- '(1) This section applies if an elected assembly for a region has been established pursuant to a referendum held under section 1(1).
- (2) The Secretary of State shall by order cause a further referendum to be held in a region specified in the order if he is presented with a petition requesting such a referendum signed by not less than 5 per cent. of the electors eligible to vote in the region as defined in section 3(1).
- (3) The question to be asked in a referendum held pursuant to an order under subsection (2) above is the question set out in section 2(1).'.—[Mr. Hammond.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
2.49 pm§ Mr. Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge)I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
§ Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal)With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Amendment No.12, in page 3, line 15 [Clause 5], leave out 'five' and insert 'ten'.
§ Mr. HammondMindful of what was said in the previous debate, I shall attempt to be brief. The main issues of concern to hon. Members mostly fall in the second group of amendments, so I hope that the debate on this group will be relatively short.
Clause 1 provides for regional referendums to be held on creating elected regional assemblies. There is no provision for a threshold for turnout or, indeed, a threshold for yes votes. Hon. Members will be mindful of what happened in the Welsh Assembly elections. Clause 5 will give the Government the power to hold repeat referendums—if they fail the first time, they can try again after a five-year gap—so a ratchet effect is being introduced.
The Government need to achieve only a tiny majority on a tiny turnout, once, to create an elected regional assembly. They will need to shift public opinion only momentarily to get their way, and they will get as many goes as they like at achieving that. In effect, in a region where a referendum has been fought and narrowly lost, a sword of Damocles will hang over local government in that region.
Under the Government's proposals, an elected regional assembly will necessarily involve the abolition of one of the tiers in two-tier local government areas. It will be impossible for local authorities in those areas to continue to carry out their functions, to improve the delivery of public services and to recruit and retain good staff with the constant threat of a further referendum just five years down the line, and therefore the possibility of abolition or reorganisation.
This group of amendments consists of two parts. New clause 2 would insert the concept of citizen-initiated recall ballots. If an elected regional assembly were established and 5 per cent. of the electorate in that 480 region petitioned for a new referendum to be held, the Secretary of State would have to call a new referendum and exactly the same question as before would be put.
§ Jim Knight (South Dorset)The hon. Gentleman says that a sword of Damocles should not hang over people in local authorities because of the uncertainty that their arrangements may change if regional assemblies are created. He is now arguing in the new clause that a sword of Damocles will similarly hang over people because the arrangements might change back again. Is not that contradictory—or is that just what we are used to?
§ Mr. HammondThe Bill will allow the Government to hold a second referendum on a whim, but we propose to give effect to the will of the people. We have to have things one way or the other. We need either sensible periods between referendums and sensible thresholds so that a tiny majority in a tiny turnout cannot determine the issue, or a mechanism for going back if it all turns out to be a dreadful mistake.
New clause 2 would allow mature reflection. It would deal with the situation where the elected regional assembly perhaps turns out to be something rather different from what the electors had been led to believe, bearing in mind that no legislation setting out the powers and functions of elected regional assemblies will be available to them at the time of the referendum. It would allow a wake-up call for the silent majority. It would allow a route back from what the Government would like to see as a one-way ratchet.
New clause 2 would allow an assessment to be made based on the experience of an elected regional assembly in operation and the unitary organisation of local government that that necessarily involves, rather than one based only on the Government spin that would be available before the referendum. The threshold of 5 per cent. that is proposed, which is similar to that for mayoral ballots, is a tough target. It is not so easy to organise a petition of 5 per cent. of all the electors in a region.
We oppose the currently proposed elected regional assemblies because they will not address the real problems created by the Government's centralising tendencies and they will not address the issues facing England post devolution, but we do believe in democracy. Certain safeguards need to be put in place because elected regional assemblies are not just matters for individual regions; they concern the whole of England. If those safeguards can be put in place—some of them will be dealt with in the debate on the second group of amendments—we are confident that, in a fair and open ballot where all the people of England have an opportunity to express their views on a settlement for England, the Minister will get his answer. We are confident that our view will prevail.
§ Mr. Kevan Jones (North Durham)I am pleased that the hon. Gentleman has clarified the fact that the Conservatives will oppose regional assemblies. However, you said in Committee that you recognised that people in the north-east are interested in having a 481 regional assembly. Will the Conservative party in the north-east therefore oppose the establishment of a regional assembly there?
§ Mr. HammondI am sure, Madam Deputy Speaker, that you did not say anything in Committee, but it is important to put on record the fact that I certainly recognised in Committee that there are concerns in the peripheral parts of England about the centralising tendencies. [Interruption.] There is nothing pejorative about the word "peripheral".
§ Joyce Quin (Gateshead, East and Washington, West)Yes, there is.
§ Mr. HammondNo, there is not. It is a geographical term, and there is nothing pejorative about it at all.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the. Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. Christopher Leslie)Can the hon. Gentleman say where the central heart of England is?
§ Mr. HammondIf the hon. Gentleman had allowed me to finish, I was about to say that I recognise that there is concern in the geographical periphery of England about the London-centred Government and their centralising tendencies, grabbing power and accumulating it in Whitehall. That is a fair point, and I have acknowledged it in Committee. We simply do not believe that the Government's chosen route is the way to address that issue. We do not believe that it presents a plausible, credible and durable solution for all of England, post the devolution settlement for the nations of the United Kingdom.
§ Mr. Kevan Jonesrose—
§ Mr. HammondI said that I would try to be brief; I shall give way once more to the hon. Gentleman and then I want to make progress.
§ Mr. JonesCan the hon. Gentleman confirm whether the Conservative party in the north-east will campaign for a no vote in any referendum there?
