Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]

It is a great pleasure to have the opportunity to debate the devolution settlement with the noble Lord, Lord Roberts. We do not see him often enough in Committee and I am very pleased that he is here. He knows that I always do my best by Wales, which is why I am in complete agreement with everything that he said. But I assure him that the answer lies in what I am about to say. The amendments seek to disapply the provisions of the Bill so that the duty will not apply to county or county borough councils or connected bodies, or to community councils, in Wales; to achieve this by changing the process so that Welsh Ministers can make subordinate legislation in respect of the duty and to modify those provisions as they see fit; and to ensure that the petition will be equally valid irrespective of language. These provisions would give Welsh Ministers greater flexibility to make different provisions in relation to promoting democracy and to petition schemes. There is absolutely no difference in principle in recognising that, in Wales as much as in England, local communities should have a greater understanding of the role of local government and public bodies, and that there should be a requirement on local government to do that. My experience in Wales is that people are more involved in local government in many ways because it is nearer the ground. Why have we done this in this way? The answer is that Welsh Ministers asked us to. They requested that these provisions are applied equally to England and Wales. We trust the Welsh Government. We listened to what the Ministers asked for and we have provided it. So my response is predictable: Welsh Ministers are content with the provisions set out in the Bill. They have not sought changes or further flexibility. That is partly because they also appreciate that we are leaving the detail and the process to local authorities themselves to determine what is best for their local communities and relationships. We were in very close contact with the Welsh Assembly Government throughout this process. I know that the amendments are there to provoke debate. However, just in case they should pass into law by accident, I should say that agreeing, for example, Amendment 133A—which would remove community councils from the list of bodies to which Welsh Ministers could by order provide that they had arrangements for handling petitions—would be a serious blow to democracy in Wales. There are 736 community councils, which are equivalent to English parish councils, and only 22 unitary councils. The community councils are the bodies which are closest to the communities and identify with them. It would be totally unreasonable if this requirement were not to apply to them. A major concern is the serious risk that these amendments, if some but not all were approved, could lead to profound inequality between England and Wales. As my noble friend has asked, why should Wales be at any disadvantage to England in its citizens’ right to information about how councils work and how local people can be part of the process? There is a reason for the process as well, as Welsh Ministers were aware. These provisions can be commenced in Wales and England to the same broad timescale because they are included in the Bill. As noble Lords will know, the effect of the amendments would be that Welsh Ministers would have to wait for commencement before bringing forward subordinate legislation. I do not see why Wales should wait longer for this extension of democracy; nor do my colleagues, the Ministers in Wales. On the amendment on petitions, I assure noble Lords that a petition, no matter whether it was written in English or Wales, would be treated in the same way. The noble Lord, Lord Roberts of Llandudno, will know that all local authorities in Wales already have their own Welsh language schemes under the Welsh Language Act 1993 that give effect to the principle that Welsh and English are treated equally. I suppose that we are debating here the devolution settlement in different ways and what powers the Welsh Assembly Government require to deliver for the people of Wales. Noble Lords will understand the passion with which I say that I do not believe that Westminster should in any way ignore or override what the Welsh Assembly Government require. We should not second-guess what those requirements should be. If Welsh Ministers want greater powers for themselves or the National Assembly, the Government of Wales Act enables them to request them. They have not considered it necessary in this case; they are content with the wording of the clauses and the flexibility which the order-making powers and their power to commence offer them. I draw the attention of the Committee to a technical procedure in relation to the petition provisions applying to Wales. Provisions relating to petitions are within the legislative competence of the National Assembly for Wales by virtue of Matter 12(5)(b) in Schedule 5 to the Government of Wales Act 2006. Noble Lords will be aware that the agreement of the National Assembly should be obtained when a parliamentary Bill makes provision that falls within the legislative competence of the National Assembly. The National Assembly will tomorrow consider a Legislative Consent Motion and Memorandum to give consent on that point.