offices, it will probably
impinge more on the rural ones. I cannot compliment the post office
network enough for the way in which it has kept rural post offices open
in the past, with Government support. It will be a huge pity if all our
good work goes to nothing and many post offices are
shut.
Mrs.
Gillan: I speak from experience, because the closure of a
semi-rural post office in my constituency has taken the heart out of
that area of the village. Such closures rip the heart out of
communities. In more isolated rural areas, the post office is even more
important as a centre of social activity and a focus point for
communities. The fact that this network is being allowed to wither on
the vine is probably one of the most criminal things that this
Government could have
done.
Mr.
Williams: I agree absolutely with the hon. Lady. It is a
case of investing a lot of money and then seeing it wasted because of
the Government’s lack of determination to see this wonderful
service continue. This
has been a good debate. I commend the continuation of the Welsh Grand
Committee, because it provides the opportunity for hon. Members for
Wales to raise issues nationally as well as locally. The debate, which
has been good, has served that
purpose. 3.7
pm Alun
Michael (Cardiff, South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op): I am
grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate. I want to say a
few words about the interface between Parliament, Government and the
National Assembly for Wales on crime and disorder, nuisance and
clearing up the local environment. Before I do that, may I say that it
is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire,
even if he is currently in conference on what alliances can be created
on the Opposition
Benches? Delivery of
services to rural areas, something with which I have been engaged and
have spent quite a lot of my time doing in recent years, is bound to be
challenging, particularly in relation to crime and
disorder. When I was deputy Home Secretary, I instigated research on the
impact on rurality on police work, partly because of representations by
the then chief constable of Dyfed-Powys, Ray White, who was also
president of the Association of Chief Police Officers during the 1997
general election. He was, as hon. Members might imagine, a passionate
advocate of the needs of rural areas. The result of that research was
to demonstrate where there is stretch and demand through the pressures
of rurality and whether there is a rurality premium in terms of the
finances for rural police forces. However, there is a much lower level
of crime in most rural areas and a higher rate of solving the crimes
that come to the attention of the police. Dyfed-Powys has had
considerable success in that
regard. The hon.
Member for Brecon and Radnorshire was a little bit cheap in suggesting
that the Government do not like to set targets for themselves, which is
untrue. When we came into office in 1997, we had more specific targets
and commitments than any previous Government, and we achieved them. I
take a great deal of pride in having halved the time that it takes to
bring young offenders before the courts. The previous Government had
taken so little interest in the issue that there were not even facts or
statistics on which to base anything, so we had to lose a few months
while we calibrated the figures to allow us to see what it would mean
to halve the time. We then pursued a tough objective, which we achieved
during our first term in office.
We are leading the world on
climate change. That leadership should be acknowledged, and it should
be a matter of pride, even on the Opposition Benches. American interns
in my office have commented on the extent to which understanding of
climate change, interest on the part of Government and
challengingthe community are factors in this country, which is
completely new in their experience.
Of course, there need to be
targets. In fact, we are setting harder targets than our international
obligations demand. An obsession with annual targets is a mistake. Yes,
we ought to look at figures each year to see where progress is being
made, but variations in the course of a year might introduce
distortions that render the figures meaningless. One has to look at
them over a longer period to ensure that the direction of travel is
right and is maintained. Sometimes, it is a question of what we mean by
setting challenging targets and the means of measuring them. Targets
need to be intelligently set and intelligently measured—the hon.
Member for Brecon and Radnorshire does not seem to
disagree—which is how this Government try to approach such
issues
| 