§ Mr. HammondI suspect that the Conservative party in the north-east will campaign for a no vote in any referendum there. However, we are now dealing with provisions for further referendums if such referendums are held and are unsuccessful from the Government's point of view, and if there is a rejection in relation to amendment No. 12. Indeed, under new clause 2, we want to create an opportunity for a recall ballot if there is a yes vote.
The point is that a fair and open process is not being proposed. Electors are being asked to vote blind. They will not know what the powers of the new assembly will be. They will be asked to vote for regions that have no identity and, in many cases, little credibility. They will be asked to vote for local government reform, the effect of which they will not know until it has happened. The Government want to create a one-way ratchet so that 482 there is no going back. In the absence of any requirement for threshold of support for the creation of elected regional assemblies, with an ability for repeat ballots every five years and because electors will be voting blind, simple fairness and equity demand that there is a way back, and new clause 2 would provide it.
Amendment No. 12 addresses the provisions in clause 5 on repeat referendums. Clause 5 will allow repeat referendums to be called every five years. I have discussed that with business, interested organisations and local government members, and we believe that five years is too short a period for pragmatic reasons. If a referendum were lost, to have the threat of a further ballot in just five years' time would plunge local authorities in that region into chaos. There will be recruitment and retention problems and service delivery problems.
Repeat referendums will effectively create a state of permanent campaign for the ensuing four years or so. That is not in the interests of the citizens of any region. It is not in the interests of good local government, and it is certainly not in the interests of what should be the Government principal objective: improving the delivery of public services. The public want the Government to focus on public service, and they want their local authorities to deliver them. So five years is a recipe for chaos. I suggest that 10 years is the minimum period acceptable from a practical point of view. We tested various other periods in Committee. I hope that the Minister will be persuaded that 10 years is a sensible compromise.
§ Jim KnightI listened with care to what the hon. Gentleman said about amendment No. 12, but I do not see any time limit in new clause 2 about the reversal process. Is that an omission or does he think that people should be able to get together 5 per cent, and reverse the result of a referendum at any time?
§ 3 pm
§ Mr. HammondThe hon. Gentleman is right. There is no provision for a time limit on repeated recall ballots. I considered that issue. I envisaged that the Minister would raise it. If he is prepared to concede that time limits are sensible and that a recall ballot is a good mechanism and needs to be time limited and if he will propose or accept a sensible time limit on repeat referendums under clause 5, I shall certainly consider withdrawing this new clause. I should be happy if the Minister would table a new clause in the other place which would create a symmetry, so that referendums for the creation of elected regional assemblies and referendums for the winding up of elected regional assemblies on a citizen initiative have an equal, level playing field. The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point. If the Minister is prepared to take that on board, at last we are beginning to achieve something.
§ Mr. Edward Davey (Kingston and Surbiton)If the Conservatives press the amendments to a vote we shall oppose them. They want to pass these amendments because they want to wreck the anti-devolution movement. These powers should be vested in the regional assembly. When the Government introduce a powers and functions Bill for the regional assembly, as I hope they will, I hope that they will put forward a proper 483 constitution for those bodies. When those bodies are created it should be up to them to decide whether there is an opinion in the region that the assembly should be dissolved. It is not for the Secretary of State or Whitehall to decide that after devolution has taken place. The Conservatives may have a point in that the people of the regions should have a way of changing that constitution, but the new clause is not the way to do it.
§ Mr. HammondI have some sympathy with what the hon. Gentleman said, but he often seems to live in an ideal world. Has he heard of the concept of turkeys never voting for Christmas?
§ Mr. DaveyThe hon. Gentleman is into pejorative words today about voters and parts of the country. Those whom he calls turkeys are the people who will vote for the assembly members. If voters want to vote in people who will dissolve the assembly, they will be free to do so. This is an inappropriate system. The hon. Gentleman suggests that we are living in some sort of cloud cuckoo land. He is completely wrong. We want regional devolution because we want the quango state that the Conservatives created democratised. That is what is important. When the quangos have been abolished, it could be up to the people of the region to decide whether they have faith to continue with regional assemblies. We shall vote against the Conservative amendments.
§ Mr. Gary Streeter (South-West Devon)I support these amendments. The Government are proposing an imperfect constitutional settlement. I cannot really believe that they intend that the long-term constitutional arrangements for this country should involve some parts with elected regional assemblies and others without. That is not a sustainable framework. It is important, therefore, that there is some recall mechanism in place so that the people of the region can undo the wrong which they may come to realise they have done.
We keep talking about the north-east but that is something of a distraction because we are legislating for the entire country. If arrangements need to be put in place for a particular area, let us talk about it, but let us not legislate for everyone just because of one corner—albeit an important corner—of the country. By the way, we in the south-west are peripheral. That is not a pejorative thing to say; it is a fact of geography—we are a long way from the centre. We need mechanisms to undo what may be done. If the north-east goes down this route and votes blind for an elected regional assembly, in a few years time people there may come to think that it is an expensive talking shop and brings them no benefit whatever.
§ Jim KnightIs it Conservative party policy to offer a recall referendum for the Greater London Assembly?
§ Mr. StreeterThe hon. Gentleman knows full well that there is none in place. My answer is that we would not start from here. If the hon. Gentleman believes that the appointment of the Mayor of London has been a terrific success, I invite him to think again.
It may not be just the north-east that votes for an elected regional assembly. We have heard that the north-west does not believe itself to be a coherent 484 region, nor does the west midlands. Other parts of the country have shown little interest in this proposal, but there are defensive reasons why such parts may find themselves voting for an elected regional assembly. They may then have even more reasons to seek to undo that decision in future.
