Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill

That issue was lost because Wales, in 1979, had no confidence in itself as a nation community. That situation no longer obtains. In 1979, that vote was lost in every one of the Welsh constituencies, with one notable exception, and that was Cardiganshire, where the vote was carried by a very slim majority. So it had very little to do with the issue of the Welsh language. In the end, it had everything to do with an absence of confidence and with an exploitation in a most ruthless and unprincipled way by those who were against devolution. Let us draw a line totally under that situation and revel in the fact that when Wales comes to that momentous decision on 3 March, we shall all—the noble Lords, Lord Thomas, Lord Kinnock and Lord Anderson, myself and the vast majority of the people of Wales—be standing shoulder to shoulder in favour of that proposition. My other point is this: if ever there was a time when the confidence of the public in ordinary Members of Parliament was low, this is it. I hope that I will never live to see a period when confidence is at a lower ebb than it is at the moment. I suspect that that is a thought, a principle and an attitude that will be shared by every Member of this House. The question in my mind is not essentially whether or not there is a case for reducing the numbers of Members of Parliament because people will have different views about that. The case that I have argued in the last few hours and over the past few weeks is that one should not make a stab in the dark. One should come to a decision in regard to this grave and weighty matter based upon evidence. That evidence should be collected by someone of high calibre who is utterly committed to giving a dispassionate picture of the situation so that Members of both Houses of Parliament and the public can come to a reasoned, logical, informed judgment in the matter. That has been my case and it remains exactly the same. However, that is not the point that I wish to make at this stage. All of us would wish to see confidence in Members of Parliament raised from the abysmally low level at which it is at present. Do you think you can do that by giving the public the impression that in some way or another you will at random nominate 50 of them as hostages and say, ““Off you go””? It is all but the same as you marching into the bar of any public house in the United Kingdom and asking, ““What do you think of these rotten fellows?””. Many people might say, ““Off with them. Get rid of them—50 of them in the next year””; and many people in the chorus behind would say, ““Why not say 100?””. In other words, you would be sending a psychological message that reducing the number of Members of Parliament from 650 to 600 appeals to the ordinary British citizen. That is a very unfortunate message. As far as they are concerned, you are saying, ““These people are pretty rotten fellows. Let us get rid of 50 of them””. I believe that would be devastating. Whatever advantages there might be from bringing about that adjustment—maybe there will be a saving of £12 million; maybe the saving will be much less than that; maybe there will be no saving at all for the reasons we have already heard; and there may or may not be a case for reduction—the psychological effect will be utterly disastrous along the lines that I have suggested.