SUBMISSION TO THE COMMISSION ON THE ASSEMBLY’S POWERS AND ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS FROM NICK BOURNE AM, LEADER OF THE WELSH CONSERVATIVES IN THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY |
CONTENTS |
| 1. The Present Position |
| Speech
|
| 1. The Present Position | |
|
The National Assembly for Wales was set up as a result of the 1997 Referendum on administrative devolution to Wales. It effectively meant the transfer of the existing Welsh Office functions to a democratic body made up of 60 members – 40 elected by the traditional ‘first past the post’ mechanism for the same constituencies as Westminster, and 20 elected by proportional representation on a closed list system via five Welsh regions. The referendum result was a narrow victory for those putting forward the case for administrative devolution on a turn out of about 50%. I think that this electoral background in a referendum relatively recently should be at the forefront of any discussion of the future of the National Assembly. |
|
|
Insofar as one can ascertain, most people in Wales now accept that the National Assembly is here to stay. I think that the acceptance of the institution should not lead proponents of change to believe that there is any great warmth towards the institution. Indeed, there is a clear feeling of, at the least, disappointment and, at the worst, betrayal by many people in Wales in terms of delivery. This should clearly, and quite fairly, be laid at the door of the Welsh Assembly Government, initially Labour, and now Liberal/Labour, that has failed to deliver on the almost impossible expectations that were hyped up during the referendum campaign. It is true to say that there is a confusion between the Welsh Assembly Government and the National Assembly for Wales as an institution; a confusion that does not exist between the government and Parliament at Westminster, but nevertheless the poor performance of the Welsh Government has affected the standing of the institution. It is tempting for politicians to believe that they are more important than they really are, and this perhaps translates to a feeling that the National Assembly is more popular than it actually is. Clearly, what concerns people in Wales is delivery on key issues like health, education, transport, economic development and agriculture, as well as the avoidance of wasting public money. As an institution, the National Assembly for Wales can scarcely be said to be popular, or even respected. I believe that that respect must be earned. I would readily accept that it is early days in the history of the institution; a point that is often put forward by the very same people who are suggesting fundamental change. What I believe is necessary is a period of consolidation and hard graft to bring about some of the changes necessary in Wales, and particularly massive improvements in healthcare and a narrowing of the Welsh gap with England. |
|
|
The National Assembly for Wales is an important body. It has an annual budget of some £12 billion at its disposal and under its control. The way that that budget is spent has a fundamental effect on the lives of the people of Wales. I believe, as does my Party, that the disappointment felt by people in Wales is as a result of a failure to spend that budget wisely - a failure to invest the money at the sharp end of public services like health and education, whilst wasting resources on grandiose and unimportant projects like the new Assembly building, mini-embassies around the world, and in contributions to a driverless train linking central Cardiff and Cardiff Bay. These are not the people’s priorities! I am all in favour of testing the powers that we have under the devolution settlement contained in the Government of Wales Act of 1998. Indeed, the Welsh Conservative Party in the Assembly has suggested, for example, paying hardship grants to Welsh students of the amount they are obliged to pay in tuition fees to universities in the United Kingdom. I would term this as muscular devolution. However, the Administration has wrung its hands and said that it has no power to abandon tuition fees in Wales. I would term this as muscular devolution. A sensible approach to ascertaining the precise powers of the National Assembly would be to have a dedicated policy unit within the institution, setting out the existing powers and policy options for the government of Wales. The Welsh Conservative Party is also supportive of broad Henry VIII clauses in parent acts from Westminster delegating power to the National Assembly to determine how particular Westminster measures are to be carried out in Wales. This seems wholly sensible. |
|
|
Key to the effective operation of devolution is the relationship between Westminster and Cardiff. Here the promised effective cohesion has clearly not occurred. We have had, for example, a spat on the issue of free personal care, with leaks from the Wales Office telling the Welsh Assembly Government to ‘grow up’. The Finance Minister, Edwina Hart, has accused the Home Office of letting Wales down in relation to monies to combat the menace of drugs, and there has been confusion, and scarcely veiled conflict, on the subjects of top-up tuition fees. The Welsh Conservative Party believes that on occasion an argument can be made for the transfer of functions from Westminster to Cardiff. We have been supportive, for example, for the transfer of animal welfare powers, now being dealt with in the Animal Health Bill. We have also been supportive of the transfer of powers relating to electricity generation of over 50 megawatts, governed by S36 of the Electricity Act 1989. This transfer is now occurring, although slow in gestation. We have also given support to looking at the issue of transfer of powers on top-up tuition fees. This matter has been badly handled at Westminster as well as Cardiff. In any devolution settlement there will inevitably be friction, and the aim should be to minimise this. Friction is likely to be minimalised if matters evolve rather than having constant change and uncertainty. |
|
|
Central to the operation of effective devolution in Wales today is the office of the Secretary of State. We believe it is essential that Wales has a place at the top table at Westminster, both now under present arrangements and if ever there were to be any changes in these arrangements. We view with horror suggestions made by other political parties, and certainly the Liberal Democrats, that the office of the Secretary of State for Wales should be abolished. Under existing arrangements not enough has been made of this vital pivotal link. The Secretary of State is entitled to sit in the National Assembly and may, with consent (unlikely to be withheld) participate in debates. Indeed, initially a separate seat in the Assembly Chamber was earmarked for the Secretary of State. In practice we have been treated to annual vice regal visits when the Queen’s Speech is debated. (ex post facto). The seat seems to have disappeared from the Assembly Chamber, symbolically we believe of a break down in effective communication between the two institutions and certainly between the two governments. We believe the Secretary of State should attend on a more regular and more frequent basis to consult with members, both formally and informally. This could only be to the benefit of both institutions and contribute to good government in Wales and in the rest of the UK. |
|
| 6. Workings of the Assembly | |
|
Clearly there are many reforms that could be made to the Assembly as an institution that would contribute to the better government of Wales. We do not believe that the number of Assembly Members should be altered nor the electoral arrangements. We do believe some rationalisation of committee structure is in order, and particularly that it is feasible that there could be a more productive use of committee time. We believe that some sensible alteration of working times of Assembly Members could be made to allow for important debates not to be curtailed as now sometimes happens because of the inflexible (and probably unique in today’s working environment) hours of operation of Plenary. On a tangential but important issue, we believe that a hard copy of the written record of proceedings would be valuable to Assembly Members, to members of the public in Wales and to other governmental and public institutions inside and outside Wales. |
|
|
Uniquely amongst political parties in Wales, the Welsh Conservative Party believes that, certainly at this stage in the history of the National Assembly for Wales, no fundamental changes should be made to its structure or operation. There is a great danger that we are now reaping a very predictable whirlwind for the over exaggerated claims made by the proponents of an Assembly during the referendum campaign, and made by some political parties in the Assembly election campaign of 1999. The institution in short should not be scapegoated for the failures of the current administration and nor should politicians be led to suppose that the acceptance of the National Assembly in Wales and a desire to see it operate effectively puts it on a par in the Welsh psyche with Welsh national icons like Tom Jones or Catherine Zeta Jones. Much work needs to be done to gain the respect of the Welsh people and that is what I want to do, as does my political party. |
|
|
NICHOLAS BOURNE AM 26 February 2003 |
|
|
Source Division: Richard
Commission |
|