§ Mrs. Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside)Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a MORI poll showed that in the north-west there was 97 per cent, identification with the region? Is he further aware that a BBC poll showed that over 72 per cent, of people in the north-west supported a directly elected assembly?
§ Mr. StreeterI was aware of neither. I was basing my assumptions on comments that I have heard the hon. Lady's colleagues make in this Chamber and in Committee as the Bill has proceeded, that the north-west does not consider itself to be a coherent region and there is little interest in this measure.
§ Mr. George Howarth (Knowsley, North and Sefton, East)Is the hon. Gentleman aware that one of his hon. Friends and I took part in a debate on Granada television, following which there was a telephone poll, and that the majority of people who responded were opposed to a north-west regional assembly?
§ Mr. StreeterI hate to intrude on a private grief. Sadly we do not get Granada television in the west country, or at least not very often, unless it broadcasts "Coronation Street".
Although other parts may not want an elected regional assembly it is possible that because another region or other regions have plumped for it, they feel that in some intangible way they are missing out. They might mistakenly follow the same route. People make decisions for all sorts of reasons. Therefore, some sort of recall mechanism should be in place.
I was interested the other day when we debated the House of Lords that an hon. Gentleman spoke powerfully about how in Scotland many people are realising that the electoral settlement of Members of the Scottish Parliament elected on a list system was causing chaos and confusion in Scottish constituencies and wish that more thought had been given to that. I got the impression that many in Scotland wished to undo that particular mechanism. Elected regional assemblies may cause confusion with people who are elected to sit on those assemblies tripping over the toes of Members of Parliament and vice versa, colliding with MEPs going about their duties, and stepping on the toes of local councillors. I predict that there could well be immense confusion about respective functions, responsibilities and powers. That in itself may cause right hon. and hon. Members to reconsider their opinions on whether elected regional assemblies are right. That is another reason why there might be a recall mechanism.
My hon. Friend is right that 5 per cent, is a high threshold. Such a percentage cannot be put together on a wet Sunday afternoon. A lot of people have to sign a petition. That gives the Government all the reassurance that they need that it would not be lightly triggered, but would be available if people felt strongly.
Finally, I shall deal briefly with amendment No. 12, which I would like to support. I know from discussions with local authorities throughout my constituency that 485 there is little likelihood of the south-west going for a regional assembly—I have never met anyone in my part of the region, Devon and Cornwall, who is in favour of it—[Interruption.] Hon. Members may disagree, but I remind them that Dorset is not in Devon and Cornwall. No one has mentioned it to me on the doorstep, and I have not had a single letter or phone call to my constituency office saying, "If only we had an elected regional assembly, all of my problems would be over." There is no interest in that in my part of the world.
Because local government is charged with looking ahead and looking around corners, however, it is already planning what might happen if there were a south-west elected regional assembly and what might be the impact on local councils. As I have said previously, West Devon borough council was already having meetings about how it would respond if there were an elected regional assembly, several years down the track, and the Electoral Commission were to conclude that Devon should be carved up into two or three unitary authorities. Its contingency plans have already introduced uncertainty, and if, every five years, the sword of Damocles is to hang over local government—which, as my hon. Friend rightly says, will have a great impact on recruitment and retention and the sense of security and stability—that will be an unnecessary infliction on its exercise of its lawful and statutory duties. I urge the Minister, who is reasonable, sensible, sensitive and impressive—
§ Mr. LeslieWhich Minister?
§ Mr. StreeterBoth the Under-Secretary and the Minister for Local Government and the Regions. I hope that they will think about that and change five years for 10 years in the Bill, and that they will agree to a recall mechanism, too.
§ Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West)I support entirely the thrust of amendment No. 12 tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond). I am concerned, however, about the threshold of 5 per cent. I would have welcomed a lower threshold although I wholly support the principle of the amendment.
To illustrate the difficulty of achieving that 5 per cent., I draw the attention of the House to the question that was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for New Forest, East (Dr. Lewis) on 20 January. He asked the Minister for Local Government and the Regions,
how many representations he has received from electors living in (a) the south-east region, (b) Hampshire and (c) New Forest East constituency in favour of the establishment of an elected regional assembly".The answer given by the Minister was thatbetween the dates of 9 May 2002, when the White Paper was published, and 30 November 2002, the office of the Deputy Prime Minister recorded 18 respondents from the south-east who were in favour of an elected regional assembly … of whom two were from Hampshire."—[Official Report, 20 January 2003; Vol. 398, c. 168W.]In relation to getting a 5 per cent, threshold, I draw my hon. Friend's attention to the fact that there are some 6 million electors in the south-east region.
§ Mr. HammondIt is worse than my hon. Friend fears: there are 8 million electors in the south-east region. I 486 understand his concern. I thought long and hard about the figure of 5 per cent, and I tabled it in an attempt to reach for some consensus or centre ground on which I hope that the Minister and I can meet. It does not seem to me an unreasonable suggestion that there should be some recall mechanism. While I know that my hon. Friend takes a rigorous view on these matters, I hope that by going for 5 per cent. I will demonstrate to him that I am reaching out to the Minister in a spirit of compromise.
§ Mr. SwayneI am persuaded and reassured by my hon. Friend, who, throughout the Committee proceedings, was entirely reasonable, as he is being now. I will follow his lead and accept 5 per cent. Nevertheless, Labour Members should be reassured that 5 per cent. will be very difficult to achieve.
