HC Deb 18 December 1969 vol 793 cc1722-30

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. James Hamilton.]

11.44 p.m.

Mr. Roy Hughes (Newport)

I welcome this opportunity to raise the question of local government reorganisation in Wales, which is causing concern and anxiety amongst my constituents. This has come about as a result of the debate on the Queen's Speech and the statement of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister: In the light of further consideration, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales proposed now to make a further urgent review of the situation in the geographical counties of Glamorgan and Monmouth to see if a satisfactory pattern can be worked out which will avoid the continued division between county boroughs and administrative counties, and he will report his conclusions about the end of the year."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 28th October; Vol. 790, c. 32.] The Welsh White Paper proposals on this matter in July, 1967, proposed that Newport should remain a county borough. Now the fear, which I understand is well founded, is that Newport will be swallowed up by the county, not by agreement but by a takeover in the best Arnold Weinstock tradition. This is not mere hearsay but publicly quoted evidence in the usually reliable South Wales Argus. Alderman Bevan, Chairman of Monmouthshire County Council, is supposed to have said to the Secretary of State on 22nd October: When are you going to give us Newport? This is the situation which exists at present however much the Secretary of State attempts to camouflage it by talking of moving divisions between the town and the county.

The object, apparently, is to create one large unitary authority in the county under which the identity of Newport would be lost. The people of Newport have no wish for this to happen. I am inundated with protests from individuals and organisations in the town. It is a town with proud traditions and one which has made the most of its opportunities. It is essentially a prosperous town for, through being strategically placed, it has been able to attract important industry. This provides thousands of jobs for people in the development area of the hinterland. It has excellent communications both by road and rail, and thriving efficient docks. These factors are a considerable inducement to industrialists.

In local government it has a good record for, although two years ago the Tory Party took control of the council, I am proud of the fact that for over 20 or the 24 years since the end of the Second World War it has been controlled by the Labour Party. I am convinced that it has resources to provide efficient local government. All we are asking at the moment is to be allowed to go on in our efficient prosperous and expanding way. I should have thought this a not unreasonable request, especially in view of the fact that the White Paper proposals advocated just this after a most thorough investigation.

The Secretary of State himself, in the Welsh Grand Committee debate on 11th December last year, said that he was against the one-tier system because it would mean the disappearance of our county boroughs which are already large enough to operate efficient services. Yet in a letter to me dated 26th November, he said: The starting point of the review is that the division between administrative counties and county boroughs should be ended. Apart from this basic premise, I have a completely open mind at present on the form which reorganisation should take in South Wales. It is clear that, whatever happens, county councils and county borough councils will no longer exist in their present forms, but no decisions have yet been taken on the areas of the new authorities. Those are Maud Royal Commission criteria, pure and simple. There are some of us who resent this arbitrary treatment of South Wales. The Maud Commission did not investigate local government in Wales, so why should we in Glamorgan and Monmouthshire just be tacked on to the rest of England. I have always been a great admirer of the Secretary of State, but his job, as I see it, was created to give Wales a separate and independent voice, and he should have insisted on the White Paper proposals being implemented and should not have succumbed in the way he seems to be succumbing.

Monmouthshire has long been recognised as a sort of Sudetenland of the United Kingdom, and in Newport there is sometimes a confusion about where loyalty lies. This tends to add to the character of the place. Yet if the Secretary of State is to be steam-rollered under the slightest pressure, as he seems to be in this case, the people of Newport will say, "What is the point of our being attached to the Welsh Office? We might as well be under the Ministry of Housing and Local Government." To paraphrase what the late Aneurin Bevan once said in this House, Why bother with the monkey when one can deal first-hand with the organ grinder? We hear much about the Maud Commission. Its report is a comprehensive document. One could call it a grand design. My criticism is that it has forgotten about the people, let alone the finances of local government. If implemented, it would mean taking power away from the people and handing it over to the bureaucrats. It is the sort of method of administration that many people in Eastern Europe and many parts of Asia are now so anxious to throw overboard. Our local government system, with all its inefficiencies, still has much to commend it.

