Welsh Governance

I thank the Secretary of State for giving me early sight of the White Paper. I am pleased that, following its publication, we can have a serious and informed debate about the extent of the Assembly’s powers months in advance. May I also say that we greatly support the statutory division of responsibilities between Welsh Assembly Ministers and the National Assembly for Wales? Does the Secretary of State agree that that is both sensible and overdue because it makes it easier to hold the Welsh Assembly Government to account, instead of always blaming the Assembly as a whole for errors of government? We know, for example, that student fees are supported only by Labour and opposed by the rest of the Assembly. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is important for the public to see that sort of transparency? Will the Secretary of State clarify the timetable? He said that no significant changes that would require a referendum were likely before 2011, but it was not clear whether he really meant 2011 or 2015 as the earliest time at which a referendum could be held. In either case, why is he so reluctant to accept the recommendation of the Richard commission that such a referendum could happen sooner? The issue of the triggers for the referendum—a two-thirds majority from the Welsh Assembly and, I assume, a majority from both Houses of Parliament—is also worrying. Why is the Secretary of State placing so many barriers between where we are now and where we should be in the future, particularly when the Scottish Parliament secured all the powers that it sought on the basis of a single referendum? Does he not see that by placing so many barriers between now and the future, it looks as though he is trying to make significant reform impossible? Given that he has not discussed the case for tax-varying powers anywhere in the White Paper, why does he believe that we require a referendum in any case? On the issue of the splitting of constituency and list candidatures, can he not see that it looks to other parties as if he is seeking to arrange matters in a way that favours his own party and potentially disadvantages others? What business is it of the Secretary of State for Wales to impose restrictions that mean that other parties—and, indeed, his own—cannot choose the people that they want to stand for both the list and the constituency candidatures? Given his transformation on the road to Damascus on the issue of democracy, does he agree with the rest of the country that securing 36 per cent. of the poll certainly does not give his party the authorisation to govern the country as a whole? Can he give me an assurance that he will look further into the wider issue of electoral reform across the country? On the veto, the Secretary of State seems to have included, under paragraph 3.16, the power to block aspects of devolution that he does not like. Does that not amount to centralised control by the back door? If I have misunderstood the implications, will he clarify precisely what he means to achieve through paragraph 3.16? Will he also ensure that consultation will take place not only across Wales, but across the border, as neighbouring constituencies in England will also be significantly affected? Finally, will the Secretary of State accept that those who are genuinely in favour of the Welsh Assembly having significantly greater powers regard the White Paper, far from giving a green light to devolution, as something of a white flag to the devolution sceptics? It seems to me that the Liberal Democrats, the official parliamentary opposition in Wales, will have to build new alliances with individuals from all parties and from none who want to give the Welsh Assembly the powers that it needs to provide Wales with the services that it deserves.