§ Jim KnightGiven everything that the h on. Gentleman has said about the difficulty of reaching a threshold of 5 per cent., would it not have been easier to have listened to the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey)—I know that that is difficult, but on this occasion he is correct. It would be much easier for electors to elect people to a regional assembly and have them dissolve themselves in the same way that electors in the European elections, I am afraid, occasionally vote for the UK Independence party in the full knowledge that it is standing to dissolve a Parliament with which it does not agree.
§ Mr. SwayneTurkeys do not generally vote for Christmas. Once an elected assembly is established there is little prospect of it dissolving itself. What this carefully crafted new clause does is to provide a means by which citizens can initiate the political process and exercise people power: power for the greater part of the population as expressed in terms of the 5 per cent, requirement in the petition.
§ Mr. LeslieWill the hon. Gentleman, who is moonlighting in his usual role as a Whip, say whether, being so persuaded of the need for a 5 per cent, trigger mechanism, or any trigger mechanism, he feels, as my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Jim Knight) pointed out earlier, that that should also be applied to the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly?
§ Mr. SwayneI do not want to stray from the terms of this debate, which is on the regional assemblies. I am therefore not prepared to be tempted by the Minister to go beyond that brief. I was interrupted in the train of thought that I was drawing to the attention of the House with respect to the difficulty of achieving a petition of 5 per cent, of the electors. As my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge says, the south-east region has 8 million electors. Eighteen responses were received in favour of a regional assembly. In Hampshire, there are more than 960,000 electors—not people, electors—but there were only two respondents in favour of the proposals. The Ministers know their uphill task. They have therefore devised an ingenious mechanism: any response whatever is counted as interest in favour of a referendum. The fact that someone might be wholly against an assembly, and might write to say so, will 487 nevertheless be counted as someone expressing an interest in a referendum. Our task in securing a petition will not be nearly so easy as the method that the Ministers have devised for themselves.
§ Mr. Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight)I am shocked and amazed at the implicit duplicity of Ministers if, as my hon. Friend asserts, they should count a clear expression of objection to a regional assembly as an argument in favour of a referendum. I know of the huge amount of work that has been done by our colleagues, MEPs representing the south-east, in campaigning against a referendum. Is he saying that Ministers are genuinely taking such expressions against as expressions of interest in a referendum being held?
§ Mr. SwayneI will preface my answer by saying that I am keen to move on to the next group of amendments. My hon. Friend should study the Official Report of the Standing Committee, as this was an issue that the Committee considered in some depth. The position is precisely as he fears.
§ Jim KnightDoes the hon. Gentleman not recall the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond) talking about the sword of Damocles and about his concerns about the effects on people in local authorities? Is it not valid for a community to decide to campaign for a referendum so that it can resolve the issue even if it is against an assembly? It is perfectly valid for people to organise for a referendum so that they can say no.
§ Mr. SwayneI doubt very much that the people writing to the Secretary of State to say that they do not want a regional assembly have any idea that their letters are counted as though they are in favour of holding a referendum.
My hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge has provided a mechanism by which we can put an end to the ratchet effect and can avoid what I described in Committee as African democracy. We want one man, one vote, once. Then the matter will be settled and there will be no going back. That is the reverse of what Ministers have provided for the proponents of regional assemblies. They will be able to go on ad infinitum and hold referendums every five years. It is therefore entirely appropriate to accept amendment No. 12 and to make the figure 10 years. In Committee, I argued for 20 years—a generation—but I will accept my hon. Friend's reasonable compromise of 10 years.
§ Mr. Andrew TurnerI want to make two points. The first is to admit that I am a little confused by the speech of the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey). The question is, who are the turkeys? He asserted, in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond), that the description of turkeys voting for Christmas was a slur on the electorate in a given region. I do not think that it 488 was a slur. The epithet "turkeys" was addressed not to the electors in the region, but to the members of the putative assembly.
§ Mr. Hammondindicated assent.
§ Mr. Swayneindicated assent.
§ Mr. TurnerMy hon. Friends nod in agreement, so we have got that clear. The hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton was slightly wrong.
My second point was about the threshold that the electors—not the turkeys—would have to achieve under the new clause to enable a second or recall referendum to take place. I disagree with the assertion of my hon. Friend the Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne), because I have experience of petitions being obtained for a whole range of purposes.
Before 1997, I was pleased to assist schools with the complex but invigorating process of achieving grant-maintained status. It was necessary for 20 per cent. of the parents of the pupils registered at a school to sign a petition for a referendum, which was conducted by postal ballot, to take place. A huge number of parents from almost 2,000 schools were willing to sign a petition. They signed up in such numbers that referendums were called. It is not difficult to reach a threshold of 20 per cent., or one that is even higher than that.
I cite the case of the west Wight ambulance or the Tennyson ambulance, as it is called. It was given to the area by the widow of Alfred Lord Tennyson, who was a distinguished resident of the west Wight. The ambulance serves the area covered by the parishes of Freshwater and Totland, the town of Yarmouth and the parish of Brighstone in my constituency. That area has a population of about 8,000. However, when the Isle of Wight Healthcare NHS trust proposed to redeploy the Tennyson ambulance, I received a copy of a petition signed by 4,000 electors—such was the level of interest in the deployment of a single ambulance. Imagine the level of interest that there would be in the deployment of the many millions of pounds that Labour Members wish to tear out of the grip of electors and hand over to the bogus assemblies. As it would not be difficult to achieve a 50 or 20 per cent, threshold, it is reasonable to propose a 5 per cent, threshold, and my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge is to be commended for that.
My hon. Friend the Member for New Forest, West also referred to people power. Putting power into the hands of the electors is the best way to determine such issues. It is not right to call the electors turkeys. I challenge the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton to tell me when a regional or national Assembly has voted for its own dissolution. If he can provide a substantial example of that, I might be forced to conclude that new clause 2 does not justify my support, but I do not believe that such an example exists.
