The
Committee consisted of the following
Members:
Chair:
Hywel
Williams
†
Davies,
Geraint (Swansea West)
(Lab/Co-op)
†
Davies,
Glyn (Montgomeryshire)
(Con)
†
Evans,
Chris (Islwyn)
(Lab/Co-op)
†
Flynn,
Paul (Newport West)
(Lab)
†
James,
Mrs Siân C. (Swansea East)
(Lab)
†
Johnson,
Gareth (Dartford)
(Con)
†
Jones,
Mr David (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
Wales)
†
Jones,
Mr Marcus (Nuneaton)
(Con)
†
Kirby,
Simon (Brighton, Kemptown)
(Con)
†
Latham,
Pauline (Mid Derbyshire)
(Con)
†
Llwyd,
Mr Elfyn (Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
(PC)
†
Lumley,
Karen (Redditch)
(Con)
†
Michael,
Alun (Cardiff South and Penarth)
(Lab/Co-op)
†
Newmark,
Mr Brooks (Lord Commissioner of Her Majesty's
Treasury)
†
Smith,
Owen (Pontypridd)
(Lab)
†
Tami,
Mark (Alyn and Deeside)
(Lab)
†
Williams,
Mr Mark (Ceredigion)
(LD)
†
Williams,
Roger (Brecon and Radnorshire)
(LD)
Adrian Jenner, Committee
Clerk
† attended the
Committee
Fourth
Delegated Legislation
Committee
Wednesday 24
November
2010
[Hywel
Williams
in the
Chair]
Draft
National Assembly for Wales Referendum (Assembly Act Provisions)
(Referendum Question, Date of Referendum etc.) Order
2010
2.30
pm
The
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr David
Jones):
I beg to
move,
That
the Committee has considered the Draft National Assembly for Wales
Referendum (Assembly Act Provisions) (Referendum Question, Date of
Referendum Etc.) Order
2010.
The
Chair:
With this it will be convenient to consider the
Draft National Assembly for Wales Referendum (Assembly Act Provisions)
(Limit on Referendum Expenses Etc.) Order
2010.
Mr
Jones:
Thank you, Mr Williams. It is a pleasure to serve
under your chairmanship. For ease of reference, I shall refer to the
two orders as the referendum order and the expenses order. The
Committee is asked to consider two draft orders that would make
arrangements for a referendum to be held in Wales on further law-making
powers for the National Assembly for Wales. The circumstances in which
a referendum can be called and the parameters of the referendum
question are prescribed under the Government of Wales Act 2006. That
Act provides for primary law-making powers for the Assembly in devolved
areas of policy, if and when the people of Wales decide in a referendum
that that is what they
want.
On
9 February this year, the Assembly unanimously passed a resolution
calling for a referendum in Wales. When the First Minister wrote to the
previous Secretary of State on 17 February giving formal notice of the
Assembly’s resolution, he triggered the process under the 2006
Act, which meant that the Secretary of State had 120 days from the day
after receipt of the notification either to lay the draft referendum
order before Parliament or to set out reasons for not doing so.
Following the general election, it fell to my right hon. Friend the
current Secretary of State to respond to the Assembly’s call
within the statutory deadline. She did so on 15 June, confirming that
she would lay a draft referendum order before Parliament as soon as
practicable and, as agreed with the First Minister, would work towards
a referendum in the first quarter of
2011.
The
coalition Government have taken seriously their commitment to hold a
referendum. Since we entered office, we have worked with the Welsh
Assembly Government and other interested parties to ensure that we
could deliver on that commitment. There has been good co-operation,
showing that the mutual respect agenda is working well.
The draft
referendum order is the larger of the two draft orders before us today.
It consists of 28 articles and six schedules, and comprises the bulk of
the provisions relating to the arrangements for a referendum on further
powers for the Assembly. Provisions in the Government of Wales Act 2006
and in the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act
2000—PPERA—also apply to the referendum, but the draft
referendum order is necessary to complete the details of the
arrangements, including the key provisions on the date of the
referendum and on the referendum
question.
The
purpose of the draft expenses order is to specify the limits on
spending by those campaigning for a particular outcome in the
referendum. Both draft orders are subject to approval by both Houses of
Parliament. The referendum order is an Order in Council, and must also
be approved by a majority of at least 40 Assembly Members before it can
be recommended to Her Majesty in Council. The requisite Assembly
approval was given on 9 November.