In Newport, though, we have no intention of adopting an ostrich-like attitude to reform of local government. We are prepared to enter into discussions on what have become known as the "Model Two" proposals, which would have the effect of splitting Monmouthshire into two. The southern half, based on Newport and catering for 250,000 people, in this sense would meet the Maud criteria. However, the plan that is apparently going the rounds is for one unitary authority for the whole of Monmouthshire, and a metropolitan system for Glamorgan, with one half based on Cardiff and the other based on Swansea, with districts underneath.

This would in effect largely retain the identity of both Cardiff and Swansea, but it would mean that Newport would be submerged. This is unacceptable to my constituents. There is a degree of rivalry between Cardiff and Newport. Cardiff has more than double the population of Newport, but most qualified observers point out that it is Newport which has the aces for the future. Its more favourable geographical location and better communications make it the better prospect of the two towns. Surely Cardiff Ministers are not going to lay themselves open to being accused of blotting out Newport. I hope not, for there are other solutions.

My plea to the Secretary of State is, firstly, to look again at the Welsh White Paper proposals, for there is now nearly 100 per cent. backing for them in Wales. This heaven-sent opportunity for reorganisation by agreement is not likely to come for a long time again. Ten years or so hence, our structure could be looked at again. Meanwhile, perhaps—and I say, "perhaps"—England would have reorganised its structure of local government and we could benefit from that experience.

Alternatively, if my right hon. Friend still thinks that the White Paper proposals are no longer suitable, he should do the just and democratic thing by creating a Royal Commission to investigate local government fully in Wales, the same as has happened both in England and Scotland. At least the people would then accept that we were having a bit of chwarae teg.

11.56 p.m.

The Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. George Thomas)

I have listened with great care to my hon. Friend the Member for Newport (Mr. Roy Hughes), who is, of course, a great champion in this House for the distinguished county borough which he represents. I was not a bit surprised that he quoted from the local newspaper. I would have been surprised, I suppose, if the South Wales Argus, of which I am a regular and devoted reader, had not itself sounded the clarion call that he has echoed so faithfully tonight.

I was surprised, however, that so much has been built on a chance remark and a joke by Alderman Bevan in a private conversation—I believe that it was at some garden party or maybe at a civic function in Newport. But we do not advance policy on reported private jokes, and I must say that I am surprised that this has been elevated into an argument.

Obviously, the Government and I want Wales to have the best form of local government that we can provide.

Mr. Alec Jones (Rhondda, West)

This is an important issue for Wales, particularly for Glamorgan and for the County of Monmouthshire. Is it not, therefore, rather startling that not a single hon. Member from either the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party or the so-called Nationalist champions of Wales has seen fit to attend?

Mr. Thomas

I am obliged for that intervention. My hon. Friend is right. There are a number of hon. Members present on this side and no one opposite. The people of Wales will take their own note of the fact.

My hon. Friend the Member for Newport, being a Welshman like myself, is given sometimes to strong language—within the law of course; I just mean strong, decent English language or Welsh language as the case may be. But when he talks of my succumbing to pressure, of my being steam-rollered by the slightest pressure, I want to tell him and the good people of Newport that this was my considered decision after long and careful thought on what I could see was going to happen to local government in the rest of the United Kingdom. There is no question of my being steam-rollered.

My hon. Friend said that some people had spoken of the proposal to merge Newport with Monmouthshire—I shall return to this subject—as a takeover bid. But my hon. Friend has made his own takeover bids. For example, in the Welsh Grand Committee he wanted to take Cwmbran into Newport. He has also had his eye on the delectable fruit of Llanwern for a long time. It is my hon. Friend who is thinking in terms of takeover bids, not me.

My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary received, on my behalf, her worship the Mayor of Newport and the town clerk when they recently brought a substantial petition to the Welsh Office. The threat to the status of Newport is no more and no less than the threat to the status of every other local authority in the United Kingdom, outside Greater London, where there has been reorganisation.

Local government is in the melting pot. Or, to phrase it differently, local government reform has been in the minds of local authority administrators and of this House since the major reports on the subject were produced. The reconstruction of local government envisaged in those reports and in their proposals implied that all existing local authorities would cease to exist in their present form.

My hon. Friend suggested that we should forget the "Hands off Newport" —or is it now "Hands on Monmouthshire?"—slogan. But a big chunk of Monmouthshire is involved. This may be the decision in the end. I do not know. I am not anticipating what will be the eventual proposals that I will submit to the House.

