COMMISSION ON THE POWERS AND ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR WALES

  MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

 of the

 EVIDENCE OF:

 North Wales Group of Labour MPs

 held at

 Boothroyd Room, Portcullis House, Westminster

on

 THURSDAY 12 JUNE 2003

In Attendance

Lord Richard, Chair, Richard Commission

Ted Rowlands, Richard Commission

Tom Jones, Richard Commission

Peter Price, Richard Commission

Dr Laura McAllister, Richard Commission

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth, Richard Commission

Paul Valerio, Richard Commission

Vivienne Sugar, Richard Commission

Eira Davies, Richard Commission

Huw Thomas, Richard Commission

Ian Lucas MP

Betty Williams MP

Gareth Thomas MP

Proceedings

Lord Richard

Thank you very much for coming. What we have been trying to do with most people is to ask you to formally identify yourselves for the sake of the transcript and then if you would be good enough to open up the discussion, as you see it, and then we will pursue whatever for the lines we think. Is that all right?

Ian Lucas

I am Ian Lucas, Member of Parliament for Wrexham.

Betty Williams

I am Betty Williams, Conwy.

Gareth Thomas

Gareth Thomas, member for Clwyd.

Ian Lucas

We are here today on behalf of the group, the North Wales group of Labour MPs, who represent 8 constituencies from across North Wales, and we have reached a unanimous submission to the Commission which I hope you have.

Lord Richard

We have one from you which is headed "Submission" --

Ian Lucas

That is from an individual. If I can just briefly outline the main points on it. As I say, it is a submission on behalf of all of us which we have agreed after some considerable discussion. It effectively makes the point that we consider that the present settlement is working in general terms well. We consider that it is a very novel settlement and that the present arrangement has only been in place for a relatively short period, 4 years, and we, therefore, as a group feel that there are no pressing needs -- there is no pressing need for major change at this stage, and by major change we mean granting, or allowing the Assembly tax raising powers, primary legislative powers, or indeed a major transfer of a particular area of the policy; for example, the Home Office has been discussed in different circles. We as group would not support that.

We think that North Wales has a particular perception of the Assembly at the present time which is not positive and we believe that the Assembly needs to address that issue in the current term, and in order to do that we also believe, as most of us backbenchers, that we need to try to, as Members of Parliament, work more closely with backbench members of the National Assembly during the course of the years ahead to improve the working of the settlement and to look at different ways for developing scrutiny of legislation as it affects our constituents.

I think that is the summary of our position and my colleagues, I do not know if they are intending to add anything.

Betty Williams

I am not sure whether we discussed about the PR system, whether that might come out in the discussion we were unanimously referring to that issue.

Lord Richard

If you want to make the point now, fine.

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Mae yna deimlad digon cryf nad yw’r cynllun hwn wedi gweithio cystal ag oedd llunwyr y cynllun wedi ei obeithio mewn gwirionedd. Mae yna deimlad llwyr ei fod yn dangos annhegwch – yn enwedig yr etholiadau diweddar; cyn belled ag y maen nhw yn y cwestiwn, roedd nifer y pleidleisiau a roddwyd i’r gwahanol bleidiau, fel y dywedais, dydyn ni ddim yn teimlo ei fod wedi gweithio fel roedd y llunwyr wedi ei rag-weld ac wedi gobeithio y byddai’n gweithio

Interpretation:

There is a feeling, quite a strong feeling, that this scheme has not worked as attractively as the architects of the plan had actually hoped that it would work. There is a complete feeling that it actually demonstrates inequality and unfairness - particularly the recent elections; as far as they are concerned the number of votes given to the various parties was, as I was saying, we do not feel that it turned out as the architects had actually anticipated and hoped that it would turn out.

Lord Richard

Do you have any suggestions on how to improve the situation?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Wel, rydyn ni’n cydnabod bod y cynllun yn bod a rydyn ni’n credu ei fod yn anghyfiawn, yn annheg. Efallai y bydd rhai’n rhoi sylwadau personol ychwanegol hefyd i chi, ond yn gyffredinol dydyn ni ddim yn teimlo’n bod yn hapus am y cynllun, gydag 20 yn ychwanegol at y 40, does yna ddim byd penodol. Does ganddyn nhw ddim etholaeth benodol na chylch gwaith penodol yn ymwneud ag unrhyw etholaeth. Rydyn ni wedi bod yn siarad â’r rheiny a oedd yno am y 4 blynedd cyntaf ac maen nhw wedi cydnabod nad oes ganddyn nhw hanner cymaint o waith achos â’r AC sydd ag etholaeth benodol i’w chynrychioli, ac i mi nid yw hynny’n rhoi cynrychiolaeth deg i’r rheiny sy’n ceisio rhoi eu hamser a’u gwaith i ddemocratiaeth. Mae yna deimladau cryfion am hyn, ac felly rydyn ni wedi rhoi sylwadau am gynlluniau gwahanol yr hoffem eu gweld. Dydyn ni ddim wedi manylu ar hynny. Y cyfan rydym yn ei ddweud yw ein bod yn teimlo’n gryf nad yw’r cynllun presennol yr hyn a ddylai fod o bell ffordd.

