Government of Wales Bill

I am sure that we are all grateful to my noble friend Lord Crickhowell for opening in his usual poignant and effective style the first Committee debate of the Bill and for highlighting the simple fact that we already have a National Assembly for Wales, and have done so since the Government of Wales Act 1998. Section 1 of that Act states:"““There shall be an Assembly for Wales to be known as the National Assembly for Wales or Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru””." Those words of translation were carefully chosen and debated at that time. We should be careful before making an abrupt change. We must be sure that it would be acceptable to the Welsh people. Let us not forget that ““Senedd”” is the word normally used in Welsh to describe this Parliament of Westminster, which is somewhat different from ““Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru””. The next subsections of Section 1 of the Government of Wales Act 1998 state:"““The Assembly shall be a body corporate””," and that the,"““exercise by the Assembly of its functions is to be regarded as done on behalf of the Crown””." When one compares the content of that section with the content of the first clause of this Bill—and, indeed, the remainder—one begins to realise the extent of the change envisaged in the new Bill. The new Assembly is not a later model; it is a new creation. It is not, as a whole, a body corporate—that status is confined to the Assembly Commission. As for its functions, the majority are to be transferred to Ministers in the Assembly government. Some might say that the Ministers, rather than the Assembly, are the real gainers under this Bill. As the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee has noted, in paragraph 11 of its seventeenth report:"““The principle of this bill is that powers to make delegated legislation should in future be conferred on Welsh Ministers, the First Minister or the Counsel General (who is not required to be a member of the NAW)””." The transfer of functions to Ministers, in the process of separating the executive and legislative arms of the Assembly under the 1998 Act, is extensive and goes beyond the provisions of Part 2 of this Bill, to Part 6 and the transitional provisions in Clause 161 and Schedule 11. The Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee states in paragraph 45 of its report that,"““it is Schedule 11, not an order under clause 58, that gives NAW’s existing functions of making subordinate legislation to Welsh Ministers””." So there is a subtraction of power from the Assembly proper and an accretion of power to Ministers, as I read the Bill and, I think I am right in saying, as the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee reads it. The committee considered that,"““the transitional provisions are more significant than in most other bills and that the affirmative procedure should apply to orders which modify Schedule 11””." I hope that we will remember that point when we come to that part of the Bill. The National Assembly of the 1998 Act, which was modelled on local authorities, has not been an outstanding success in all respects, as the strong wish to change it expressed by the Assembly itself in 2002 clearly indicates. The Government’s endorsement of the present Bill, based on the White Paper Better Governance for Wales, points to the same conclusion. The inescapable fact is that the present system does not appear to command the support of the majority of the people it serves. Even the most optimistic interpretation of opinion polls does not assert that with any degree of conviction. The Bill represents a fresh start, which is conveyed in the first clause. The key question is whether it is the right start. The Secretary of State, Mr Peter Hain, said in the other place as recently as 28 February that:"““I have no doubt that if a referendum were held today, it would be lost””.—[Official Report, Commons, 28/2/06; col. 209.]" That view hardly shows confidence in the rectitude of the old Bill or of the present one, but quite the reverse. However, at this stage, our task as an official Opposition is not to outline an alternative or to indicate a preference for one of those already presented, but to be constructively critical of the Government’s proposals. That will, I hope, describe our conduct in Committee.