§ (" . The subordinate legislation procedures must include provision for securing that the Assembly makes such provision as it considers appropriate in any legislation it makes to take account of the position of agricultural businesses comprised of land partly in Wales and partly in England.").
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, I moved an amendment in Committee regarding the problem which could be faced by farms straddling the border which was not accepted. That was partly because the noble Lord, Lord Williams, thought that I might be able to "work the system" in having a farm in both Anglesey and Oxfordshire. I have to admit that I had not realised the potential which, I am sorry to say, reflects poorly on my intellect. Indeed, if I had, I would have drafted the amendment more deviously.
§ However, I gather that the noble Lord really did not approve of the amendment. He suggested that it was cherry picking and said that the problem would be dealt with by "regulatory appraisal". With respect to the noble Lord, I cannot see that such an appraisal would solve anything other than necessitating a few civil servants spending the odd afternoon discussing the problem, shaking their heads in sadness, having a cup of tea and saying that they should not be made to do the job.
§ The current amendment would be more positive because it would do much more than appraise. It would oblige the assembly, when regulations are made, to consider any effect those regulations might have on farms straddling the border. That would then oblige the assembly to make a special regulation for those farmers if it was considered necessary. I beg to move.
§ Lord Williams of MostynMy Lords, I am not sure that I can add much more to what I said on the earlier occasion. From the wording of the amendment, it is not clear what is sought to be achieved. However, I understand what the noble Lord indicates is his hope. We are talking about an agricultural business comprising land partly in Wales and partly in England—indeed, I believe I said "partly in southern England" previously. It was only later that I realised that I ought to have said Oxfordshire, but I was not then quick enough to say so. Nevertheless, the noble Lord has made his confession in that respect.
An agricultural business could easily comprise land in Anglesey and land in Norfolk. Undoubtedly, if the assembly was making subordinate legislation affecting land in Wales, I dare say it would want to consider what consequential effects that might have on a business which was a true cross-border straddle. However, I do not see the point of this amendment which deals with "subordinate legislation procedures"; in other words, the process by which such legislation is to be made.
The Welsh assembly will only be able to legislate within the borders. The noble Lord's amendment would simply enjoin the assembly to take account of the position of businesses which straddle Wales and England. But that is virtually meaningless. If the 815 assembly believes that there are anomalies, they will be taken into account in any event. I know the intended purpose of the amendment, but I do not believe that it would produce the desired result.
§ Lord Stanley of AlderleyMy Lords, I am not sure that I follow the Minister's response. If he thinks that I am still trying to flog the case of a farm in Wales and one in Oxfordshire, that is not the case. I am really concentrating on a farm which straddles the border. I am saying—and perhaps the Minister is agreeing with me in this respect—that there may be occasions when this will cause a problem with regulations. Therefore, in such a case, I am asking the assembly to look specifically at such farms and make the necessary regulations to ensure that there are no further bureaucratic problems like those that the Minister said in Committee he did not want. That would ensure that the process would work correctly. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 65 [Regulatory appraisals]:
§ [Amendment No. 93 not moved.]
§ Clause 67 [Disapplication of procedural requirements]:
§ [Amendment No. 94 not moved.]
§ Clause 70 [Openness]:
§ Lord Elis-Thomas moved Amendment No. 95:
§ Page 36, line 11, at end insert ("including in audio-visual or electronic form,").
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, this is a new amendment which seeks to establish that the word "record" in the Bill as it relates to a record of the assembly's proceedings can indeed be in forms of information technology. This follows on from some concern that we may be replicating in Cardiff Bay—perhaps needlessly or necessarily, depending on one's viewpoint—the procedures of this House. It is certainly not for me, as one who has benefited from having my words recorded in Hansard over the years, to criticise that provision in the Official Report. I merely wish to point out that there are other ways and other procedures adopted by different assemblies to relate their proceedings. In particular, we are now in a situation where an electronic record and an audio-visual and textual record of that kind can be made instantly and easily accessible to those who want to follow assembly proceedings.
§ For those reasons I think it is important that we should consider what is happening in other countries. For example, I understand that in the Basque country members and officials have instantaneous access to video and audio tapes of proceedings and audio tapes of interpretation. There is a similar linguistic balance between the Castilian and Basque languages as between Welsh and English. They also provide access to electronic transcripts as soon as they are produced. I seek to ensure that we seek the simplest, most accessible, cheapest and most effective way of 816 providing a record. I suggest that many of the bilingual issues can be resolved by use of the appropriate technology.
§ As I have argued on previous occasions, simultaneous translation from spoken Welsh into English will be immediately necessary in the context of the assembly and its record. As regards the written record, in the context of the subordinate legislation that has to be produced in a bilingual form, there is clearly an argument for a written record in both languages. I caution here that we should approach the issue of record and of language of record in a pragmatic and sensible way. We should consider the technology used to produce the record alongside the question of languages and content. We should consider the accessibility to the record on the Internet and treating the affairs of the assembly as if they were one great current affairs television production. With the modern techniques of electronic digital recording, time coding and so on, it is possible to retrieve the record rapidly.
§ Therefore the methods that we adopt in this House for reasons of history and of practice to produce a typewritten record overnight might not be the most efficacious way to deliver an immediate record of the proceedings of the assembly. These are issues that I want to flag up because they are under debate within government and within the advisory group. I want to ensure that the record can be produced in whatever form is appropriate. I beg to move.
§ Lord Falconer of ThorotonMy Lords, Amendment No. 95 would require standing orders to provide for publication of a report of assembly proceedings,
including in audio-visual or electronic form".While we do not think that this is a matter for the Bill, we sympathise with the thought behind the amendment. As a modern democratic institution, the assembly will want to ensure effective communication with those for whom it is working, and its reporting arrangements will need to reflect that. So, for example, it is quite likely that reports of its proceedings will be accessible through the Internet, and no doubt the fertile mind of the noble Lord will have other suggestions to make on assembly communications with people in Wales if the electorate of Meirionnydd Nant Conwy are bold enough to select him as their representative.If the noble Lord will accept that we applaud the spirit of the amendment but cavil at its insertion into the Bill, perhaps he will be minded to withdraw it.
§ Lord Elis-ThomasMy Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for spelling out the breadth of the meaning of the word "record". I am not sure whether I take his other remarks as an endorsement of my candidature or whether they are, as it were, hostages to fortune. However, I shall not take up the time of the House at this time of the morning to discuss that. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
817§ Lord Stanley of Alderley had given notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 96:
§ After Clause 72, insert the following new clause—