Interpretation:

Well, we acknowledge that the scheme exists and is in place and we think that it is unjust, unfair. Perhaps a couple will be giving personal additional comments as well to you, but generally we do not feel that we are happy with the scheme, with the additional 20 to the 40, so there is nothing specific. They do not have a specific constituency and they do not have any specific remit regarding a particular constituency. We have been talking to those who were there for the first 4 years and they have confessed that they do not have half as much case work as the AMs that have a specific constituency to represent, and to me I do not think that gives fair representation of those who are trying to give their time and work to a democracy. There are quite strong feelings on this, and so we have actually given comments about which alternative plans we would like. We have not put that in detail. All we are saying is that we feel strongly that the current plan isn't what it should be by a long chalk.

Dr Laura McAllister

Is your opposition to PR generally or is your opposition to the particular scheme for PR that we have with the AMS system?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Mae’r 4 blynedd diwethaf wedi dangos i ni sut mae’r trefniant arbennig hwn yn gweithio, a dyna’r unig brofiad personol sydd gen i o weithio’n agos gyda rhywun yn y Cynulliad dan y trefniadau presennol. O’r hyn rwyf fi wedi ei weld, mae’n hollol anghyfiawn. Rydyn ni hefyd yn teimlo, ynglyn â chwestiwn Cynrychiolaeth Gyfrannol pan gaiff ei defnyddio, ei bod yn dueddol o roi sefyllfa ansefydlog mewn llawer gwlad arall. Rwy’n cydnabod bod yna drefniadau gwahanol o systemau cyfrannol, ond ble bynnag y mae’n gweithredu mae yna gryn ansefydlogrwydd yn y gwledydd hynny o’r naill etholiad i’r llall.

Interpretation:

These past 4 years have shown us how this particular arrangement under PR is working and that is the only personal experience that I have of working closely with somebody within the Assembly under the present arrangements, and from what I have seen it is completely unjust. We also feel that the question on PR generally when it is used in other countries is that it tends to give an unstable situation in many other countries. I acknowledge there are different arrangements of proportional systems, but wherever it does exist there is quite a bit of instability within those countries from one election to the next.

Lord Richard

Could I follow up the unjust point; unjust and unfair. To whom? To you as Members of Parliament, or constituencies, or to the AMs who are representing? How does it affect your work, this list system?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Fel Aelodau Seneddol, dydy hynny ddim yn digwydd oherwydd ein bod wedi ein hethol dan drefn y Cyntaf Adref, ond wrth siarad ag Aelodau’r Cynulliad, yr Aelodau hynny sydd wedi eu hethol, mae’r 20 hynny yn teimlo bod y drefn yn hollol anghyfiawn, am nad ydyn nhw’n cael hanner cymaint o waith achos â’r Aelodau Cyntaf Adref, a dyna lle mae’r annhegwch. Oherwydd fel y deallaf fi, mae’r aelodau i gyd yn cael yr un gyflog p’un a ydyn nhw ymhlith – rwy’n dweud 30 o hyd yn lle 40 – yr 20 arall.

Interpretation:

As Members of Parliament it does not because we have been elected under the First Past the Post system, but in speaking to Assembly Members, those Assembly Members that have been elected, those 20 do feel that, they tell you themselves that they feel it is totally unjust, because they do not get half as much casework as those First Past the Post members and that is where the inequality lies because, as I understand it, all members are paid the same salary, whether they are in the -- I keep saying 30 instead of 40 -- and as the other 20.

Tom Jones (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Yn eich etholaeth chi tan yr etholiad diwethaf, roedd yr AC o blaid wahanol. Oedd hynny’n ei gwneud yn fwy anodd cydweithio a rhannu’r gwaith?

