WALES BILL (Hansard, 3 May 1978)

§ Sir David Renton (Huntingdonshire)
I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker, of which I have given you notice. I am very glad to see the Leader of the House in his place. Last Thursday, after this week's business had been announced, I asked him to postpone the start of the Report Stage of the Wales Bill as there was not enough time following the end of the Committee Stage—which happened late last Wednesday night—for hon. Members to draft and table amendments for Report Stage.
That task could not be started until we had a printed copy of the Wales Bill, as amended in Committee. We did not have that until 3 o'cock last Thursday afternoon. Also, before drafting one's amendments, it is preferable—I agree, not vital—to see the Government amendments which are put down. If one can see the Government amendments first, it may stop one from cluttering up the Amendment Paper with unnecessary amendments of one's own.
We got the Bill at three o'clock on Thursday afternoon. But the Government amendments were not available until Friday morning. Speaking for myself, and perhaps for other right hon. and hon. Members, I was committed to being in my constituency on Friday. I had to leave on Friday morning for my constituency where I had to attend a meeting of a local government committee of which I am a co-opted member. The date of that meeting had been fixed several months before.
I drafted my amendments on the train on Friday with a copy of the Bill—but without the Government amendments—in front of me. I checked the drafts on Friday evening and posted them on Saturday. They reached the Public Bill Office only yesterday morning. Therefore, they appear starred on today's amendment paper.
In accordance with the usual practice you, Mr. Speaker, have not selected them. I make no complaint about that. I quite 250 understand the position that you are in. But I must say in passing that there have been occasions when the House has been pressed so hard on the timetable that the Chair has selected starred amendments. However, on this occasion, I think that even if you had selected my starred amendments they probably would not have been reached.
On the Amendment Paper are seven new clauses, including one Government new clause, and 123 amendments, including no fewer than 36 Government amendments, many of which we welcome. In the short time available to you since yesterday morning—more especially, this morning—first your advisers, and then you, must have had a very hectic as well as difficult task. I shall come to that again later. You have done your task and have selected for consideration five new clauses, including the Government new clause, and 104 amendments, including all the 36 Government amendments, which are more or less automatic.
The important thing is that your selection, Mr. Speaker, gives rise to 59 separate discussions many of which will involve debates on major matters affecting the future of Wales.
After the Leader of the House made his business statement last week he said: I fully accept that there is only a brief interval between the passage of Committee stage and proceedings to the Report stage next week. I interpolate there that the interval was six clear days including only three working days. This compares with a period of at least 14 days which is recommended by the Committee on the Preparation of Legislation for any Bill that is long or complex. The Wales Bill is certainly long—85 pages—and is so complex that it recasts the Government of Wales for the first time in 450 years.
The Leader of the House went on: But I believe that when the House deals with the Bill it will see that that is satisfactory. How can it be satisfactory? A total of 59 separate matters must be considered in one day. Some of these matters are most important. The Leader of the House then said: The second day will take place somewhat later. We had been discussing the Report stage up to then, and I assumed that we might have a second day for the Report stage, 251 let alone Third Reading. But the Business Committee met shortly after that and decided that with only two days available altogether, one day should be for Report and one for Third Reading.
The Leader of the House then tried to pour a bit of oil on obviously troubled waters when he said: I hope that the House will recognise that this is the proper way to proceed."—[Official Report, 27th April 1978; Vol. 948. c. 1643.] I wish to ask you, Mr. Speaker, knowing the limitations of your powers in this matter to consider the very serious situation that has arisen. I contend that it is serious on three grounds. The first is that the position in which we are placed is entirely contrary to the spirit of our rules of order and our usual practice and procedure.
The second is that Members have been placed under unwarranted and unnecessary pressure of time for drafting and putting forward their amendments. Added to this is the fact that there is an acute shortage of time for considering the amendments that have been selected.
The third immediately concerns your own duties, Mr. Speaker. What has been done makes a mockery of your difficult and elaborate process of selection. If 59 matters of this kind are to be discussed in only one day everyone knows that with the best will in the world on the part of those who oppose the Bill on both sides of the House, only a very small proportion of the 59 matters will be discussed adequately or even reached.
Therefore, for these three reasons I believe that the methods used by the Leader of the House are not only an abuse of our procedure but they reveal a contempt for the ancient and honourable relationship which exists between the people of England and Wales.

