HL Deb 22 March 1979 vol 399 cc1274-8

3.40 p.m.

The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Peart)

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister about the further action which the Government propose to take following the results of the referendums on devolution which were held in Scotland and Wales on 1st March.

The Statement is as follows:

"The House is aware that it is now almost 10 years since the Royal Commission on the Constitution was appointed at a time when there was much public dissatisfaction with the workings of government in Scotland and Wales.

"For a decade there has been intense debate about possible changes in the system of Government, not only in this House, where all parties have put forward their own proposals for improvement, but also in Scotland and Wales. Parliament itself has been engaged for almost two years in considering detailed legislation which included the proposal for advisory referendums to enable the people of Scotland and Wales to vote on whether they wished the Acts to come into force.

"The results of those votes fell short of the conditions laid down by Parliament. So today the Secretaries of State for Scotland and Wales are laying draft orders to repeal the Acts, as they are required to do by Section 85(2) of the Scotland Act and Section 80(2) of the Wales Act. The effect of these orders would be to repeal both Acts in their entirety. That is a fundamental decision and Parliament must have a full and early opportunity to debate and decide the issue. This is the Government's intention.

"If the House were to decide to repeal these Acts that will certainly not be the end of the matter. The debate will continue, especially in Scotland, where a majority of the votes cast was for the Act to come into force. Such a volume of opinion cannot sensibly be disregarded. The Government have now fulfilled their obligation to lay the repeal orders. We intend to proceed to the next stage, namely, to ask the House to debate and decide on the orders. But we also propose that before the House makes such an important decision there should be a short intermediate stage. As the House knows, the Government are themselves firmly committed to a policy of devolution. We shall therefore use this short interval to make formal approaches to all the other parties in the House urgently to discuss on a bilateral basis, taking into account the result of the Scottish referendum, whether a measure of agreement might not be found to provide for the better government of Scotland. We will be ready to consider carefully modifications which might now be proposed to the present Act and ready to consider no less carefully any other proposals that might emerge. The Government's intention is that such discussions should be brought to a conclusion one way or the other by the end of April at the latest.

"As for Wales, the same uncertainties are not present. There was a heavy majority vote against the Wales Act and the Government assume that Parliament will wish to repeal the Act. Nevertheless, agreement might be possible on further administrative changes which would improve the quality of government in the Principality. We shall therefore approach other parties to consider whether we can secure agreement on further devolutionary changes that would lead to a settlement in Wales within the same time limit of the end of April.

"The Government's conclusion is that the situation in Scotland makes it imperative that before any irrevocable step is taken by this House there should be one further attempt by the parties to get the matter right in a way that would not disregard the voting in the Scottish referendum and would strengthen the unity of the United Kingdom."

My Lords, that concludes the Statement.

3.43 p.m.

Lord CARRINGTON

My Lords, we are grateful to the noble Lord the Leader of the House. I hope that he was gratified by the response which he has had to the Statement. Were your Lordships' House not so polite we should all have been rolling in the aisles. My Lords, of course this Statement has got nothing whatever to do with devolution; this is just an explanation of how an unpopular Government seek to stay in power, by delaying tactics and by subterfuge, for a few weeks longer. I do not really know who the noble Lord is fooling. He is not fooling me, and I doubt very much whether he is fooling anybody in your Lordships' House, least of all those who sit behind him.

As for all-party talks, the Government have refused my party's suggestions over the last 2½ years for all-party talks, and now, at the fag end of a Parliament, when the Government's plan for devolution has been rejected, they suddenly turn the somersault and expect us to take them seriously. The right thing for the Government to do, though it appears that they are not going to do it, is to stop all the wheeler-dealing, dissolve Parliament, and let the people of this country choose a new Government with a fresh mandate.

3.45 p.m.

Lord BYERS

My Lords, it may well be that we should have a General Election as soon as possible, and that has been our view in this party since October. As to the Statement itself, we welcome the proposal for all-party talks. There is so much dissatisfaction in both Houses, in Scotland itself, and in this country, with the Scotland Act as it now stands that, in our view, all-party talks are quite essential whether there is a General Election or not. Before or after the General Election, and preferably before, there must be all-party talks to try to get the system of devolution into far better shape than it would otherwise be. We in this party will certainly want to play a constructive part in such talks, and we feel that the sooner they take place the better. I would hope that the Conservative Party would also see its way to cooperate before rather than after the Election.

3.47 p.m.

Lord PEART

My Lords, I have noted carefully what the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition has said. I do not think he has really treated this subject seriously. The very fact that the Liberal Party, and not the Opposition, has shown positive leadership, is an indication. After all, there are many matters affecting Scotland which are important in the sense of local government and regional matters, and noble Lords know very well that an all-party talk would be a fruitful way of trying to deal with some positive problems which still affect these great regions. Therefore, I hope that the Tory Party, despite what their spokesman has said, will really think of this carefully, otherwise we shall be regarded as flippant politicians.

Lord SKELMERSDALE

My Lords, it seems to me that the referenda were specifically designed to ask an opinion of a specific electorate on a particular Act. The Statement recognises that this has been given, and it is the Act that is at fault rather than the idea of devolution. Could the noble Lord the Leader of the House say why, in this case, the all-party discussions, which I think we all welcome, should not be held after the Act has been repealed?

Lord PEART

My Lords, I think that the timetable is right. I would wish that there would be a positive response now in view of what I have said, and I hope that it will be taken up in the other place. I think that there is a general desire to look at this important matter. After all, many regional matters arise. I think of Wales, in particular, where, to give one example, I was involved in devolving some of our agricultural matters from the Ministry of Agriculture. This is the sort of thing that has to be considered. This is important for government, so I welcome what the noble Lord has said.

Lord FERRIER

My Lords, can the noble Lord say how such talks would deal with those, among whose number I include myself, who regard the referendum as being quite an unsuitable way of dealing with the matter at all, depending, as it did, on the list of voters in Scotland many of whom were not Scots at all?

Lord PEART

My Lords, it is not a question now about whether we should be ruled by a referendum, or anything like that. We believe now that inevitably, because of what has happened, the results, and having now to lay the orders, it would be right and proper to have talks, and all-party talks.