Mr.
Murphy: I think the Welsh Assembly Government would very
much differ with the hon. Lady on that. They have allocated an
additional £4.5 million to existing mortgage rescue
schemes, taking it up to nearly £10 million this
year, and they have undertaken various other housing initiatives.
Housing is devolved, as the hon. Lady knows, and it is an issue on
which both Governments can help Welsh people. If she wants to do away
with the Assembly so that only the UK Government will be responsible
for such matters, her party must say so. But to deny that the Assembly
Government have a role to play in helping people, either in terms of
affordable housing or mortgages, is simply not
right.
Mrs.
Gillan: The Secretary of State is again trying to twist my
words. I want him to confirm that the mortgage rescue scheme and the
affordable housing funding scheme, which are being delivered through
the Assembly, also exist in other parts of the
UK.
Mr.
Murphy: Of course they exist in other parts of the UK. My
point is that special circumstances and funding exist in Wales that
allow extra schemes to help people in relation to affordable housing
and other such matters.
Albert
Owen (Ynys Môn) (Lab): Does my right hon. Friend
agree that the shadow Secretary of State is completely missing the
point? The benefit of having a well funded Assembly—I emphasise
the term “well funded” because the Assembly’s
Budget has doubled over 10 years—allows specific policies to be
developed in Wales for the benefit of Welsh people, which is what has
happened on the issue under discussion. We are an integral part of the
UK, but also have the flexibility to do things
differently.
Mr.
Murphy: We have the best of both worlds; we are part of
the UK with all the advantages that that brings, but at the same time
we have our own Assembly, which brings extra benefits that are tailored
to Welsh people. I therefore agree with my hon.
Friend. We
have to protect services and help people, and in order to do that we
have inevitably to pay for it. People have talked of the tax increase
for those who earn more than £150,000 a year, and it is right to
ask those who earn the most in our country to help out the most; I do
not think that there is anybody in a Welsh constituency
who thinks otherwise. People similarly understand that government at all
levels—locally, in Wales and in the UK—must ensure that
there is proper value for money in the way that we run our services.
That is why we are to have efficiency savings from the UK Government,
as well as from the Welsh Assembly Government. I have talked to the
First Minister and the Finance Minister about all those
issues. Adam
Price: Part of the UK Government’s so-called
efficiency savings programme is the proposal to privatise the Royal
Mint. I asked the Secretary of State about that when we discussed the
pre-Budget report, and at that stage he said that I was reading too
much into the issue. We now know that there is a proposal to privatise,
and the local Assembly Member has criticised the plans as unnecessary.
What is the Secretary of State’s
view?
Mr.
Murphy: Certainly, there is no plan to privatise the Royal
Mint, but there is a plan to ensure that it is given company status so
that money can be poured into what could be an even more successful
business than it is at present. The Mint’s chief executive made
that clear to various people whom he spoke to last week. I have talked
to trade unions on the issue and will continue to do
so. The
potential exists for the Mint to be even more commercially successful.
In the build-up to the Olympics over the next few years, for example,
medals could be forged in Llantrisant, and work could be obtained from
other countries by way of medals or other coinage. Those are potential
commercial ventures that, far from reducing the stability of the Royal
Mint, will enhance it and could even create more jobs
there. Dr.
Kim Howells (Pontypridd) (Lab): My hon. Friend the Member
for Cardiff, North and I attended a meeting at the Royal Mint to find
out for ourselves what the situation was, because we were sickened by
the speculation being put around by nationalists and Liberal Democrats
regarding privatisation and job losses. On the contrary, the Royal Mint
is going to create 100 jobs between now and Christmas—that is
100 new employees. There are not many firms doing that in Wales, and it
is very good
news.
Mr.
Murphy: But the projection is that more jobs will come to
Llantrisant and that they will be protected in a way that will enable
private money to be put into the Royal Mint building. That is not
privatisation, but it ensures the survival of the Mint in hotly
commercial
circumstances.