I propose
outlining briefly some of the key provisions in the two draft orders
that may be of particular interest to members of the Committee. Turning
first to the draft referendum order, the provision that has possibly
attracted the most attention to date is that on the referendum question
and its preceding statement, which is set out in article 4. There was
relative silence before the general election on the issue of the
referendum question. Work had commenced on drafting the detailed
provisions of the legal instruments, but at the request of the First
Minister, no work had taken place on the key provision in the draft
order that relates to the
question.
In
the five weeks following the general election, my right hon. Friend the
Secretary of State met her statutory obligations as set out in the
Government of Wales Act 2006, reached agreement with the First
Minister, and referred the question to the Electoral Commission on 23
June. The commission required 10 weeks to assess the question and to
report to the Secretary of State. During that time, the commission
conducted a thorough assessment of the preamble in question. That
included carrying out public opinion research, inviting and gathering
views from interested parties, including political parties, and seeking
advice on both the English and Welsh versions of the
question.
The
commission produced its report on 2 September. My right hon. Friend the
Secretary of State discussed the findings with the First Minister and
the Deputy First Minister, agreed to the commission’s
recommended revision of the question and its preamble, and confirmed
the legality of the question, as is set out in the Government of Wales
Act 2006. It should be noted that the Presiding Officer of the Assembly
also indicated his agreement to the decision to use the revised
question.
Apart
from the referendum question, the other aspect of the proposed
referendum order that has attracted attention is the date on which the
referendum is to be held. Article 3 provides for the referendum to be
held on 3 March 2011. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State gave
careful consideration to the date of the referendum. The First Minister
had made representations, saying that he was not in favour of holding
the referendum on the same date as the Assembly election and favoured a
referendum in early spring. The coalition Government are committed to
working with the Assembly Government in a spirit of mutual respect, and
consequently the
Secretary of State was prepared to consider carefully any reasonable
request from the First Minister regarding the date of the referendum.
The Assembly Government had made a commitment to holding the referendum
on or before the Assembly election in May 2011. The First Minister
pointed out the difficulties that could arise if the referendum was
held on the same day as the Assembly elections, in terms of Assembly
Members engaging in two different campaigns in the same period, with
political parties campaigning against each other in the elections, but
possibly campaigning for the same outcome in the referendum. He stated
a preference for distinct and separate campaigns, with a 3 March
referendum giving enough distance in time between the two. The
Secretary of State considered that the request to hold the referendum
separately was reasonable, and agreed to the date of 3
March.
Although
the other provisions of the draft referendum order have not attracted
as much attention, they are none the less important; they deal with how
people are to vote in the referendum, and set out the rules for how the
referendum is to be run by the chief counting officer and the local
counting officers. All those who are registered to vote in Assembly
elections will be able to vote in the referendum. Schedules 1 and 2
make provision for absent voters—those who vote by post or
proxy—and for the issue and receipt of ballot papers. Those
provisions are similar to those that apply for
elections.
With
regard to the running of the referendum, the provisions relating to the
chief counting officer, the deputy chief counting officer and counting
officers are relevant. The chief counting officer will be the chair of
the Electoral Commission. Under article 9, she
“must do all
such acts and things as may be necessary for effectually conducting the
referendum in the manner
provided”
for
in the draft order. There will be a counting officer appointed for each
voting area, and those areas will be the same as local authority areas
in Wales. The chief counting officer, under article 11, can direct
counting officers on how they should discharge their functions relating
to the referendum, or to take specified steps to prepare for the
referendum. Counting officers must also conduct the referendum in
accordance with the detailed referendum rules, which are set out in
schedule 3 to the draft
order.
The
timing of the count has not yet been decided. The default position is
that it should take place as soon as reasonably practicable after the
close of the poll. However, the chief counting officer may direct the
count to take place the following day. The Electoral Commission has
invited views from interested parties, including broadcasters, on when
the count should take place. It has not yet announced its decision on
the timing of the count, but will no doubt do so as soon as possible,
taking into account all the submitted views.
