Government of Wales Bill

If there is a commitment to devolution, it is necessary to ask why the Secretary of State would want to exert a power of refusal that would put him on a collision course with the Assembly of the day about the very powers that his Government have brought forward. The Government’s spokesman in the Lords, Lord Davies of Oldham, said that this was not an issue of seeking to aggrandise the Secretary of State, but that is the effect of the power and everyone in the House knows it. The power allows the Secretary of State both to delay and obstruct the Assembly’s wishes and process and to remove or delay the ability of both Houses of Parliament to have a say in the matter. After two thirds of the democratically elected Assembly had voted in favour of holding a referendum on part 4 powers, why would the Secretary of State wish to act as a road block to such a provision receiving consideration in the House? The whole process is fairly tortuous, but as I understand it, if a requisite two thirds of Assembly Members voted to pass a resolution in favour of a referendum, the First Minister would have to give notice of the resolution to the Secretary of State. Within 120 days of that, the Secretary of State must"““lay a draft of a statutory instrument containing an Order in Council…before each House of Parliament””." If the order was passed, a referendum would be held to decide whether the part 4 provisions would come into force. However, if the Lords amendment is not allowed to stand, the Secretary of State will be able unilaterally to give notice in writing to the First Minister that he refuses to lay an order and merely give his reasons. The order simply would not have to be laid and the Secretary of State could block the process from reaching Parliament. During the debate in another place, Lord Kingsland—[Interruption.] Hon. Members should listen to this. Lord Kingsland said:"““The real shift in power is from this Parliament to the Executive and the Secretary of State.””— [Official Report, House of Lords, 28 June 2006; Vol. 683, c. 1237.]" And a shift of power it is. The provision places the Secretary of State in a pro-consular position over Wales—as the lord and master. It interposes a single member of the Executive between the Assembly’s decision and the order about that decision reaching Parliament for a vote. The process certainly does not square with the Government’s response to the House of Lords Select Committee on the constitution in which they said:"““The Government agrees that this is a matter for Parliament to decide””" because the Secretary of State is placing himself in the dominant position. The Bill has been characterised by the ingenuity that has enabled the Secretary of State to say one thing in Cardiff and another in Westminster. The provision, like the part 3 powers, gives the Secretary of State the opportunity to say pompously in Cardiff that he is proudly enshrining in legislation for the very first time the possibility of full law-making powers, while saying here that he has put a provision in the Bill to stop a referendum from being held if that does not suit him, or if he does not like the timing. In other words, he is saying here that he will not let the Assembly dictate to him. Rhodri Morgan—the First Minister—the Secretary of State and Welsh Labour are not in the business of calling a referendum that they are going to lose, so the Secretary of State has taken a power that will allow him to block that. The Conservative party has made the decision to support a Welsh Assembly that works for the people of Wales. We will do that in a straightforward manner, not with weasel-like— It being three hours after the commencement of proceedings, Mr. Deputy Speaker put the Question already proposed from the Chair, pursuant to Order [this day]. Question put, That this House disagrees with the Lords in the said amendment:— The House divided: Ayes 294, Noes 189.