Scottish Parliament (Candidates) Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for assisting me in my defence of the United Kingdom Government. The noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, now seeks to choose the bits of the devolution Act that he likes. From my perspective, the whole impetus behind the devolution project was to enshrine a permanent Labour majority in Scotland. It was about concentrating Labour’s power and then coming down to England to vote on English issues that were devolved in Scotland. It was a piece of gerrymandering. But this Bill takes the biscuit for gerrymandering. It is about forcing other parties, which will not win as many constituency seats but which would win seats on the list system, to field their weakest candidates to the electorate. I agree with the noble Earl that a better system, if we are going to amend the system, would be one that gives voters an opportunity to have a say on the quality of candidates. This measure, however, is straight out of Stalin’s guide on how to run a politburo. Not content with Labour being the party that dominates Scotland in local government and in the Scottish Parliament, the noble Lord resents the fact that people might come to a constituency and put forward a different point of view. Therefore, they have to be stopped. Note that he is concerned about people setting up offices. He is not concerned about the cost of those offices. This very month, the cumulative cost of the Scottish Parliament will reach £1 billion. The electorate and taxpayers are entitled to have the best quality of candidate. They are entitled to see the sort of candidates that are going to the Scottish Parliament. Allowing people to stand as a constituency candidate while being on the list means that good people will go forward. With this measure, good people will not go forward. They will want to be on the list because they might lose their chance. Voters will be cut out of the process and given no opportunity to express a view. The noble Lord, Lord Foulkes, loves that, because the party apparatchiks will decide who is on the list. I shudder to think of the kind of process that that involves, but it will not be the kind of process that democratic scrutiny should provide. This is an extraordinary Bill and I am looking forward to the Minister’s reply because I suspect that he will not support it. I am looking forward to seeing how he explains how this would be wrong for Scotland although it is right for Wales. I accept that Wales is completely different from Scotland. Apart from anything else, the difference between an Assembly and a Parliament appears to be £400 million—one gets an Assembly for £40 million but a Scottish Parliament for £440 million, and I very much doubt that the rafters will be coming down in the Assembly.