There are two
further points relating to the draft referendum. First, in relation to
the costs of the referendum, the costs of the Electoral Commission will
be met by the coalition Government, but all other costs will be met by
the Welsh Assembly Government through the Welsh Consolidated Fund. The
bulk of those costs have to do with the local administration of the
referendum by the counting officers. It will therefore be for Welsh
Ministers to make an order to deal with the counting
officers’ fees and charges, subject to the draft referendum order
being approved and being made by Her Majesty in
Council.
Secondly,
the commission’s report on the intelligibility of the question
highlighted the low levels of awareness about the proposed referendum
in Wales, and indeed about its subject matter. It is for the
“yes” and “no” campaigns to make the case
for either vote, but there is of course value in having available an
independent and impartial source of information on the subject matter
of the referendum. To that end, article 16 of the draft order provides
for the Electoral Commission to take such steps as it thinks
appropriate to promote public awareness in Wales about the referendum,
its subject matter and how to vote in it. I am sure that Committee
members are aware already that the Government of Wales Act 2006 gives
the Assembly Commission powers to promote awareness of the system of
devolved Government, and the Assembly Commission has launched its
“Vote 2011” awareness
campaign.
The
expenses order is considerably
shorter.
Alun
Michael (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op):
Will the
Minister clarify the difference between the orders that are before us
today and the equivalent orders for Northern Ireland and Scotland?
There may be a simple answer that the Minister can give to my question.
In this year’s election, MPs who represent two parties—I
am nominated by both the Labour and the Co-operative party; there are
other arrangements in Northern Ireland—were told that we could
not be badged as Labour/Co-operative because of an unintended mistake
in the subsidiary legislation under which the election was being held.
That was corrected in the equivalent orders for Scotland and Northern
Ireland, but the issue is not mentioned in today’s legislation.
We are told that this is because a National Assembly order in 2007
dealt with the issue. Is that the case, and is that why the matter is
not mentioned in today’s statutory instruments? It gives rise to
the question why, if the problem was solved in 2007, there was a
problem this year. Can the Minister
explain?
Mr
Jones:
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for the
question. I await inspiration on the answer. I hope to
return to the subject when I wind
up.
Mr
Elfyn Llwyd (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC):
While the Minister
awaits inspiration, may I inspire him further? May I ask the Minister
to look at what he calls article—I would call it section, but
never mind—19(2)(d)? Page 11
says:
“(2)
The person who is required or authorised to give or display the
document must give or display or otherwise make available in such form
as that person thinks
appropriate—
(a)
the document in
Braille;
(b)
the document in languages other than English and
Welsh;
(c)
graphical representations of the information contained in the document;
and”—
this
is the bit I am interested
in—
“(d)
other means of making the information accessible to persons who might
not otherwise have reasonable access to the
information.”
What
does that mean?
Mr
Jones:
Again, I await inspiration. I will return to the
hon. Gentleman when I wind up. I now turn to the expenses order, which,
as I said, is considerably shorter. It sets the spending limits for
campaigners who have registered as permitted participants, who are
spending more than £10,000, and whose expenditure is therefore
subject to
regulation.
My
right hon. Friend the Secretary of State consulted the Electoral
Commission on what the limits should be, as she was required to do
under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act 2000. She
accepted the recommendations of the Electoral Commission, so the
spending limits specified in the draft order are as recommended by the
commission. They are, of course, set at a significantly lower level
than the statutory limits set for a UK-wide referendum campaign. PPERA
provides a framework for the referendum and enables the Electoral
Commission to ensure that it is run fairly.
Article 3 of
the draft order varies the time period in which individuals and
organisations can register with the Electoral Commission and apply to
be the lead campaign organisation for either the “yes” or
“no” vote, increasing it to five weeks, instead of the
usual four, to allow for the Christmas and new year holiday period.
That period will be followed by a two-week period during which the
Electoral Commission decides whether to appoint a lead organisation for
each side. The remaining period of just over four weeks to the poll
will be for the campaign proper. I emphasise that what we are talking
about here are the limits imposed on spending by campaigners from their
own funds, and not the spending of public
money.
Finally,
the draft order makes explicit that media coverage is not to be
regarded as a referendum expense, so broadcasters and newspapers need
not register as permitted participants in the referendum in Wales.