Adam
Price: If this is speculation being put around by
nationalists and Liberal Democrats, why did a headline in the
Western Mail on 20 April read, “Labour minister opposes
Royal Mint privatisation”, following a statement made by the
Labour Assembly Member for Pontypridd? Is she a crypto-nationalist, or
is she so badly misinformed that she does not know what is going on in
her own
constituency?
Mr.
Murphy: I never comment on personalities—I leave
that to others. The issue is whether the Royal Mint can flourish and
become a better business so that jobs
can be more properly safeguarded and more jobs can be created. That can
happen as a result of more private investment. I do not have a problem
with that, so long as we ensure that those jobs are safeguarded, and I
think that that is what everyone is concerned
with. Mr.
Don Touhig (Islwyn) (Lab/Co-op): My right hon. Friend is
making several important points in the face of Opposition
Members—the nationalists and the Tories—who are all in
the same group and who always take pleasure in talking Wales down. Is
that not the message that we have to get across to the people when they
go to the polls next month? Those who defend Wales are those sitting on
this side of the
Committee.
Mr.
Murphy: The Opposition are talking about an age of
austerity, but if it is to be an age of austerity, I know that it will
be for most of the people we represent, rather than for the wealthy
people in this country. Our job is to be ambitious for Wales, ensuring
that we plan our public services and put money into them. We must
invest in new technologies, including digital technology and low-carbon
technology, so that when we come out of the recession Wales will be
much better placed than it has been in the past. What is the point of
seeking out as much gloom as possible for political reasons? That is
not our job. Our job is to give hope and confidence to people in
Wales.
The
Government’s actions over the past few months, and certainly in
the Budget, direct us not to sit back and simply do nothing, but to
invest for growth and ensure that people in Wales can look forward to a
future in which their children are properly educated and skilled, and
we will then have the skills and investment to go into the next decade
after the recession. The only way we can do that is by ensuring that we
retain a Labour Government in the United Kingdom and a Labour-led
Assembly in Cardiff.
Mrs.
Gillan: I am grateful to the Secretary of State for giving
way—
Hon.
Members: He has finished his
speech.
Mr.
Murphy: I can give another peroration if Members would
like.
Mrs.
Gillan: I was hoping that the right hon. Gentleman was
giving way. I wanted him to explain how the £7
million efficiency cuts set out in the Red Book will help the Driver
and Vehicle Licensing Agency and how S4C will benefit from the
£3 million also being cut from its
budget.
Mr.
Murphy: Those are obviously important issues, but I remind
the hon. Lady that I have finished my speech and that she will be able
to make those points in her own
speech.
10.3
am
Mrs.
Gillan: First, I apologise to the Committee, the Secretary
of State and the Under-Secretary of State, because I will be unable to
be here for the closing part of the debate. That is for the simple
reason that I drew first
place in the private Member’s Bill ballot and, with all-party
support, am trying to put through the Autism Bill. There is a Committee
meeting this afternoon, for which the Government tabled the money
resolution last night. I hope that you, Mr. Caton, and all
members of the Grand Committee will understand that my absence is
certainly not intended to show any disrespect to the Committee. Rather,
I am hoping during the course of the Bill, as the hon. Member for
Cardiff, North knows, to be able to talk up the strategy the National
Assembly has produced on autism, because it is a particularly helpful
document, which has led the way in that area.
We meet today
on the 10th anniversary of the Assembly, and I was surprised, as I am
sure were many of those listening to the debate, that the Secretary of
State chose, rather than celebrating and highlighting that anniversary
in his opening remarks, to pre-empt the forthcoming general election
campaign by attacking the Tories. It is an old game and a sad game, and
I had thought that he was better than that. Welsh Conservatives,
however, certainly understand that for devolution to work we need a
strong relationship between Westminster and the Assembly, and I believe
that successful devolution depends on the support of the people, as
well as on political co-operation. That is why we are committed,
despite the off-the-cuff remark of the Secretary of State, which was
not worthy of him, to developing an open, constructive dialogue, not
just between Ministers but between the bodies. By working together, we
know that the Assembly can make a difference to the lives of people
across Wales. I am delighted to have the opportunity to put that on the
record at this stage of the
debate.
Mr.
