UK Parliament / Open data

Government of Wales Bill

Proceeding contribution from Dominic Grieve (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 24 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bills on Government of Wales Bill.
I agree with my right hon. Friend and cannot imagine such a circumstance. The process under part 3 that must be followed to get the Order in Council, including the delay periods, shows that Assembly Measures are hardly the material of urgent business, so it is difficult to understand why subsection (2) is needed at all. I hope that the Minister will accept that I say sincerely that subsection (2) is an invitation to possible conflict. Someone could decide to short-circuit the process, and the difficulty would be that the poor old Secretary of State would have to decide whether to apply his veto because hon. Members would make representations to suggest that the whole matter had not been considered by the Welsh Assembly and that full scrutiny had thus not been carried out. I look forward to hearing the explanation for subsection (2) from the Minister. There is justification for including such a provision in part 4, if it is ever to be implemented, but I do not understand the justification for including it in part 3. If I understand the Government’s position correctly—let me leave aside the question of whether I agree with the principle of the process—they are offering the reassurance that the people of Wales will get better governance because the Welsh Assembly will have more time to flesh out the details of a principle that has been approved by the House. However, subsection (2) is a mechanism by which the Government say that if the Welsh Assembly wishes to circumvent that principle, it may do so. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response because unless it is adequate, we might well wish to pursue this important matter—on Report, if not now. However, I do not want to provoke a conflict at this stage because even though I am not wildly happy with part 3 of the Bill, I want to improve it. Amendments Nos. 171 to 173 are probing amendments that relate largely to the same point: the Standing Orders for private proposed Assembly Measures. The House has different procedures and Standing Orders for its consideration of private measures, so I understand that the Welsh Assembly would need different procedures, too. However, private proposed Assembly Measures would still need to be considered fully. We must not have a situation in which that process can be short-circuited. Although I accept that there must be a mechanism for a separate system, the amendments reinforce the point that I am making about subsection (2).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
441 c1351-2 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top