UK Parliament / Open data

Government of Wales Bill

Proceeding contribution from Huw Irranca-Davies (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 28 February 2006. It occurred during Debate on bills on Government of Wales Bill.
: I am pleased to speak towards the end of the very long process of our dealings with the Bill. I spoke on Second Reading, I spoke in Committee, and I am pleased to be here at the denouement. I am also pleased to see that at the end of the long process of Welsh debate on what will become the Government of Wales Act, many English Members are gathering on the Benches here to see it through—[Interruption.] And Scottish and Northern Ireland Members, too. I begin by congratulating fellow Members on the arduous journey of these debates, and on bringing the Bill to what I hope will be a successful conclusion, which we shall see in a few moments. I also thank the Chairman and the members of the Welsh Affairs Committee, who have contributed so strongly to the development of the Bill with their ideas. I want to mention the members of the Wales TUC and the CBI, whose support has undoubtedly—albeit on one small part in one clause—contributed significantly to ensuring that the voices not only of employers, but of employees and unions are more firmly represented in the Bill than has previously been the case in legislation. That recognises the good work that the Welsh Assembly has already done in dealing with the affairs of business, and also puts it there right in front of us so that there can be no retreat. The hon. Member for Carmarthen, East and Dinefwr (Adam Price) mentioned that we now have half a loaf—but my reading of the situation is that at the moment, half a loaf is what is being demanded. There is no stomach for anything more than what is on offer. However, this is a still a process, and there are still questions. Devolution was never a moment in time, or a definitive statement followed by a stop. What is in the Bill undoubtedly will not satisfy some Members here because it does not go far enough for them. For others, it goes much too far, and they would like us to roll back the whole thing. I have been speaking to my constituents since the start of the process, at the time of Second Reading and all the way through. I have to say that there are not many people knocking on my surgery door to ask about the Bill—and when we do get into discussion about it, there is no great appetite for running headlong into further referendums and transfers of primary powers. However, what there is—and what the Bill in its present form recognises—is the fact that the Welsh Assembly Government are starting to deliver well. They are starting to be recognised more and more by the Welsh people for the way in which they connect with communities, consult and, at a very local level, do far more than the old Welsh Office used to do. That is good, but there is no appetite to rush headlong any further. The three main components of the Bill, and the split between the Executive and legislative powers, seem to have caused no great difficulty for most people. By and large, that was one of the easiest areas to take through. I think that all of us, or at least many of us—everyone apart from the Conservatives—are looking forward to maximum use of the Orders in Council, and to seeing that system working. It is a good stage development of the devolution process. Labour Members recognise that the Bill does not go as far as some people want, but we think that what we now have with the Orders in Council, and what we will be voting on in a few minutes, is exactly what the Welsh people are now willing to accept. The most contentious area of all is the idea of standing as a first-past-the-post candidate in one seat, losing and then, the following morning, being resurrected as a regional Member. We will never agree on that across these Benches, but—as we have said throughout progress on the Bill—it does not seem right, in terms of natural justice, that there should be a Lazarus-like resurrection of candidates the morning after they have been soundly defeated. We will not agree on that, but we think that the changes are appropriate. I also wish to put firmly to bed the idea, which has been frequently thrown at us, that the most contentious proposal has anything to do with gerrymandering. We have shown time and again that—[Interruption.] As has just been said from a sedentary position, it is not partisan, because Labour Members will be as likely to lose out as Opposition Members. I do not wish to regurgitate the arguments from Committee, but the changes are to no one party’s particular advantage. I welcome the approach being taken by the Liberal Democrats and Plaid, because even though they are not happy with everything in the Bill, they have said that they will go out and try and make it work. Regrettably, that is in stark contrast to the major Opposition party. At the beginning of this process, we hoped that the Conservatives would say that although they had difficulties with some of the details, they supported in principle the idea of staged devolution at a pace suitable to the Welsh people. Unless Opposition Members change their views in the next few minutes, it seems that only one party in Wales will, once again, nail its colours firmly to the anti-devolution mast. That is a matter for great regret because, regardless of the difficulties with the Bill, it would be great to be able to say with one voice that we were all united.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
443 c224-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top