§ Sir Raymond Gower (Barry)
In considering what has been posed so ably by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton), I ask you Mr. Speaker to take account of the harsh combination of circumstances in this matter.
First of all, we have the determination of the Leader of the House and the Government to force so much through in such a limited time. Secondly, there have been delays in the publication 252 of parliamentary papers. Third, a Bank Holiday came in the middle of the period and exacerbated the problem. Fourth there has been difficulty ensuing for Members because of the limited time between the completion of the Committee stage on Thursday and the Report stage today, bearing in mind the weekend, the non-collection of post on Sundays and the Bank Holiday. This has meant that any amendments in the post could not reach the House until Tuesday which places hon. Members and you, Mr. Speaker, in an intolerable position.
In these circumstances the Government should have acted with magnanimity, taken a broader view of things and allocated more time than they otherwise would have done.

§ Mr. Ian Gow (Eastbourne)
On Thursday last week the Leader of the House, in reply to my right hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire (Mr. Pym) gave an assurance to the House in these terms: Most of the Govenment amendments will be put on the Order Paper today."—[Official Report, 27th April 1978; Vol. 948, c. 1649.] If this is not a matter for you, Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Leader of the House through you how many Government new clauses and how many Government amendments met that undertaking which he gave last Thursday? Were there any that were not put down until Friday?

§ Mr. Francis Pym (Cambridgeshire)
It is within the knowledge of every hon. Member of the House that the facts that have been stated by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton) and my other hon. Friends are accurate. The very short interval between the conclusion of the Committee stage and the Report stage and the problems that we faced last weekend are facts.
In a sense it is almost an insult to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Huntingdonshire because he was invited some years ago to prepare a report on the preparation of legislation. He and his distinguished colleagues prepared an extremely important report, but so far from the Government taking any notice of it, it appears that in their handling of this Bill they have positively flouted it The way in which they have handled the Wales Bill is an insult.
253 Out of 84 clauses and 12 schedules that existed in the original Bil, we debated in Committee only 16 clauses and two schedules. That means that 68 clauses and 10 schedules were never debated at all. We now find that we have only one day to take the whole of the Report stage.
We did not vote against the motion of the Business Committee because we wanted to save time. Nor did I make any counter proposals to the Business Committee to the Government's proposals to take only one day because I thought that we would have plenty of time for Third Reading. There is no way that a Report stage and Third Reading can be debated on a sensible and responsible basis in the course of two days only.
This is a parliamentary scandal. We are being asked to put this Bill through virtually undebated in the course of this Session of Parliament. This could have been remedied if all the time that was devoted to the Scotland Bill and the Wales Bill had been devoted to the Scotland Bill alone. Then, if the Government were still in office and if they were so inclined to do this for Wales also, they could have introduced the Wales Bill in another Session. This would have been one way in which more time could have been given to the Scotland Bill.
Of course we as an Opposition are not faced with this decision. But the fact remains that the Government have forced this guillotine through more fiercely and more constrictively than any other guillotine at any time on any Bill—

§ The Minister of State, Privy Council Office (Mr. John Smith)
What about the European Communities Bill?

§ Mr. Pym
The Government use the European Communities Bill as their one alibi which they always quote. But I must point out that every clause of that Bill was debated. There were only 12 clauses and every single one was discussed. In the whole of the Wales Bill only 16 clauses were debated. That is not the way to conduct a constitutional change of this kind. There is no precedent for a guillotine of this kind on a Bill as far reaching as this. Parliament should appreciate what is being done. What is being done is neither parliamentary nor democratic. The Government are faking 254 the attitude "We are the masters now" and it is an absolute scandal.

§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (West Lothian)
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. If more time had been found for the Scotland Bill, and had the time we have spent on the Wales Bill been devoted to the Scotland Bill, nothing would have happened other than that more manholes would have been found, as indeed the Lords are now finding. It just goes to show how unworkable is the Scotland Bill.

§ Mr. Speaker
I have listened with concern and careful interest to the right hon. Member for Cambridgeshire (Mr. Pym), the right hon. and learned Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton), and the hon. Members for Barry (Sir R. Gower), Eastbourne (Mr. Gow) and West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell). They will understand that I am bound by the rules of the House. It is impossible for me to rule on the spirit of our rules, although I try to interpret them as generously as I can when it lies within my power.
Today, the amendments have been selected. There are a large number of such amendments, and it is not for me to comment on the points made about the number that are likely to be discussed.