I want to echo one or two remarks that my hon. Friend the Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter) made on the frequency of referendums. The referendums will be deeply unsettling. They will entail the abolition of a tier of local government and redeployment of a huge number of local government staff and officers. That will make recruitment to those 489 posts difficult. It is better to enable local government to operate in a stable environment—indeed, that is the objective of the Minister for Local Government and the Regions—but knowing that the sword of Damocles hangs over the assemblies every five years does not contribute to stability.
§ Mr. LeslieThank goodness the Conservatives objected to the programme motion. They clearly wanted to spend much more time debating the main issues. It is a shame that only two of their Back Benchers are in the Chamber. Perhaps they will flood in later for other groups of amendments.
The Conservatives are using new clause 2 to introduce the right for 5 per cent, of the electorate to sign a petition to requisition a further referendum on the establishment of an assembly once it is up and running. That would be a recipe for uncertainty and extremely disruptive to the operation of an assembly. Elected regional assemblies will be strategic and focus on the long term so they need certainty. What would happen if such a petition was successful, a further referendum was requisitioned and people voted to abolish the assembly? New clause 2 gives no idea of who would take on the assembly's responsibilities. Would they return to Whitehall?
§ Mr. HammondThe reason for that is that nowhere in the Bill is there anything about what the assembly's responsibilities might be. The Government are inviting people to vote blind in a referendum for elected regional assemblies. We will have to wait a long time before we see the legislation that sets out their powers.
§ Mr. LeslieWell, goodness gracious me, if the hon. Gentleman has not noticed the voluminous White Paper "Your Region, Your Choice", which describes in great detail the roles, functions and activities of elected regional assemblies, he may need to do a bit more research.
A 5 per cent, threshold to trigger a further referendum would be unprecedented in our constitution. No other body has a 5 per cent, threshold for a re-ballot. My hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Jim Knight) asked the interesting question of whether the Conservatives would apply it to the Greater London Authority. The same could be said of the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly. [Interruption.] The Conservatives, including one of their Front-Bench spokesmen, the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne), who is temporarily on the Back Benches, suggested that that was not within the Bill's scope, but I think that they were frightened to answer the question. If they believe that people should be able to challenge a decision to devolve powers and create an assembly or Parliament as a right, they should say whether that would apply to all parts of our country. I am surprised that they could not face up to that.
A 5 per cent, minority being able persistently, veraciously and repetitiously to frustrate the settled will of the majority of people in a region would be not only a distraction but extremely costly and wasteful. There would be the costs of the referendums and of demolishing an elected regional assembly once it had been set up.
§ Mr. Andrew TurnerThe Minister suggests that a 5 per cent, minority is unsuitable to cause a recalled referendum. What level of interest does he regard suitable to cause an initial referendum?
§ Mr. LeslieThat is also set out in the White Paper. We are trying to give people the opportunity to make a choice. We are not talking about the establishment of an assembly, but simply about whether there should be a referendum to establish one. The hon. Gentleman opposes giving people a choice and letting them express their will in a referendum.
It is most unfortunate, but it is important to say that I agree with the suggestion of the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey) that the electorate have the perfect capacity to elect people to run these assemblies and then say what those assemblies should be doing. The new clause is not necessary because people would have every opportunity both to consider the merits of an assembly in the initial referendum and to shape that assembly every four years in elections to it.
§ Mr. DaveyWill it be the Government's intention when they introduce a Bill on the powers and functions of regional assemblies to create a constitution for them to allow an elected party to such an assembly to dissolve it?
§ Mr. LeslieObviously, we shall have to look at that nearer the time, but I imagine that most Members would accept that Parliament is perfectly capable of making a judgment on the continuity issues of any assembly. I believe that that deals adequately with the point raised by hon. Members who want to consider the question of dissolving an assembly.
§ Mr. HammondI do not want to fight the battles of the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey) for him, but this is an important point because it drives a coach and horses through what the Minister is saying. Will an elected regional assembly have the power to dissolve itself or not?
§ Mr. LeslieParliament decides to set up devolved authorities and assemblies, so that will be a matter for Parliament.
I am curious about the Conservatives' claim that once an elected regional assembly is established, voters should have the opportunity to change their minds whenever they want. However, amendment No. 12 would deny voters in a region without an assembly the chance to change their minds for 10 years. They want to impose a minimum 10-year gap from the date of a no vote to when any subsequent referendum can be held in the same region. That is completely inconsistent and unfair.
§ Mr. HammondIf the Minister is prepared to agree on behalf of the Government to accept the 10-year 491 provision in clause 5, I would certainly be willing to withdraw new clause 2 and retable it in the Lords to include a 10-year lockout.
§ Mr. LeslieThe hon. Gentleman brings me to my next point: precisely why a 10-year gap is wrong and why we oppose the measure.
§ Mr. SwayneTease!
