|
 |
| |
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
|
|
|
| 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.
|
|
|
2. Present Attitudes
|
|
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.
|
|
|
3. The Way Forward
|
|
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.
|
|
|
4. The Relationship between Westminster
and Cardiff
|
|
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.
|
|
|
5. The Office of the Secretary of State
for Wales
|
|
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.
|
|
|
7. Conclusion
|
|
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
Leader of the Welsh Conservatives in the National Assembly
26 February 2003
|
|
|
Source Division: Richard
Commission
Author Name: Alyson Thomas
Date: February 2003
|
|
|
|
|