Interpretation:

In your constituency until the last election, the AM was of a different party. Did that make it more difficult to collaborate and allocate the work?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Wel, rwy’n credu cyn belled ag y mae rhannu gwaith yn y cwestiwn – fel all fod gan fy nghydweithwyr farn wahanol – ond os byddai gan etholwr broblem yn ymwneud ag iechyd, dywedwch, yna rhaid i chi ystyried cyfrinachedd rhwng yr aelod etholedig a’r etholwr hwnnw. Os bydd rhywun yn dod at Betty Williams neu Gareth Jones ynglyn â phroblem benodol, rwy’n teimlo mai dyletswydd Betty Williams yw delio â’r broblem honno, nid ei throsglwyddo i rywun arall.

Interpretation:

Well, I think the question of allocation of work as far as I am concerned, my colleagues might have different views, but if a constituent has a problem let us say which is a health issue then you have to consider confidentiality between the elected member and that elector, and if somebody approaches Betty Williams or Gareth Jones with a particular problem I feel that it is Betty Williams’ duty to deal with that problem and not just pass it on.

Tom Jones (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Ond sut fyddech chi’n delio, er enghraifft, â chwestiwn yn ymwneud ag iechyd, efallai, neu broblem gyda’r ysbyty lleol? Oeddech chi’n gallu troi ar Weinidogion yn y Cynulliad neu at swyddogion yn Llywodraeth y Cynulliad gyda’r broblem? Oedd hi’n hawdd?

Interpretation:

But how did you deal, for example, with a question regarding a health issue perhaps, or a problem with the local hospital? Were you able to approach Ministers in the Assembly or to officials of the Welsh Assembly Government with your problem? Was it easy?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Dim problem o gwbl. Mae’n dibynnu ar y testun. Weithiau gallwch ei ddatrys gyda’r ymddiriedolaeth iechyd. Neu os nad yw hynny’n bosibl, yn ystod y 4 blynedd diwethaf, wrth gwrs, roedden ni’n siarad am awdurdod iechyd Gogledd Cymru a’r ymddiriedolaethau a’r Cynulliad, ac felly roedd tair lefel o iechyd a gweinyddu os ystyriwch y peth. Ac mae gennych iechyd cymuned hefyd – wrth gwrs, hwnnw yw’r bedwaredd ran . Ond fel Aelodau Seneddol byddwn i gyd yn meddwl, "At bwy ddylwn i fynd mewn gwirionedd yn gyntaf i gael yr ateb cyflymaf er lles y claf a theulu’r claf? Felly, doedd hi ddim yn broblem bersonol i fi, ac mae’r un peth yn wir am addysg.

Interpretation:

No problem whatsoever. It depends on the issue. Sometimes you can settle it with the health trust, or if that is not possible, over the past 4 years, of course, we were talking about the North Wales health authority and the trusts and the Assembly, and so there were three levels of health and administration if you consider it and you have the community health as well -- of course that is the fourth part, but as Members of Parliament we all think, "Who should I actually approach first of all to get the swiftest solution for the benefit of the patient or the patient's family?" So it was not any personal problem for me and the same is true with education.

Lord Richard

You would like it directed to the Assembly Ministers, would you?

Betty Williams

Well, it has. I decide whether it is a matter for the Minister, or whether it is a matter for the Director of Education, or the Governors of the school.

Lord Richard

That is within the structure of the devolved administration?

Betty Williams

We have an excellent working relationship between myself and Parliament.

Lord Richard

You would not write to the Wales Office here, the Secretary of State, or to the Secretary of State for Health here?

Betty Williams

If it is a devolved matter, no.

Gareth Thomas

Can I come back on the PR point. Speaking candidly, I think it is a source of irritation and frustration for Members of Parliament representing a specific constituency to find that there will be no less than 5 Assembly Members purporting to represent that constituency, one of whom only will actually have been elected under the First Past the Post system. As I have said to you this morning, the rather bad example of Clwyd West, where each candidate from the major party who lost effectively ended up with a seat in the Assembly. I think it is fair to say there is irritation -- personal irritation -- about the fact that these list members, are deemed to be an Assembly Member, not just for the region, but for each individual constituency within that region. I suppose that it may sound like a Trade Unionist point and, frankly, I do not suppose that is necessarily a bad thing, but you could argue it is an abuse of the system. It does cause some confusion amongst the electorate and there is a case for the Assembly itself looking at its own rules and seeing how the office costs allowances of Assembly Members who are on the list is utilised.

Lord Richard

I gather that. We have heard evidence from other people saying the same sort of thing, but that is an argument against any form of PR. It is an argument in favour of only having individual constituency members.