Although I am addressing empty benches opposite—it is a good thing that a number of my hon. Friends are in their places—I want the whole House to know that when my proposals are ready, I will submit them to Parliament. At that stage each local authority concerned will have an opportunity to put its point of view before me. That view will be seriously considered and no final decision will be taken without us hearing the views of those who are affected.

I thought that at one stage my hon. Friend was pleading for Newport to be left out of local government reform while the rest of the United Kingdom is to have stronger units of local government. No authority can be taken out of the review and insulated from the process of reform. Results of the review will come in due course to this House and will then be put before the local authorities.

The White Paper to which my hon. Friend pays high tribute was strongly criticised by Cardiff and Swansea. It was clear that there was to be great trouble over the years between the counties and the county boroughs if this distinction had been allowed to continue. The great urban conurbations of Monmouthshire and Glamorgan have so much in common with the great urban conurbations across Offa's Dyke that it would have been irresponsible of me to say to Wales, "Never mind what advantages there are in the stronger units of local government you will find across the Severn Bridge, we will cling to the White Paper which we advanced two years before we knew what was in the general principles in the Wheatley and Maud reports", but I am not tied to either of those and that is why it is wrong to speculate on the proposals which will ultimately come before the House.

Mr. Ifor Davies (Gower)

I am conscious that there are strict limitations to the debate, but since my right hon. Friend referred to the position of the county boroughs it is proper to express appreciation of the many local authorities in Wales which co-operated and to say that they, after various conferences, said that as a first step the White Paper was an appreciable and important step forward.

Mr. Thomas

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the former Under-Secretary, because he played a tremendous part in the local government discussions in the Principality. He is right that for the greater part of Wales our proposals stand. Cardin has shared anxieties such as those of Newport. Cardiff submitted proposals in reply to my White Paper proposals, that they should have a large area out of Glamorgan and a slice of Monmouthshire.

With our resolve that the advantage of ending the anachronistic division between town and country was to be given to local government in the rest of the country it would have been wrong of me to say, "We do not want the advantage for ourselves".

My hon. Friend and the people of Newport should know that the County Councils Association and the Association of Municipal Corporations—of which Newport is a member although I know she does not agree with the point of view advanced—have urged that these divisions between town and country should be ended.

I have not reached a decision. I have reached no conclusion at all on the application of the recommendations of the various Commissions. I am not tied to the Maud or Wheatley Reports. I will look at both to see if Wales can have a great advantage in the strengthening of local government in the two counties with the greatest proportion of our population.

Three-quarters of the population of Wales live in Glamorgan and Monmouthshire and it would be wrong for me not to give further consideration to their position. I asked every local authority in Wales to look at the White Paper again in the light of the proposals in the Maud and Wheatley Reports and to let me know their views. It is true that the majority wanted no change from the White Paper, but I am equally entitled with the local authorities to look again at the proposals in the light of those reports.

I do not for a moment suggest that local government in Wales has to follow the same pattern as that in England, and it is not going to do so. For more than three-quarters of the counties in Wales the two-tier system of the White Paper will stand, but I would be ashamed to look the Welsh people in the face if I had not had the courage to look again at the White Paper in respect of Glamorgan and Monmouthshire.

My hon. Friend quoted what I said in the Welsh Grand Committee a year ago, long before we knew what the Maud and Wheatley Commissions would say. I am answerable to the House and the people of Wales and in due course I will bring forward proposals that will strengthen local government and give us more efficient units in which so much more can be done for the Welsh people in Glamorgan and Monmouthshire. I hope that when those proposals come, the people of Newport of whom my hon. Friend is such a champion, that great industrial town, will feel that the important thing is whether we are improving local government, whether we are raising standards. I ask them to look not only at their own town, but at the whole structure of local government in Wales, and I hope that they will feel that I have their interests at heart as my hon. Friend has.

I am not seeking to dictate to anyone, or to push anything on to anyone. We will follow the democratic process and let the House express its opinion and let local government in Wales express its opinion and ultimately reach a decision which, I hope, will be to the advantage of the Welsh people.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at thirteen minutes past Twelve o'clock.