HL Deb 14 October 1997 vol 582 cc111-2WA
Lord Stoddart of Swindon

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What evidence they have that the "Say no to a Welsh Assembly" campaign is a Conservative "front organisation".

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Williams of Mostyn)

The right honourable Member for Devizes has been reported as having instructed Conservative Party members not to run a Conservative Party campaign but to work through the "Say NO to Wales" campaign.

Lord Stoddart Swindon

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What public expenditure is being incurred in promoting the campaign in support of Welsh devolution.

Lord Williams of Mostyn

No public expenditure is being incurred.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, in the interests of democratic balance, public money is being made available to the "Say No to a Welsh Assembly" campaign; and, if so, how much.

Lord Williams of Mostyn

As no public money is being made available to any campaign organisation in respect of the Welsh Assembly it would not be in the interests of democratic balance to pay money to any "Say No to a Welsh Assembly" organisation should one be established.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon

asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many Welsh quangos will remain after a Welsh Assembly has been established.

Lord Williams of Mostyn

There are 87 public bodies in Wales at the moment, made up of 45 executive and advisory non-departmental public bodies, 36 NHS bodies and six Training and Enterprise Councils. The Government would take action by the time the Assembly is established to abolish nine of these bodies (five executive NDPBs, two special health authorities and two TECs) and an as yet undecided number of NHS trusts. The Assembly would be able to abolish most of the bodies that remain if it so wished: that would be a matter for it to decide. It is thus not possible to give an exact answer to the noble Lord's Question.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon

asked Her Majesty's Government:

How they envisage the business community will gain "easier access to key decision makers" in the Welsh Assembly, as promised in paragraph 2.20 of the White Paper, A Voice for Wales; and how this access can be insulated from the activities of professional lobbyists.

Lord Williams of Mostyn

The Assembly's standing orders will be published. It will therefore be clear who is responsible for taking particular decisions, including those relating to matters of interest to the business community. In addition, the 60 members of the assembly will be based in Wales, whereas Welsh Office Ministers spend most of their time in London when Parliament is sitting. It will be for the Assembly, by means of its standing orders, to decide how it should regulate contacts between its members and professional lobbyists.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will ensure that there will be no victimisation or discrimination against any member of a public body in Wales who does not endorse the statement of support for a Welsh Assembly included in a letter of 2 July issued by the "Yes for Wales" campaign and intended to constitute a "list of Quango Members for an Assembly".

Lord Williams of Mostyn

The Government believe that members of public bodies should be appointed and serve on the basis of individual merit.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they consider that the four signatories of the letter from "Yes for Wales" of 2 July, addressed to other members of public bodies in Wales giving their public positions beside their signatures, are behaving in a manner compatible with the guidance from the Welsh Office of 21 July to Chief Executives on the involvement of staff and non-executive members or directors in the referendum campaign.

Lord Williams of Mostyn

The letter of 21 July to Chief Executives from the Welsh Office made clear that non-executive members or directors of NHS bodies are free to engage in political activities provided that they express their views in a personal capacity. The letter of 2 July was sent out before the guidance to the NHS became available. But, as the letter makes no claim that its authors are writing on behalf of the bodies of which they are members, it would not in any event seem to be inconsistent with the guidance issued.