Gareth Thomas

No, it is not, because you could have additional members elected on a national list system and with the benefit of hindsight, that would be preferable. I was very keen on getting PR into the settlement because I and others perceived that it would be extremely difficult in that run-up to the referendum campaign getting the support of the Liberal Democrats, who were crucial, and the Nationalist Party unless there was an element of PR included in the settlement. There was a big battle within the Labour Party, as you well know. I think you could change the system, but my position is that I do not want another Government of Wales Act.

Lord Richard

I understand that. But I can just pursue this list point first and then I know other people want to come in.

If you have a national list, which presumably the parties would have their candidates, all people would have to put a cross against the party, are you not going to make the problem worse as far as you are concerned? We would then have 30 odd people, or however many it was, 40 odd people, who were thinking that they represented everybody and everybody's constituency.

Gareth Thomas

No, because I think it would be made clear in those circumstances that those Assembly Members are only there in order to give proportionality to the system, and their role is not as constituency members they would not have a constituency role, so it would have to be made clear.

Lord Richard

You would have two classes of Assembly Members; one which has a constituency role and one which does not have a constituency role.

Gareth Thomas

Yes, because I do believe that there ought to be an element of proportionality. Can I say, with the benefit of hindsight again, I would have favoured an open list system to give electors the opportunity to check out --

Paul Valerio

I do not quite understand this. How would an elector be prevented from going to an AM because he was elected on an additional member's list? Surely any elector should be free to go to any --

Gareth Thomas

Of course, but they would not be attached to any particular constituency. They do think they are; that is the problem.

Ian Lucas

I think that I should first of all make clear that I think the common position of North Wales members is that we are particularly unhappy about individuals who stand -- individual constituency members who lose and then also stand at the same time as list members.

I think that the common position that we have is that we would like that to change. The position, to be candid, is that what occurs is that political parties use the fact that someone is elected in a region as a means to establish a base in a place where they have relatively little support and describe themselves, for example, as being Wrexham based when there is a very small vote for that particular party in that particular area. So that is the type of concern I think that we as members have.

My personal position is that because I favour the settlement as it currently stands remaining largely in place, I think part of the settlement is that there was a proportional representation aspect to it which was a very important aspect to it. Therefore, I do not personally favour a change to that, although I think that there could be some aspects of it that could be improved.

Gareth Thomas

I think one can call that "the job lot argument"; we take it warts and all and we accept there is no perfect system of PR.

Betty Williams

I think it is fair to say as well, to add a little bit on what Gareth described as frustration and irritation, I think we all have examples of what I call cherry picking, these AMs, these floaters, as some people attempt to call them, they send a planning officer. It is very easy to distance yourself from a planning issue that is controversial, sit on the fence happily because you do not have a direct case work with that particular constituency, so you can go through life, through your 4 years as an Assembly Member, cherry picking the issues that you like to get involved with.

Lord Richard

It sounds admirable to me!

Betty Williams

The AMs are people directly elected to represent that particular area and they have to come off the fence and I found that very irritating.

Lord Richard

Are you irritated by the ones who are elected by First Past the Post? If you have an AM now, and you are really dividing AMs into upper class and lower class AMs, and the upper class ones who have been solidly elected and constituency based, what about working with them?

Betty Williams

That is not the issue. There are people, whether AMs of different political parties or MPs, who go through the system -- and I am a First Past the Post person; I had better make that clear anyway -- and I am not in agreement with Gareth on this PR idea; I do not like it, as you have probably gathered by now, but the people who have been directly elected in the First Past the Post system they have certain boundaries and they have constituents they are answerable to.

Lord Richard

Let me just ask the question -- I am sorry, Huw is trying to get in -- their boundaries are the same as your boundaries, so long as it is the same party?

Betty Williams

No, no, these people --

Lord Richard

Not the list people. I am talking about the First Past the Post people.

Betty Williams

I am not complaining about that.

Lord Richard

That is what I want to ask about.

Betty William

That is not the issue.

Lord Richard

It is an issue that we have to focus on. Can I -- and then I will shut up, for a bit -- If you have in effect two people representing one geographical constituency, one at Westminster one in Cardiff, you say you get very irritated with the ones outside, the list people, who claim to be properly representative of your constituents and you do not think they are, but supposing you had, you as a Labour MP and you had member of the Assembly of a different party, how would it work? What are your relations like with the AMs?

Betty Williams

Actually the only time I used to meet Gareth was at events, at engagements, that sort of thing. Very rarely would we discuss casework at all.

Lord Richard

Supposing somebody wrote to you, would you send it to the AM?

