HL Deb 29 July 1997 vol 582 cc96-104

3.7 p.m.

Read a third time.

Clause 2 [Referendum in Wales]:

Lord Elis-Thomas moved Amendment No. 1: Page 2, line 16, leave out ("Welsh Assembly") and insert ("National Assembly for Wales").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I find myself virtually sitting on the Labour Benches due to the crowding of the House. The purpose of the amendment is to replace the words "Welsh Assembly" with the words "National Assembly for Wales". Without anticipating tomorrow's debate on the White Paper, I wish to stress that this Third Reading amendment is generated by enthusiasm for the White Paper and for the wording within it.

The purpose of the amendment is to assert the fact that the proposed assembly is not a Welsh assembly, a Welsh nationalist assembly, a Welsh socialist assembly, a Welsh Liberal Democrat assembly or a Welsh Green assembly but that it is in all senses a national assembly. It is a national assembly in terms of its international relations to be effected through the European dimension of the White Paper; it is also a national assembly through its internal regional organisation within Wales.

The formulation "National Assembly for Wales" is a closer rendering of the actual White Paper than the wording at present on the face of the Bill. Indeed, within the White Paper itself the phrasing "an Assembly for Wales" occurs on a number of occasions. I notice that the Minister in another place, Mr. Peter Hain, in Friday's debate, in fact referred on a number of occasions to the assembly as being an assembly for Wales.

To be more specific, I shall briefly indulge in some linguistic argument. Welsh connotes both language and identity: Wales connotes both. An assembly for Wales indicates a national institution for all citizens of the Principality without reference to linguistic or ethnic affiliation. An assembly for Wales is not about national identity or affiliation; it is about all the residents of Wales who will be able to vote in the referendum. To specify the assembly as an assembly for Wales, as the Welsh language version does, it would be Cynulliad i Gymru rather than Cynulliad Cymreig. For a Welsh assembly, the adjective "Welsh" would be Cymreig whereas an assembly for Wales, as rendered in the Welsh language version, is of course an assembly for Wales. This is not merely a point of translation. It emphasises the inclusiveness of the proposals in the White Paper and the need for an inclusive debate in the referendum.

The use of the word "national" is also important. This is a European regional assembly. It is, and will be, a United Kingdom regional assembly. I, for my part, have no problem in describing Wales as a region and indeed a European region; an economic region of the United Kingdom. But to use the favourite expression of the BBC, it is also a national region, a phrase used by that organisation to apply to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is national in the sense that it represents the cultural aspirations of an historic nation, which are resolved politically through a regional structure within Europe. That is why I say that it is a national assembly and not a nationalist assembly.

I say that advisedly because I am a little tired, sitting on the Cross-Bench, to be chastised by opponents of the Bill for advocating Welsh independence or a nationalist solution and for being the advocate of a slippery slope. I support the White Paper because it represents a consensus of opinion in Wales. Any further development of the constitutional structure of Wales is a matter for the United Kingdom Parliament—it cannot be otherwise—and therefore it cannot be a slippery slope. It is not a nationalistic assembly proposal, but a national assembly. The national aspirations of Wales can be perfectly accommodated within the United Kingdom and the European Union.

The other purpose of the amendment is to assert that the national aspirations of Wales are no threat to the United Kingdom and its integrity. We can have within our union state of the United Kingdom—which is not any more, and never has been in any real sense, a unitary state—national assemblies which have a validity, speaking for the nations of that kingdom without creating any threat to the unity of the kingdom but propagating the national diversity which has always been the nature of this state.

For the life of me I cannot see why the Conservative Party has not tabled its support of this amendment. I understand that that party, in the person of the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. William Hague, has declared unequivocally that it is now prepared to accept that if the people of Wales and Scotland vote for their parliament and assembly that decision shall remain on the statute book and unchallenged by the party. Clearly, if there is to be a Conservative intervention in this short debate, I hope that that assertion can be confirmed for it seems to me that we now need to build a consensus for the kind of constitutional change in which we are involved. If Conservative Members are to nominate candidates and to stand for the assembly and the parliament, then surely it is hypocritical of them to campaign—as apparently they are still doing—against the establishment of such an assembly and parliament. I beg to move.

3.15 p.m.