I hope and trust that the Committee will agree that the
draft orders are important. It is absolutely necessary to approve them
to enable the people of Wales to express their views in the referendum
next March. I commend the draft orders to the
Committee.
2.45
pm
Owen
Smith (Pontypridd) (Lab):
It is a pleasure to serve under
your chairmanship, Mr Williams. It is also a pleasure to say—as
I did yesterday, when we considered an order amending schedule 7 of the
Government of Wales Act 2006—that the orders are a further
important step in the settlement of devolution, which has evolved
significantly over the past 10 years, and we imagine that it will
evolve still
further.
I
am pleased that the Minister has truncated the substantive order to
“the referendum order”, and the supplementary order to
“the expenses order”. The substantive order has, as the
Minister says, been debated fully and approved in the National Assembly
for Wales. Before that, it was subject to specific and welcome
amendments as a result of consultation with the Electoral Commission
and other bodies. I am pleased to say that we agree with the Minister
that the result of that consultation is a question that we can agree is
the best and most simple that we might hope for, given that it deals
with a relatively complex issue.
I cannot help
but say that, on that particular question, the Minister is absolutely
right to say that the so-called respect agenda has been observed, and
there has been
good, solid co-operation between the First Minister in Wales and the
Secretary of State. It is just about the only issue that I can think of
on which the respect agenda has been observed, but we should be
grateful for small mercies.
The other
substantive issue in the referendum order is the date. There was less
agreement about where that should sit on next year’s calendar,
but it is now settled for 3 March. With that date, we at least do not
run the risk of the referendum being overshadowed by the great event on
29 April; some of us might fear that that is a problem that we have to
face, in relation to the Assembly election.
The
supplementary, expenses order did not need to be approved by the
National Assembly and is, therefore, being debated in this House for
the first time. It, too, has been subject to significant scrutiny by
the Electoral Commission and others. The commission is pleased that its
recommendations, such as the extension from four to five weeks to deal
with the Christmas period, received a positive response. We, too, are
pleased with that and therefore we support both orders. Labour will
campaign for a “yes” vote in March as the most effective
means of protecting Wales from the ravages of the coalition Government
and of maintaining our agenda of fairness and opportunity for
all.
I have a few
questions to ask the Minister. On article 5 of the expenses
order, will the Minister clarify exactly what is intended by the
exclusion of broadcast or other media, whichever position they support
in the referendum, as legitimate expenses? Does that relate to any
political broadcast—any pro or anti-referendum broadcasts by any
of the designated eligible parties—or does that apply only to
the BBC?
I beg the
Chair’s indulgence in allowing me to expand slightly on a
related point: BBC Wales will not be given significant additional
resources in respect of this referendum, whereas it was when it covered
the referendum in 1997. Will the Minister consider whether broadcast
expenses should be allowed? As he has said, the coalition Government
have been as good their word in working hard to deliver the referendum,
so he will want to ensure that there is adequate coverage of it. Might
he think about
that?
The
Chair:
Order. The hon. Gentleman has made the
point.
Owen
Smith:
Okay. Finally, may I ask the Minister to reflect on
the fact that we have before us today two orders that are of
considerable weight? The vast majority of the provisions deal with the
technical and increasingly complex issues around the delivery of the
referendum, such as the manner in which it is to be conducted, where
the polls will be undertaken and so on. May I ask him to reflect on how
much more difficult that will be in an era when we have
multiple constituencies—both parliamentary and
Assembly—and, potentially, ever more referendums in the
future?
2.50
pm
Roger
Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire) (LD):
It is a great
pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Williams. I
thoroughly welcome the orders on what is an historic day for Wales. I
have spoken on many occasions, along with my hon. Friends, about the
importance of replacing the current, cumbersome system that allows the
Welsh Assembly to make laws. I hope that we will, with the agreement of
the Welsh people in a referendum, consign the legislative competence
order system to the dustbin of
politics.
The
Welsh Assembly has been in existence for 10 years, and it is
high time that it was allowed to make its own laws within the areas for
which it has competence and powers. Many people will not understand why
it was necessary to impose the 2006 Act restrictions on the Assembly,
which have led to numerous delays, most notably in taking action on
affordable housing. We are where we are, however, and we must take this
opportunity to move forward. The Electoral Commission expressed some
concerns about the original wording of the question, but that has now
changed in line with its recommendations, so I am pleased that we have
a fair and understandable question that we can put to the Welsh voters
in March. I very much look forward to taking part in the
“yes” campaign, and I hope that we can persuade all hon.