§ Mr. LeslieI should like to tease the hon. Gentleman over what he said in Committee. It was interesting that he argued for a 20-year gap, saying that he wanted to distance himself from the CBI suggestion of a 10-year gap. He said:
I am not so concerned about the limit of 10 years that the CBI suggested. I think that our amendment suggesting a limit of 20 years is about right.When asked by my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Mr. Jones) whether he actively disagreed with the CBI, the hon. Gentleman said:I do in this case. I think that the period should be a generation",and he repeated that today.The hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond) did not weigh in to support his hon. Friend, as he did in Committee, when he said:
The CBI is looking at these matters from the narrow perspective of business … However, it cannot be a concluding perspective".—[Official Report, Standing Committee A, 3 December 2002; c. 26–30.]The fact that the Conservatives have changed their mind and accepted the 10-year gap in the space of just one month proves my point. People can change their minds in less than 10 or 20 years. The Government's five-year interval strikes the right balance between a reasonable opportunity for people to change their minds and the avoidance of uncertainty and the repeat costs of a referendum. A five-year gap is a minimum—the exact period will depend on the soundings of opinion taken by the Secretary of State—and there is not a requirement to hold referendums in a five-year cycle. The Government have not plucked that five-year figure from the air. As Members will know, five years is the maximum interval between general elections and is also the standard interval for European parliamentary elections. I believe that five years is the right interval. I hope that Opposition Members will not persist with their new clause and amendment and I urge them to withdraw them.
§ Mr. HammondThe Minister is skating on extremely thin ice. In the space of about two minutes, he said that people can change their minds and should have the opportunity of repeat referendums within a period of no more than five years to try to create an elected regional assembly, but then set his face firmly against the idea that, having voted for elected regional assemblies, people may change their mind and wish to do away with them. In response to a question from the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey), he made it clear that elected regional assemblies will not have, as the hon. Gentleman would like, the power to abolish themselves. Electors electing those assemblies will not 492 have the UK Independence party option referred to earlier of electing members committed to the abolition of the assembly.
The Minister's position is therefore inconsistent. He put administrative convenience above democracy and displayed breathtaking arrogance, as he said that it is all right for Ministers to have the disruptive power to impose referendum after referendum until they achieve their objective, then a ratchet operates and things can never go back to the way they were before. However, he said that it is not all right for the people the have the power through democratic action to call a referendum and reconsider a decision. I urge my right hon. and lion. Friends and, I hope, all other right-minded, right-thinking Members to support me in pressing the new clause to a division.
§ Question put, That the clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 121, Noes 342.
495| Division No. 61] | [3:37 pm |
| AYES | |
| Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey) | Hammond, Philip |
| Amess, David | Hawkins, Nick |
| Atkinson, David (Bour'mth E) | Heald, Oliver |
| Atkinson, Peter (Hexham) | Hendry, Charles |
| Bacon, Richard | Hermon, Lady |
| Barker, Gregory | Hoban, Mark (Fareham) |
| Baron, John (Billericay) | Hogg, rh Douglas |
| Bercow, John | Horam, John (Orpington) |
| Beresford, Sir Paul | Howard, rh Michael |
| Boswell, Tim | Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot) |
| Bottomley, Peter (Worthing W) | Jack, rh Michael |
| Brady, Graham | Jenkin, Bernard |
| Brazier, Julian | Kirkbride, Miss Julie |
| Browning, Mrs Angela | Knight, rh Greg (E Yorkshire) |
| Burns, Simon | Laing, Mrs Eleanor |
| Burnside, David | Lait, Mrs Jacqui |
| Burt, Alistair | Lansley, Andrew |
| Cameron, David | Lewis, Dr. Julian (New Forest E) |
| Cash, William | Liddell-Grainger, Ian |
| Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping Barnet) | Lidington, David |
| Lilley, rh Peter | |
| Chope, Christopher | Loughton, Tim |
| Clappison, James | Luff, Peter (M-Worcs) |
| Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey | McIntosh, Miss Anne |
| Collins, Tim | Mackay, rh Andrew |
| Conway, Derek | McLoughlin, Patrick |
| Cormack, Sir Patrick | Malins, Humfrey |
| Cran, James (Beverley) | Maples, John |
| Curry, rh David | Maude, rh Francis |
| Davis, rh David (Haltemprice & Howden) | May, Mrs Theresa |
| Mitchell, Andrew (Sutton Coldfield) | |