Lord Crickhowell

My Lords, the noble Lord almost invites a challenge from these Benches. I have to tell him that I have a good deal of sympathy for his case that the assembly should be called a national assembly if the people of Wales decide that they want it. My criticism of the amendment is that it is moved at the wrong time and to the wrong Bill. In my view it is perfectly reasonable—an amendment having been won—for the Bill to come before this House again. If it helps the noble Lord I am happy to say that if the referendum is won I will accept the verdict, but it will not stop my pressing for examination of the Bill with care and possibly moving amendments and suggesting improvements. The moment for doing so is when we have a Bill bringing forward the legislative proposals.

Indeed, the noble Lord almost made the point when he began to elaborate on his case. He drew attention to the fact that, in his view, it will be a European assembly. He pointed to the internal arrangements. He says that it is all in the White Paper. We were only allowed to see the White Paper when we had virtually completed examination of the Bill. The noble Lord responding to our debates has stonewalled stalwartly throughout our consideration of the Bill on the grounds that the White Paper will be debated in due course and that these matters are not for the referendum Bill.

It is a pity in a way that the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, spoilt his case when he argued that we were not going down a slippery slope and that there was no threat in the legislation to the unity of the United Kingdom. He began to spell out in some detail his party's view that the nation which is Wales was going to be a nation which was part of Europe rather than a nation which was part of the United Kingdom. He gave just a little bit away.

I maintain that what the noble Lord is really trying to do is to find another way of influencing the result of the referendum. He is trying to insert into the referendum Bill a particular point of view and to put into the Bill matters arising from the White Paper, which we have not yet debated. That is wrong in principle. If the people of Wales vote for an assembly, and we then have a Bill and the noble Lord comes forward with an amendment at that stage to call it a national assembly, I for one would be inclined to support him. There are so many Welsh institutions that we describe in those terms. I would find no difficulty in supporting his amendment at that time. However, I find the greatest difficulty in supporting it today.

Lord Hooson

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Crickhowell, knows perfectly well, as I do, that the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, has a very considerable intelligence and intellect. However, he is not so Machiavellian, I believe, to have the motivation that the noble Lord, Lord Crickhowell, implies. It seems to me that to suggest that it would be an advantage in the presentation of the case for a "yes" vote to change the name is neither here nor there.

It is far better that we reconsider whether the institution will be best described as the "Welsh Assembly" or as the "National Assembly for Wales". The Government should reconsider this because it seems to me that, for the reasons advanced by the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, the body would be better described as the "National Assembly for Wales". That would be better than the description "Welsh Assembly" because in Wales the description "Welsh" often implies that a person is Welsh-speaking. As there may be other implications, I think that it would be far better to use the much more neutral term "National Assembly for Wales".

Over 30 years ago I introduced into another place a Bill to give a domestic parliament to Wales. I was reminded of that when the Library found a copy of that Bill, which had been drafted by my noble friend Lord Thomas of Gresford. As the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Mostyn, knows, my noble friend is a much better draftsman than I am which is why I entrusted him with the drafting. I noticed that it was called the "Government of Wales Bill", but I believe that the wording suggested by the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, is rather better—and it is better than the Government's first proposal. All that I am suggesting to the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Mostyn, is that the Government should reconsider the matter and possibly return to it later. As I have said, it would be a considerable advantage to have the proposed wording.

Lord Parry

My Lords, I have no difficulty whatever in supporting all of the arguments that have been put forward so cohesively and persuasively by the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas. The only problem is that the amendment has taken not only me but the whole House by surprise. The timing is crucial as so many papers have been prepared based on the old assumptions which the noble Lord is now asking to be corrected.

I was chairman of the Wales Tourist Board—not the "Welsh Tourist Board", for precisely the reasons that the noble Lord has outlined. Like other noble Lords, I think that "National Assembly for Wales" is a better title. I support that view totally and hope that the Government can go some way towards giving us an assurance that they will consider making such a change despite the fact that they might be defeated by the time schedule.

Lord Stanley of Alderley

My Lords, I agree with the noble Lords, Lord Hooson and Lord Elis-Thomas, about a change of title. I do not know whether it is possible to make the change at this stage, but I was delighted to hear the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, recognise that, very sadly, over the past 20 or 30 years a rather racist and ethnic approach has crept into Wales. As has been said, the new proposed name for the assembly should create the right impression. Surely that is most important. I warmly welcome what the noble Lord said.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Scottish Office (Lord Sewel)

My Lords, I have listened most carefully to the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, and others who have spoken in this short debate. The argument for the amendment has been well made and I believe that it has some power. It is perhaps unfortunate that we are faced with this amendment at this stage of the Bill's journey because it is now relatively late in the day.

