HC Deb 10 May 1976 vol 911 cc24-7
30. Mr. Canavan

asked the Lord President of the Council if he is yet able to make a statement on whether the legislation on devolution will consist of one or two Bills.

The Minister of State, Privy Council Office (Mr. John Smith)

No, Sir. The Government are still considering the representations we have received on this subject.

Mr. Canavan

Will my hon. Friend, whom I congratulate on his new job, give an assurance that the Government will not be swayed from their course by the crowd of reactionary Tory backwoodsmen and big business interests who founded the Keep Britain United Club at the weekend? Does he agree that to renege on the devolution proposals now would play into the hands of those separatists on the Opposition Benches who want to smash up the United Kingdom, and that the best way to preserve unity is by meaningful devolution?

Mr. Smith

I thank my hon. Friend for his congratulations. The Government are determined to proceed with the devolution proposals and put them before Parliament in the next Session. We shall no doubt be opposed by blinkered unionists and blinkered separatists, but I believe that in the parliamentary debate we shall beat both.

Mr. Teddy Taylor

How does the Minister justify the spending of the substantial sum of £10 million a year on the proposed new bureaucratic Assembly and employing an extra 1,000 civil servants at a time when the number of home helps in his constituency and in mine is being cut back and when about half the output of the teacher training colleges will not be able to find jobs because of the Government's spending cuts?

Mr. Smith

The justification that I would offer to my constituents, and the justification that the Government offer to the public, is that decentralisation of power increases democratic accountability, which is an objective worth pursuing.

Mr. Joseph Dean

Is my hon. Friend aware that there are some hon. Members on the Labour Benches who have deep reservations about the proposals and who may—I only say "may" at this stage—vote against them if the exercise is to be carried out to the financial disadvantage of the English regions?

Mr. Smith

I know that my hon. Friend has some reservations, which are shared by other hon. Members. It will be the Government's task to persuade them that the proposals are intended not to harm anyone else in the United Kingdom but to give extra democratic accountability to Scotland and Wales. That need not militate against the interests of England or the regions within England. Hon. Members will understand that more clearly as the debate proceeds.

Mr. Gwynfor Evans

Is not the main purpose of those who want two Bills to prevent any discussion of Welsh devolution, because of shortage of time in the House?

Mr. Smith

I shall not comment on the motives of people who make representations to the Government. What I said was that the Government are still considering representations and have not reached a final decision.

Mr. English

As the East Midlands pays more and receives less from central Government, as a proportion, than other regions do, when shall we see the proposals for English devolution?

Mr. Smith

The Government are still considering the matter in the light of the statement in the White Paper that there would be a discussion document on the question of who receives what from the United Kingdom. My hon. Friend should bear in mind that what Scotland, Wales and various regions receive depends on need and not on proportion of the population.

31. Mr. Tim Renton

asked the Lord President of the Council how many representations he has received from chambers of commerce and similar bodies in Scot- Land and Wales in favour of his devolution proposals, and how many against.

Mr. John Smith

None directly, but I understand that my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland and Wales have received, respectively, five and one such representations. These opposed the Government's proposals to set up Scottish and Welsh Assemblies.

Mr. Renton

Is it not thus increasingly clear that employers in Scotland and Wales are increasingly rejecting the Government's devolution proposals? Will the Minister confirm that the Government are thinking of giving more powers to the Scottish Assembly simply to preserve their Scottish parliamentary seats and that this is contrary to the wishes of British industry and the people?

Mr. Smith

In the latter part of his question the hon. Gentleman did not rise to the level at which this debate should be conducted. This is a matter of important constitutional change, which can be supported by members of all parties or none. We shall not be guided exclusively by the attitude of employers. The chambers of commerce have stated one view. I remind the hon. Gentleman that the Scottish CBI came out broadly in favour of devolution, although it had reservations in detail, that the Scottish Council (Develment Industry) accepted the White Paper in principle, and the TUC, the Scottish TUC and the Welsh TUC are all broadly in favour of the proposal.

Mr. Tapsell

If I may try to rise to the level of the debate, may I ask the Minister whether he really thinks that it is statesmanlike for the Government to proceed with legislation on this immensely important constitutional issue before there is a far greater consensus in both Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom?

Mr. Smith

There has been a long period of debate, going back to the appointment of the Royal Commission on the Constitution in 1969. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman has not participated in it, but that is not my fault or the fault of the Government. The Government's view is that after this long period of discussion we must now move towards action.

Mr. Watt

Does the Minister recognise that the best way to resolve the attitude of the people of Scotland over devolution is to call an early General Election?

Mr. Smith

I do not believe that that would assist the matter in any way. Certainly the hon. Gentleman and his party would not assist it, because they are arguing not for devolution but for the breakup of the United Kingdom.

Mr. Renton

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.