Members to back the much-needed move to full law-making powers. I
observe in passing that when these matters were considered by the Welsh
Assembly, there was unanimous support for these orders. Indeed, all the
parties that spoke on that occasion indicated that they wanted to
support the “yes” campaign. I fully support the orders,
and I hope that they will be the start of a new era for the Welsh
Assembly.
2.52
pm
Mr
Llwyd:
I am beside myself with pleasure and glee at
serving under your able chairmanship, Mr Williams.
It is a
historic day. I do not mean any insult to anyone who has spoken, but it
has not exactly been a historic debate. The One Wales
agreement—one of the main planks of the agreement of the
coalition Government in Cardiff—is being delivered in large
part. I know that the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats in
Cardiff have been fully supportive of this move forward towards
further, simpler and more transparent democracy and delivery of
legislation in Cardiff bay. I am sure we all applaud that as
democrats.
However,
I have one or two concerns. One of them doubtless concerns the
Minister, too, and he may come back to it. Another—I think that
the point is within the terms of the order—is that I understand
that the Electoral Commission, once the “yes” campaign
has gone through certain categories, will register it as being able to
draw down public funding. It will not be able to do so unless the
“no” campaign has similarly met those criteria. I am
hopeful that somebody somewhere, who might even read what we are
discussing today, will look at that. If for some reason the
“no” campaign did not get itself in order in time, that
would deprive the “yes” campaign of broadcasting rights,
free broadcasting and public funding. I make that point in passing,
because, in the interests of democracy, we need a full and open debate.
I am not trying to issue a back-handed insult to the “no”
campaign; evidently I shall not be in that camp. Having said that, the
process could be clogged—I hope that somebody referring to the
debate will look at that, because it is an important point.
Apart from
that, I am pleased to be here. It is a historic day, as the hon. Member
for Brecon and Radnorshire said. I am pleased that we are moving
forward towards a new era of devolved politics in Wales, and a new way
of delivering legislation for Wales, in
Wales.
2.55
pm
Alun
Michael:
As others have said, it is a particular pleasure
to sit under your chairmanship, Mr Williams, and to know that you will
be restrained from entering the debate with your usual vigour and
enthusiasm. It is a matter of great pride to have reached this point
today. We have a simple and straightforward proposition for the
referendum. It brings together the appropriate geography of legislation
with that of the powers and responsibilities already held by the
Assembly. For those of us who have been involved, it is a matter of
some pride to have been moving towards this point over the past few
years.
The
extent to which the system of legislative competence orders has added
to the powers of the Assembly to legislate in those fields for which it
has responsibility has been underestimated. The housing LCO took some
time to get through because of its bad drafting, but by the time it was
introduced and unanimously supported in the Welsh Affairs Committee,
the policy had been developed and the right to that legislative power
had been earned by the Assembly. We can also take real pride in the
Welsh language LCO, which was considerably improved as a result of
discussions in this place, and those improvements produced an order
that was supported by all sides and by acclaim. On a subject like the
Welsh language, which can be divisive, that is something in which
Members of this House can take great pride, as can Assembly Members,
who also sought to improve that
order.
Carwyn
Jones has summarised the importance of this subject, both for relations
with the current Government and for getting that tidiness of
legislative competence. The referendum is, therefore, extremely
important and the rules before us today are important, too. I have only
one caveat, for which I shall set out the background. I had
to deal with the primary and delegated legislation that was effected by
the first Government of Wales Act 1998 during my period as Secretary of
State. The interface between the different bits of legislation is far
more complex than anybody really wants to know, and I am sure that
those with legal expertise will understand that. There may still be
issues on which the Assembly will need powers in the future for us to
keep a tidy situation across the range of its
responsibilities.
I
want to return to the question that I asked the Minister, and to
explain it more broadly. My question was not the shortest, but it is a
complex area. During the general election this year, there was some
chaos for those of us who represent more than one party. Right at the
last minute, we were told that we could not do that. In my case, and
many others were in the same situation, I had to start completely
afresh on getting my nomination papers signed and submitted to comply
with what the Electoral Commission said were the rules at that time.