As the noble Lord knows, the Government have already published their White Paper on their proposals. The sub-title of that document is, "The Government's Proposals for a Welsh Assembly", and we are preparing a leaflet for households using the same terminology. I think that it would be misleading for the public if, having flocked to the shops to buy copies of the White Paper and having become familiar with the Government's proposals for what is described as the "Welsh Assembly", the ballot paper instead asked them for their views on the "National Assembly for Wales". That would introduce a degree of confusion. We have worked hard, and shall continue to work hard, to avoid confusion and to ensure that the electorate is well informed.

I am afraid that these amendments, however well intentioned, would undermine our efforts and would possibly jeopardise the ballot. However, perhaps I may suggest that these arguments might properly be deployed during consideration of the legislation setting up the assembly—subject, of course, to the people's endorsement of our proposals. On that basis, I invite the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment.

Lord Elis-Thomas

My Lords, now that I have moved back to the Cross-Benches, I am continually surprised by the way in which this House listens to arguments, having spent 18 years next door in another place. I welcome particularly the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Crickhowell, and his endorsement for the notion that, if established, the assembly would be a national institution alongside all our other national institutions. I am grateful for the support of my noble friend Lord Hooson who has long campaigned for Wales (in all senses of the word) and for Welsh institutions. I am grateful also for the support of my noble friend Lord Parry.

My only suggestion for my noble friend Lord Sewel, for whom I obviously have the utmost respect because there cannot be any more difficult role than that of sociologist turned politician, is that perhaps the strapline, "An Assembly for Wales", might feature regularly in the campaigning in Wales as a mode of information rather than disinformation. It would help to ensure that the inclusiveness, on which all noble Lords have commented, is reflected in the campaigning. I emphasise particularly the importance of ensuring that the Government's campaign is seen as an inclusive campaign for the creation of another national institution. It should not be seen as a Labour Party campaign—I am certain that it will not be seen in that way—but nor should it be seen as an anti-Conservative campaign. I am a little concerned that some Labour campaigning for the assembly might appear to be a campaign to exclude Conservatives from Welsh politics. That should never be the case because, as we have seen today, the noble Lord, Lord Crickhowell, is almost as much of a lower case Welsh nationalist as I am. On those grounds, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 5 [Expenditure]:

[Amendment No. 2 not moved.]

Schedule 1 [Section 1(2)]:

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish moved Amendment No. 3: Page 4, line 19, after ("HAVE") insert ("INCOME").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 3, I should like to speak also to Amendment No. 4. These are procedural amendments which I should have moved on Report after your Lordships had made a decision on an earlier amendment, but I am afraid that, as I am still in the nursery school of opposition, I withdrew them instead of moving them, so I beg to move them now.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish moved Amendment No. 4: Page 4, line 22, after ("HAVE") insert ("INCOME").

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Schedule 2 [Section 2(2)]:

[Amendments Nos. 5 to 10 not moved.]

Schedule 3 [Section 3]:

Lord Sewel moved Amendment No. 11: Page 6, line 41, at end insert— ("(3) It is the returning officer's general duty at a referendum to do all such acts and things as may be necessary for effectually conducting the referendum in the manner provided by this Schedule.").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, following the contribution just made by the noble Lord, Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish, perhaps I should say that Amendments Nos. 11 to 42 are minor technical amendments to improve Schedule 3 which was added on Report. They are simply good housekeeping amendments. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Chairman of Committees (Lord Boston of Faversham)

My Lords, we now come to Amendments Nos. 12 to 42 and I should mention to your Lordships that, if Amendment No. 42 is agreed to, I cannot call Amendments Nos. 43 and 44.

