Clause 15 - Implementation of recommendations
Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill
11:00 am
Mr Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)
The Minister is in mischievous mood, since he understands perfectly well what was said.
Let us turn to the Minister's speech in response to the amendment. You have chaired Committees on which I have served, Mr. Butterfill, and, as you know, I have always been delighted to while away many a happy hour of the evening discussing semantics. On thresholds and hurdles, I invite the Minister to consider the fact that a hurdle to a mouse may be a mere threshold to a lion. I would suggest that there is nothing particularly significant in my choice of words in that respect.
The right hon. Gentleman did not deal with the obvious fact that an advisory referendum is not an election. The examples that he used of the perils—as he sees them—of thresholds or hurdles were all drawn from elections. The Secretary of State will use the referendum in deciding how to proceed, as will Parliament ultimately, as the hon. Member for Ludlow (Matthew Green) said. One test that the Government themselves have introduced in clause 1 is the test of the level of interest, which is that there should not be referendums on the creation of regional assemblies where there is no significant, or a low level of, public interest. We have consistently invited the right hon. Gentleman to put some objectivity into those tests.
We should try to move away from the posturing that inevitably takes place in Committee proceedings. I would have been delighted if the right hon. Gentleman had said—as I think he very nearly said previously—that there would be a requirement for a significant measure of participation. We do not yet know whether that is 25, 35 or 45 per cent. However, I take it as read and understood on all sides that Ministers would not be minded to proceed to the creation of elected regional assemblies if total turnout was perhaps 25 per cent. and just over half voted yes.
During further proceedings on the Bill, in particular on the Floor of the House tomorrow, the Conservative party will address the issue again and get some clarity from the Minister as to what level of public support is required to undertake a major change in our constitutional arrangements. I submit that it is entirely reasonable and proper to require that there be significant public support. We can debate all day what significant means in this context; however, I would like to hear the Minister acknowledge that there must be significant support.