Clause 92 — Assembly measures

Part of Orders of the Day — Government of Wales Bill — [1st Allotted Day] – in the House of Commons at 7:15 pm on 23 January 2006.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Nick Ainger Nick Ainger Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Secretary of State for Wales 7:15, 23 January 2006

I think that everyone has got it off their chest now—this artificial indignation, saying that we have something to hide, are misleading the people of Wales and are dishonest. It may be helpful to Conservative Members to read out from the public document that was the UK Labour party's manifesto and the manifesto that we fought the election under in Wales. The UK manifesto says:

"In Wales we will develop democratic devolution by creating a stronger Assembly with enhanced legislative powers and a reformed structure and electoral system to make the exercise of Assembly responsibilities clearer and more accountable to the public."

The Welsh manifesto said:

"In a third term we will legislate for a stronger Assembly with enhanced legislative powers. We will improve the accountability of Ministers".

He has now left his place, but as Mr. Llwyd said, the Labour party fought on that manifesto, which was open with the people of Wales that we would give them enhanced legislative powers. I know that Plaid Cymru went further, as did the Liberal Democrats. In Wales, overwhelmingly, those parties that won were looking to give the Assembly more legislative powers. For Conservative Members to claim that we have been trying to slip the proposal through and hide it is totally unacceptable and contrary to the facts. The Labour party had a special conference in September 2004, some six months before the general election, in which we clearly debated the issue and formulated the policy on which that manifesto commitment was based. We have not been trying to slip something through, as was confirmed by the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, to whom I am grateful. Conservative Members have failed to make the case that the proposal represents such a substantive change from the position in the 1997 referendum, and the case that was put then, that a second referendum is justified.

At all stages, Parliament will be able to grant powers to the Assembly that are very confined. That means that the change is not huge—unlike the major constitutional change that followed the 1997 election, when the 60 Members of the Assembly were elected. They were given Executive powers and the ability to deal with secondary legislation that previously had been handled by this place.

Mr. Gummer said that such significant changes—he did not say how they were significant—warranted a referendum. However, part 4 of the Bill states that there will be a referendum if there is a call to move to full primary powers. We are not hiding that, or trying to run away from holding a referendum, as we will hold referendums when they are warranted. I was amazed to hear the right hon. Gentleman ask why, if we were so confident of our manifesto commitment, we were reluctant to put it to a referendum. Our manifesto contained many pledges to the people of Wales and of England, so is it being suggested that all those commitments should be subject to the referendum process? That would be a nonsense. The people of Wales and the rest of the UK gave this Government a mandate to implement this specific manifesto commitment, and that is what we intend to do.