Lord Sewel moved Amendments Nos. 12 to 42 en bloc: Page 9, leave out lines 26 to 28. Page 9, leave out lines 45 and 46. Page 10, line 3, column 2, after ("votes") insert ("on his own behalf'). Page 10, line 6, column 2, leave out ("voting") and insert ("electoral"). Page 10, line 7, column 2, leave out ("voting") and insert ("electoral"). Page 10, line 9, column 2, leave out ("voting") and insert ("electoral"). Page 10, line 13, column 2, leave out ("voting") and insert ("electoral"). Page 10, line 37, column 2, leave out ("voting") and insert ("electoral"). Page 10, line 38, column 2, leave out ("voting") and insert ("electoral"). Page 11, leave out lines 3 to 6. Page 11, line 25, column 2, leave out ("and") and insert ("or"). Page 11, line 49. column 2, at end insert—

("The lists maintained in accordance with paragraph 3 of Schedule 5 to the 1983 Act shall have effect for the purposes of a referendum; and any person shall, before a referendum, be entitled at all reasonable hours to inspect those lists or a copy of them.")
Page 13, line 8, column 2, at end insert—
(", and
(b) for subsection (5)(a) and (b), and the words in subsection (5) after paragraph (b), substitute "for or within any voting area where, or in relation to which, the illegal practice occurred.
(5A) In subsection (5) "voting area" means a local government area in Scotland or a county or county borough in Wales.".")
Page 13, line 9, column 1, at end insert ("(application for relief)"). Page 13, line 12, column 1, at end insert ("(incapacities on conviction of corrupt or illegal practice)"). Page 13, line 13, column 1, at end insert ("(mitigation of incapacities, illegal payments, & c., and prosecutions)"). Page 13, line 13, at end insert—
("Section 177 (summary trial) For "in the county in which the local government area for which the election was held is situated or which it adjoins" substitute "in the county or county borough where, or in relation to which, the offence is alleged to have been committed".")
Page 13, leave out lines 42 to 45. Page 14, leave out lines 9 and 10. Page 14, line 23, column 2, at beginning insert ("In paragraph (1),"). Page 15, line 3, column 2, at beginning insert—
("The reference in paragraph (a) to section 66 of the 1983 Act shall be construed as a reference to that section as modified in Table 1.")
Page 16, line 15, column 2, after ("referendum") insert ("in this electoral area"). Page 16, line 35, column 2, after ("fwrdeistref") insert ("sirol"). Page 16, column 2, leave out lines 46 to 50 and insert—
("for "yr etholiad hwn ac yn yr etholaeth hon" substitute "y refferendwm hwn yn y rhanbarth etholiadol hwn".")
Page 19, line 3, column 2, at beginning insert—
("In subsection (5) for "constituency or, as the case may be, electoral area" substitute "local government area in Scotland or county or county borough in Wales".")
Page 19, line 8, column 2, leave out ("the") and insert ("a"). Page 20, line 28, column 2, at end insert—
("For subsection (5) substitute—
"(5) A person is not entitled to vote as proxy in any electoral area in a referendum on behalf of more than two electors of whom that person is not the husband, wife, parent, grandparent, brother, sister, child or grandchild.".")
Page 24, line 23, column 2, at end insert'
("and (b) for "Constituency" substitute "Local government area".")
Page 24, leave out lines 27 and 28. Page 28, line 30, column 2, leave out from ("D") to end of line 59 on page 29 and insert ("shall be construed as a reference to the form of proxy paper in the Appendix to this Schedule."). Page 30, column 2, leave out lines 27 to 49 and insert—
(""2. Read the ballot paper carefully. On the ballot paper mark a cross (X) in the box to the right of the proposition you are voting for. Put no other mark on the ballot paper or your vote may not be counted. If you cannot vote without
assistance, the person assisting you must not disclose how you have voted.",")

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 43 and 44 not moved.]

3.30 p.m.

Lord Sewel moved Amendment No. 45: Page 30, column 2, leave out from beginning of line 53 to end of line 15 on page 31 and insert—

(""2. Darllenwch y papur pleidleisio yn ofalus. Ar y papur pleidleisio rhowch groes (X) yn y blwch i'r dde o'r gosodiad yr ydych yn pleidleisio drosto. Peidiwch â rhoi unrhyw fare arall ar y papur pleidleisio neu fe all na chaiff eich pleidlais ei chyfrif. Os na fedrweh bleidleisio heb gymorth, rhaid i'r person sy'n eich cynorthwyo beidio â datgelu sut yr ydych wedi pleidleisio.",")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move Amendment No. 45.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Sewel moved Amendments Nos. 46 and 47: Page 36, line 5, leave out ("at the same referendum") and insert("in any electoral area"). Page 36, line 25, at end insert—