Paragraph 4(5)(b) of the Scottish order refers to a partnership
arrangement whereby a candidate can represent two parties. The order
also specifies
that
“where
the description falls within rule 4(5)(b)… the registered emblem
(or one of the registered emblems) of one of the
parties”
may
be
used.
That
is very simple and straightforward.
We were
concerned to find that that problem is not dealt with in this order,
until the Electoral Commission told us that it is covered by schedule 5
of the National Assembly for Wales Representation of the People Order
2007
on
“Constituency
nomination paper: name or description of registered political
party.”
Rule
5 paragraph 3
states:
“A
nomination paper may not include a description of a candidate which is
likely to lead electors to associate the candidate with two or more
registered political parties unless the parties are each qualifying
parties in relation to the constituency and the description is a
registered description authorised by a certificate”.
In other words, one can
do it as long as the appropriate procedures are followed. The
conditions are spelt out in paragraph 5. Paragraph 5(b) says
that
“in
cases to which paragraph (3) applies, the registered emblem of only one
of the parties may be requested to be shown on the ballot
paper.”
In
other words, a candidate can use a description on the ballot paper from
two or more registered parties, but only one emblem, which is the
simple situation that has existed for many years—indeed, since
the concept of an emblem on the ballot paper was introduced. The
Electoral Commission tells us that that deals with the issue, which is
otherwise dealt with in the Scottish order. If that is the case, that
is fine, but given the chaos that the Electoral Commission got us into,
I will be grateful for the Minister’s, rather than just the
commission’s, assurance that that is the case, and that we will
not have the problem that we had in
May.
As
I say, this would be an interesting question to ask the commission: if
it had dealt with a problem, about which it did not know, in 2007, why
did we have the problem in 2010? Wales should perhaps have been
excluded from the problem that affected many including local government
as well as parliamentary elections in 2010. I would be
grateful if the Minister could provide us with that assurance in his
reply. That is my prime concern, and if he is able to give that
assurance, it would be
welcome.
My
only problem with the orders is the nature of the ballot paper, which
looks unacceptably complicated. It does not seem difficult to provide
the information contained on the ballot paper on a separate sheet, in
the same form as the information provided to the whole electorate, so
that the ballot paper itself could be simple and uncluttered. It is
disappointing that we still make the electoral process too complicated
for our electors, who will end up having to read a lot of small print
just to be sure that something new is not being said or that there is
nothing that they have not taken into account. By that stage, most
people would have read the information issued in a closely regulated
way, as it should be, and the clutter is therefore not
necessary.
That
apart, I greatly welcome the orders and look forward to the step
forward in the process of devolution that they
signal.
3.2
pm
Paul
Flynn (Newport West) (Lab):
My pleasure does not reach the
orgasmic heights of the hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd, but it is
still a joy to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Williams.
My
recollections of the campaign go back to 1953, when, as a sixth former,
I marched in the streets of Cardiff with a Labour party banner that
said, “Senedd i Gymru”, or, “A Parliament for
Wales”. It did not say, “Half a Parliament for
Wales” or “LCOs for the people”, but
“Senedd i Gymru”. While some victories come rapidly, 57
years is a fair time to wait for
success.
We
know that every level of devolution has been a grudged gift. People
part with any power reluctantly. It was interesting, when we looked at
reviving the Welsh parliamentary party, to go back to its history. In
1918, Mr David Davies, an MP from Wales, had a campaign to set up all
the institutions that we now have, such as the Secretary of State and a
Welsh Parliament on the soil of our own country.
The
progress towards devolution has been painful, where every inch of the
way has had to be fought. To those who are in some doubt about why we
are in this position, I can recommend a splendid book called
“Dragons Led by Poodles”, which gives the painful story
of why we ended up with a situation where we have half a Parliament.
That will be the main reason why people will vote “yes”
in great numbers in the referendum. They see Scotland having a real,
grown-up Parliament, and Wales being deprived. That will excite the
enthusiasm of voters to go and vote in great numbers for the
improvement. There will be a little more power. We are moving slowly
towards the goal that most of us want—to have major decisions in
Wales taken within Wales by those elected by the people of our own
country. It is a pleasure to be here today, and I shall not detain the
Committee for long. I just look forward to moving on to the
referendum.
