LORDS AMENDMENTS (Hansard, 24 July 1978)

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth 725 not insist on their Amendments Nos. 73 to 76, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 77, but agree to a manuscript Amendment in lieu of Amendment No. 76. I just want to say once more that the Government's view is that responsibility for ancient monuments and historic buildings should be fully devolved. It is in our view entirely appropriate that the Welsh Assembly should be left to manage what is, by definition, primarily a matter of Welsh concern. The planning intervention powers are designed to come into play where there is a prospect of a wider United Kingdom interest being infringed by some executive planning action. The Government believe the likelihood of a national United Kingdom interest being infringed by considerations affecting listed buildings to be so remote as to make it quite unnecessary and inappropriate to provide for this in Schedule 9.
For these reasons, the Government do not think it right to include the additional section and Schedule of references included in the first three Amendments. With or without the alteration in the condition precedent created by the fourth Amendment, we do not see how the inclusion of the additional references could have the effect intended. This is because the key words in sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph 1 of the Schedule are: any matter… with respect to which the Assembly has no power to act. Preservation or a listed building in Wales, whether or not it is viewed as part of the so-called British heritage—and it certainly is part of that heritage, wherever it is located—must be a matter with respect to which the Assembly has power to act. Accordingly, there is no way that we can see by which the Schedule can be adapted to meet the purpose of the noble Baroness within its present structure.
Given that the equivalent Amendments to the Scotland Bill have not been insisted upon, I hope your Lordships' House will not consider that this matter merits again returning the Amendments to another place. However, I also hope that your Lordships' House will, in not insisting on Amendment No. 76, agree to a manuscript Amendment in lieu. The background to this lies in the Scotland Bill. During the consideration of Commons 726 Reasons, the noble Viscount, Lord Colville of Culross, made a most helpful suggestion for improving the wording of the equivalent Schedule to the Scotland Bill. We agreed to the principle of his Amendment, but said that we would seek to improve the drafting in the Commons.
Our manuscript Amendment deals with the equivalent wording in the Wales Bill. It seeks to ensure that the conditions to be met before the Secretary of State may intervene in planning matters under Schedule 9 are exactly the same as for the more general intervention powers under Clause 34. However, our drafting is, I suggest, preferable. We propose to incorporate similar drafting in the Scotland Bill when it returns to the Commons on Wednesday. In moving in that sense, I should like to say that we are most grateful to the noble Viscount, and indeed to the noble Baroness, for raising this matter. In dealing with it in the way we propose, I think that the essence of what has been intended is being met.

§ Baroness ELLES
My Lords, I propose to reassure the noble Lord the Minister straight away that we shall not insist on our Amendments. But I should say from these Benches that it is a great pity that the Secretary of State will not be able to intervene and use sums from the National Land Fund to save certain buildings in Wales. I understand that this will be the effect, because listed buildings will not be a matter on which the Secretary of State can intervene. That is as I read it, and as I understood the position when I moved my Amendments.
Therefore, there may well be some magnificent buildings in Wales which the Welsh Assembly will not be able to afford to maintain, or will not feel justified in using money from the block grant to maintain and repair, and the Secretary of State will not be able to draw on any other funds in order to provide the necessary money. As the noble Lord himself has said, we are talking not only about the Welsh heritage but about the British heritage, and I believe that the 727 United Kingdom could have played a useful rôle. But in view of what the noble Lord has said, we shall not insist on these Amendments.

§ The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Lord Nugent of Guildford)
My Lords, before I put the Question, I should explain that I shall call the manuscript Amendment after I have put this Question.