| Djanogly, Jonathan | |
| Duncan, Alan (Rutland) | Moss, Malcolm |
| Evans, Nigel | Murrison, Dr. Andrew |
| Fabricant, Michael | Norman, Archie |
| Fallon, Michael | O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury) |
| Field, Mark (Cities of London & Westminster) | Ottaway, Richard |
| Page, Richard | |
| Flook, Adrian | Paice, James |
| Forth, rh Eric | Paterson, Owen |
| Francois, Mark | Pickles, Eric |
| Gale, Roger (N Thanet) | Prisk, Mark (Hertford) |
| Garnier, Edward | Redwood, rh John |
| Gillan, Mrs Cheryl | Robathan, Andrew |
| Goodman, Paul | Robertson, Hugh (Faversham & M-Kent) |
| Gray, James (N Wilts) | |
| Grayling, Chris | Roe, Mrs Marion |
| Green, Damian (Ashford) | Rosindell, Andrew |
| Greenway, John | Ruffley, David |
| Grieve, Dominic | Sayeed, Jonathan |
| Shephard, rh Mrs Gillian | Tredinnick, David |
| Shepherd, Richard | Turner, Andrew (Isle of Wight) |
| Simmonds, Mark | Tyrie, Andrew |
| Smyth, Rev. Martin (Belfast S) | Viggers, Peter |
| Spicer, Sir Michael | Walter, Robert |
| Spink, Bob (Castle Point) | Whittingdale, John |
| Spring, Richard | Wiggin, Bill |
| Stanley, rh Sir John | Wilkinson, John |
| Streeter, Gary | Wilshire, David |
| Swayne, Desmond | Winterton, Sir Nicholas (Macclesfield) |
| Swire, Hugo (E Devon) | Young, rh Sir George |
| Syms, Robert | |
| Taylor, Ian (Esher) | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Taylor, John (Solihull) | Angela Watkinson and |
| Taylor, Sir Teddy | Mr. Laurence Robertson |
| NOES | |
| Abbott, Ms Diane | Clarke, rh Charles (Norwich S) |
| Adams, Irene (Paisley N) | Clarke, rh Tom (Coatbridge & Chryston) |
| Ainger, Nick | |
| Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE) | Clarke, Tony (Northampton S) |
| Alexander, Douglas | Clelland, David |
| Allan, Richard | Clwyd, Ann (Cynon V) |
| Anderson, rh Donald (Swansea E) | Coaker, Vernon |
| Armstrong, rh Ms Hilary | Coffey, Ms Ann |
| Atherton, Ms Candy | Cohen, Harry |
| Atkins, Charlotte | Coleman, Iain |
| Austin, John | Colman, Tony |
| Banks, Tony | Connarty, Michael |
| Barnes, Harry | Cooper, Yvette |
| Barrett, John | Corston, Jean |
| Beard, Nigel | Cousins, Jim |
| Beckett, rh Margaret | Cranston, hon. Ross |
| Begg, Miss Anne | Cruddas, Jon |
| Bell, Stuart | Cryer, Ann (Keighley) |
| Benn, Hilary | Cryer, John (Hornchurch) |
| Bennett, Andrew | Cunningham, Jim (Coventry S) |
| Best, Harold | Cunningham, Tony (Workington) |
| Blackman, Liz | Davey, Edward (Kingston) |
| Blears, Ms Hazel | Davey, Valerie (Bristol W) |
| Borrow, David | David, Wayne |
| Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin) | Davidson, Ian |
| Bradshaw, Ben | Davis, rh Terry (B'ham Hodge H) |
| Brake, Tom (Carshalton) | Dawson, Hilton |
| Brennan, Kevin | Dean, Mrs Janet |
| Brooke, Mrs Annette L. | Denham, rh John |
| Brown, rh Nicholas (Newcastle E Wallsend) | Dhanda, Parmjit |
| Dismore, Andrew | |
| Brown, Russell (Dumfries) | Dobbin, Jim (Heywood) |
| Browne, Desmond | Dobson, rh Frank |
| Bruce, Malcolm | Donohoe, Brian H. |
| Bryant, Chris | Doran, Frank |
| Buck, Ms Karen | Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W) |
| Burden, Richard | Drew, David (Stroud) |
| Burgon, Colin | Drown, Ms Julia |
| Burnett, John | Eagle, Angela (Wallasey) |
| Burstow, Paul | Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston) |
| Byers, rh Stephen | Edwards, Huw |
| Cable, Dr. Vincent | Efford, Clive |
| Caborn, rh Richard | Ellman, Mrs Louise |
| Cairns, David | Ennis, Jeff (Barnsley E) |
| Calton, Mrs Patsy | Etherington, Bill |
| Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth) | Farrelly, Paul |
| Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge) | Field, rh Frank (Birkenhead) |
| Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V) | Fisher, Mark |
| Caplin, Ivor | Flint, Caroline |
| Casale, Roger | Follett, Barbara |
| Caton, Martin | Foster, rh Derek |
| Cawsey, Ian (Brigg) | Foster, Don (Bath) |
| Challen, Colin | Foster, Michael (Worcester) |
| Chapman, Ben (Wirral S) | Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings & Rye) |
| Chaytor, David | |
| Clapham, Michael | Foulkes, rh George |
| Clark, Mrs Helen (Peterborough) | Francis, Dr. Hywel |
| Clark, Paul (Gillingham) | Galloway, George |
| Gapes, Mike (Ilford S) | Lazarowicz, Mark |
| Gardiner, Barry | Lepper, David |
| George, Andrew (St. Ives) | Leslie, Christopher |
| Gerrard, Neil | Levitt, Tom (High Peak) |
| Gibson, Dr. Ian | Lewis, Ivan (Bury S) |
| Gidley, Sandra | Liddell, rh Mrs Helen |
| Gilroy, Linda | Linton, Martin |
| Godsiff, Roger | Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C) |
| Goggins, Paul | Llwyd, Elfyn |
| Green, Matthew (Ludlow) | Love, Andrew |
| Griffiths, Jane (Reading E) | Lucas, Ian (Wrexham) |
| Griffiths, Win (Bridgend) | McAvoy, Thomas |
| Grogan, John | McCabe, Stephen |
| Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale) | McCafferty, Chris |
| Hall, Patrick (Bedford) | McCartney, rh Ian |
| Hamilton, David (Midlothian) | McDonagh, Siobhain |
| Hancock, Mike | McDonnell, John |