A
tiny caveat is the fact that the amount of money that has been
suggested should be spent seems a little high for what is happening and
might be used as an excuse for unfairness by those parties that would
find it difficult to raise. The maximum amount is rather higher than it
should be. Elections are not won by money, but it is often a corrupting
influence. When the figures are revealed for the election in Wales, I
am sure that some of the most glorious results the last time were not
won by those who spent the largest sums. The differences between the
parties that are involved could give rise to some unhappiness for
people who might be opponents of the “yes”
vote.
3.8
pm
Mr
David Jones:
It is a huge, unaccustomed and probably never
to be repeated pleasure to be a recipient of so much general
approbation throughout the Committee. Several questions have been
asked. The right hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth referred to
party descriptions and designations. He might have been thinking of the
election order that will be debated on the Floor of the House next
week. However, he raised an important issue, and I undertake to write
to him in advance of that debate so that he does not have to repeat his
remarks next week—although if he felt minded to do so, I am sure
that he will
anyway.
The
hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd asked about article 19(2)(d). It
confers wide discretion on counting officers and the Electoral
Commission for the way they print information, to ensure that those
with disabilities or who do not have access to English or
Welsh as a first language are not thereby disadvantaged. He asked
whether the policy will be included in EC guidance to counting
officers. It seems to be very much a sweeping-up provision and to have
been drafted for that purpose, but I take his point that it is hard to
imagine what other means of communication are not already covered in
the preceding paragraphs.
The hon.
Gentleman also asked what the position would be if there were no
“no” campaign. If the Electoral Commission cannot
designate an official campaign on both sides, it will not designate an
official campaign. However, it would be for the Electoral Commission to
decide whether it should provide further information in that event. The
commission has wide power under article 16 to promote public awareness
of the referendum, its subject matter and how to vote in
it.
The
hon. Member for Pontypridd raised several issues, the first of which
was the effect of article
5.
Owen
Smith:
The issue raised by the hon. Member for Dwyfor
Meirionnydd is extremely important and one that we were unaware of. Is
the Minister saying that, if there were no “no” campaign
and one were not designated as such, there could not be a
“yes” campaign with funding? That would obviously be a
significant obstacle and might well be taken advantage of by a
“no”
campaign.
Mr
Jones:
That is indeed the case. Equally, if there were no
“yes” campaign, there could be no “no”
campaign. That is the meaning of the
provision.
The
hon. Member for Pontypridd asked about the effect of article 5 of the
expenses limits order and whether it applied to others or only to the
BBC. It applies to all media—both broadcast and print—in
coverage of the referendum excluding, of course, the campaign
broadcasts, which I think was what he was concerned about. Campaign
broadcasts are not caught by that
provision.
The
BBC will not be given additional resources to cover the referendum,
although I can understand why the hon. Gentleman, given his background,
should be
concerned about that. He raised—I am sure not
mischievously—the issue of multiple constituencies. Of course,
the referendum is conducted on local authority boundaries, so the issue
does not arise. I think that that deals with all the points that were
raised. The hon. Member for Newport West raised the issue of spending
limits. Unlike many possessors of credit cards, it is a limit, not a
target. I would gently point out that the Labour party, as a political
party, would be entitled to a larger share in the
circumstances.
Roger
Williams:
On a point of order, Mr Williams. I
note that in the proceedings of the Welsh Assembly Government, even
though there was no opposition to the matter being considered, a vote
was held so that people could demonstrate their support for the
referendum. Is there anything under Standing Orders that would allow
Members that opportunity, even though a vote was not
called?
The
Chair:
If the hon. Gentleman would care to shout,
“No”, we will have a
vote.
Question
put and agreed
to.
Resolved,
That
the Committee has considered the Draft National Assembly for Wales
Referendum (Assembly Act Provisions) (Referendum Question, Date of
Referendum Etc.) Order
2010.
Resolved,
That
the Committee has considered the Draft National Assembly for Wales
Referendum (Assembly Act Provisions) (Limit on Referendum Expenses
Etc.) Order 2010.—(Mr David
Jones
.
)
3.12
pm
Committee
rose.