Touhig: Perhaps the hon. Lady, in her remarks, will
confirm what her party’s policy is, in so far as Members of
Parliament for Wales are concerned, should the Conservatives be elected
to Government. Do they still intend to disfranchise the 40 Welsh
Members and not allow us to be part of the United Kingdom Parliament,
as our constitution says that we
are?
Mrs.
Gillan: The right hon. Gentleman seeks to peddle a myth.
Wales will always receive its true balance of representation in the UK
Parliament under a Conservative Government. He, like me, is a
passionate Unionist, and he knows that we shall try to preserve the
United Kingdom while preserving the special privilege for the
devolution settlement, which has brought some benefits to
Wales—I am the first to admit
that.
Mr.
Murphy: We ought to give the Committee the opportunity to
listen to the views of the hon. Lady’s party on such important
issues. My right hon. Friend the Member for Islwyn referred not only to
the number of Welsh Members of Parliament but to their role in the
United Kingdom Parliament. Is her party’s policy that all
Members of Parliament are treated the
same?
The
Chairman: Order. We are wandering away from the
Budget.
Mrs.
Gillan: Mr. Caton, I listen to your strictures,
but it is obvious that the appetite on the Government Benches is to
fight a general election and not to discuss the Budget.
For once, the
Budget has been different. Normally we see a Labour Budget unravel as
the fine print is revealed after a few days, but this time the growth
forecasts, the very basis of the Chancellor’s financial
assumptions, were discredited by leading economists within hours. That,
coupled with the token tax rises for high earners before the election,
sets the Budget apart for breaking the Government’s manifesto
promises—yet another promise broken by the Government. Something
else that the Secretary of State did not mention is that after the
election tax rises are coming down the road for every Welsh family,
which puts the icing on the
cake. Down
the road in Cardiff, Assembly Members seem unsure of what the
implications and consequences are for the Wales budget. However, they
know that they face so-called efficiency savings of at least
£216 million, a figure that did not fall from the Secretary of
State’s lips. According to some sources immediately after the
Budget, the figure could amount to up to £416 million. As the
Assembly Finance Minister put it, Wales is certainly not immune from
the UK spending squeeze to get national debt back to sustainable
levels.
Mr.
Murphy: On efficiency savings, the hon. Lady is right that
£216 million has been earmarked over two years, but she did not
mention that £60 million extra is coming to the Assembly in
those two years, bringing the figure down to £156 million. So
far as the extra, shadowy £200 million in capital is concerned,
that has mostly been spent. The Finance Minister in the Assembly has
categorically denied that the figure is £400 million—it
is £216 million minus £60
million.
Mrs.
Gillan: That is the trouble: the money has been spent.
There was never a truer word said in jest. However, outside
commentators differ on the figures. What appalled me was that there was
no ready explanation of the implication in detail of the Budget for
Wales, and that speculation was allowed to run rife for several
days.
Mr.
Murphy: That simply is not the case. I and other
colleagues tried constantly in the media, particularly the BBC, to make
that figure clear. Both Governments, both Finance Ministers and I agree
the figure. There is no doubt whatever that the figure is £216
million minus £60 million, if they so wish. The other figure
refers to capital. Because journalists refuse to believe what they are
told is not a matter for
me.
Mrs.
Gillan: I shall leave journalists to make their own
observations.
Mr.
Llwyd: In fact, I agree with the hon. Lady on this point.
Would it not be a good idea for a memorandum to be included with the
paperwork for each Budget, explaining precisely the effect on the
budgetary situation of the National Assembly and, for that matter, of
the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Ireland
Assembly?
Mrs.
Gillan: That is an excellent idea, because transparency is
essential. As the hon. Gentleman knows, nothing is as opaque as the Red
Book. It takes a while to go through it and find that £7 million
is being cut
from budget for the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, and £3
million from the budget for S4C. Both are in
Wales.
Chris
Ruane: Whether the figure is £200 million or
£150 million, does the hon. Lady agree that the 1997 Budget set
out £7 billion for the Wales Office, and next year the amount
will be more than £15 billion? Will she pay tribute to the work
that the Government have done in giving Wales the funding that it
needs?
| 