| Hanson, David | MacDougall, John |
| Harman, rh Ms Harriet | McGuire, Mrs Anne |
| Harris, Dr. Evan (Oxford W & Abingdon) | McIsaac, Shona |
| McKechin, Ann | |
| Harris, Tom (Glasgow Cathcart) | McKenna, Rosemary |
| Havard, Dai (Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney) | Mackinlay, Andrew |
| McNamara, Kevin | |
| Healey, John | McNulty, Tony |
| Heath, David | Mactaggart, Fiona |
| Henderson, Ivan (Harwich) | McWalter, Tony |
| Hendrick, Mark | McWilliam, John |
| Hepburn, Stephen | Mallaber, Judy |
| Heppell, John | Mandelson, rh Peter |
| Heyes, David | Mann, John (Bassetlaw) |
| Hill, Keith (Streatham) | Marris, Rob (Wolverh'ton SW) |
| Hinchliffe, David | Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S) |
| Hodge, Margaret | Marshall, David (Glasgow Shettleston) |
| Hoey, Kate (Vauxhall) | |
| Holmes, Paul | Marshall, Jim (Leicester S) |
| Hope, Phil (Corby) | Martlew, Eric |
| Hopkins, Kelvin | Meale, Alan (Mansfield) |
| Howells, Dr. Kim | Merron, Gillian |
| Hoyle, Lindsay | Michael, rh Alun |
| Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N) | Miller, Andrew |
| Hughes, Simon (Southwark N) | Moffatt, Laura |
| Hurst, Alan (Braintree) | Moore, Michael |
| Hutton, rh John | Moran, Margaret |
| Iddon, Dr. Brian | Morgan, Julie |
| Illsley, Eric | Morris, rh Estelle |
| Irranca-Davies, Huw | Mullin, Chris |
| Jackson, Glenda (Hampstead & Highgate) | Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck) |
| Murphy, Jim (Eastwood) | |
| Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough) | Naysmith, Dr. Doug |
| Jamieson, David | Norris, Dan (Wansdyke) |
| Jenkins, Brian | O'Brien, Bill (Normanton) |
| Johnson, Alan (Hull W) | O'Hara, Edward |
| Jones, Helen (Warrington N) | Olner, Bill |
| Jones, Jon Owen (Cardiff C) | O'Neill, Martin |
| Jones, Kevan (N Durham) | Öpik, Lembit |
| Jones, Lynne (Selly Oak) | Organ, Diana |
| Jones, Martyn (ClwydS) | Osborne, Sandra (Ayr) |
| Joyce, Eric (Falkirk W) | Owen, Albert |
| Kaufman, rh Gerald | Palmer, Dr. Nick |
| Keen, Alan (Feltham) | Perham, Linda |
| Keen, Ann (Brentford) | Picking, Anne |
| Keetch, Paul | Pickthall, Colin |
| Kelly, Ruth (Bolton W) | Pike, Peter (Burnley) |
| Kemp, Fraser | Plaskitt, James |
| Kennedy, rh Charles (Ross Skye & Inverness) | Pollard, Kerry |
| Pond, Chris (Gravesham) | |
| Kidney, David | Pound, Stephen |
| Kilfoyle, Peter | Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham E) |
| King, Ms Oona (Bethnal Green & Bow) | |
| Prentice, Gordon (Pendle) | |
| Knight, Jim (S Dorset) | Price, Adam (E Carmarthen & Dinefwr) |
| Ladyman, Dr. Stephen | |
| Lamb, Norman | Prosser, Gwyn |
| Laws, David (Yeovil) | Pugh, Dr. John |
| Laxton, Bob (Derby N) | Purchase, Ken |
| Quin, rh Joyce | Stewart, Ian (Eccles) |
| Quinn, Lawrie | Stinchcombe, Paul |
| Rammell, Bill | Stoate, Dr. Howard |
| Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N) | Stringer, Graham |
| Raynsford, rh Nick | Stunell, Andrew |
| Reed, Andy (Loughborough) | Sutcliffe, Gerry |
| Reid, rh Dr. John (Hamilton N & Bellshill) | Tami, Mark (Alyn) |
| Taylor, Dari (Stockton S) | |
| Rendel, David | Taylor, David (NW Leics) |
| Robertson, John (Glasgow Anniesland) | Thomas, Gareth (Clwyd W) |
| Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W) | |
| Rooney, Terry | Thomas, Simon (Ceredigion) |
| Ross, Ernie (Dundee W) | Thurso, John |
| Roy, Frank (Motherwell) | Timms, Stephen |
| Ruddock, Joan | Tipping, Paddy |
| Russell, Bob (Colchester) | Touhing, Don (Islwyn) |
| Russell, Ms Christine (City of Chester) | Trickett, Jon |
| Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE) | |
| Ryan, Joan (Enfield N) | Turner' Dr Desmond (Brighton Kemptown) |
| Salter, Martin | |
| Sanders, Adrian | Turner, Neil (Wigan) |
| Sarwar, Mohammad | Twigg, Derek (Halton) |
| Savidge, Malcolm | Twigg, Stephen (Enfield) |
| Sawford, Phil | Tynan, Bill (Hamiltton S) |
| Sedgemore, Brian | Vis, Dr. Rudi |
| Sedgemore, Brian | Walley, Ms Joan |
| Shaw, Jonathan | Ward, Claire |
| Sheerman Barry | Wareing Robert N |
| Sheridan, Jim | Watson Tom (W Bromwich E) |
| Shipley Ms Debra | Watts, David |
| Simon, Siôn (B'ham Erdington) | White Brian |
| Simpson, Alan (Nottingham S) | Whitehead, Dr. Alan |
| Singh, Marsha | Williams, Betty (Conwy) |
| Skinner, Dennis | Williams, Roger (Brecon) |
| Smith, rh Andrew (Oxford E) | Willis, Phil |
| Smith, rh Chris (Islington S & Finsbury) | Wills, Michael |
| Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster C) | |
| Smith, Jacqui (Redditch) | |
| Smith, John (Glamorgan) | Wood Mike (Batley) |
| Smith, Llew (Blaenau Gwent) | Wright Anthony D. (Gt Yarmouth) |
| Smith, Sir Robert (WAb'd'ns & Kincardine) | |
| Wright, David (Telford) | |
| Soley, Clive | Wright, Tony (Cannock) |
| Southworth, Helen | Wyatt, Derek |
| Spellar, rh John | Younger-Ross, Richard |
| Squire, Rachel | |
| Starkey, Dr. Phyllis | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Steinberg, Gerry | Jim Fitzpatrick and |
| Stevenson, George | Mr. Phil Woolas |
§ Question accordingly negatived.