Betty Williams

No, I think my responsibility is to answer my constituents as best as I can, if that constituent chose to write to me; if they choose to write to both of us fine.

Lord Richard

And if he chose only to write to the other?

Betty Williams

Fine -- I have no problem with that.

Huw Thomas (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Yn eich tystiolaeth soniech am y ffaith fod yna broblem yn y Gogledd ynglyn â deall swyddogaeth y Cynulliad. Wel, rydyn ni wedi clywed gan Aelodau Seneddol eraill, yn enwedig os yw’r AC o’r un lliw gwleidyddol, eu bod nhw’n cymryd y cyfrifoldebau, ac mae hyn yn gyfrifoldeb y Cynulliad. Felly, maen nhw’n caniatáu i’r AC ateb. Gan eich bod eisoes yn AS cyn sefydlu’r Cynulliad, a yw’ch ffordd chi o barhau i ddelio â materion – dydw i ddim yn dweud hyn yn bersonol, nac yn ei wneud yn bersonol – ond y ffordd mae Aelod Seneddol yn gyffredinol yn delio â materion sy’n gyfrifoldeb mewn gwirionedd i’r Cynulliad, ydy hynny’n ei gwneud yn fwy anodd i bobl ddeall pryd mae rhywbeth yn gyfrifoldeb i’r Cynulliad a phryd nad yw?

Interpretation:

To make the point that, in your evidence you mention the fact that there is a problem in North Wales regarding the understanding of the role of the Assembly. Well, we have heard from other Members of Parliament, particularly if the AM is of the same political colour, they take the responsibilities, and this is an Assembly responsibility. So they allow the AM to answer, or to reply. As you are already an MP before the Assembly was established, is your way of continuing to deal with issues -- I am not saying this personally, or personalising it -- but the way that a Member of Parliament generally deals with issues that are truly the responsibility of the Assembly, does it make it more difficult for people to understand when it is an Assembly responsibility and when not?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Nac ydy, ac fe ddwedaf wrthych pam. Yn y lle cyntaf rhaid i chi benderfynu a ydych chi am ddelio â’r mater hwn neu beidio. Bûm yn trafod hyn gyda pherson a ddaeth i un o’m cyfarfodydd a’i agwedd oedd, "Wel, dydy fy Aelod Seneddol ddim am fy helpu ragor. Mae hi’n taflu’r bêl at Gareth Jones. Dydw i ddim yn credu y dylai hynny ddigwydd, oherwydd os bydd y person wedi dod â’i broblem ata i, yna fi sy’n delio â hi.

Interpretation:

No, and I will tell you why, because in the first place you have to decide am I going to deal with this or not? I discussed it with one person that came to one of my surgeries and the attitude he took was, "Well, my Member of Parliament does not wish to actually help me any more. She is passing the buck to Gareth Jones. I do not think that should happen, because if the person has approached me with his or her problem then I deal with it.

Huw Thomas (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Dydych chi ddim yn esbonio wrth y person, "Nid cyfrifoldeb San Steffan yw hwn, ond cyfrifoldeb y Cynulliad"?

Interpretation:

You do not explain to this person, "This is not a Westminster responsibility but is an Assembly responsibility"?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Fe fydda’ i’n dweud bob amser, oherwydd dysgais wers o’r cyfarfod cyntaf â’r etholwr hwn a ddywedodd, "Does gennych ddim diddordeb yn ynof fi bellach, rydych chi’n pasio’r bêl", ac esboniais, "Na, dydw i ddim yn pasio’r bêl. Os yw’n fater sydd wedi ei ddatganoli, dyna chi. Ond os ydych am i fi ddelio â’ch problem, rydw i’n hollol fodlon gwneud hynny".

Interpretation:

I always tell them, because I did learn a lesson from this first meeting with this constituent who said, "You are no longer interested in me, you are passing the buck", and I explained, "No, I am not passing the buck. If it is a devolved matter there you go, but if you wish me to deal with your problem I am perfectly happy to do so".

Gareth Thomas (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Hoffwn ddweud dan y drefn bresennol ei bod yn bosibl dadlau’n ddigon cyffyrddus fod gennym yr hawl i gymryd diddordeb mewn unrhyw achos wedi ei ddatganoli gan fod cyfrifoldeb prif ddeddfwriaeth ym mhob maes yn dal yn nwylo San Steffan, ac wrth gwrs mae polisi ariannol a chyllidebol hefyd yn cael ei benderfynu yn San Steffan.

Interpretation:

Could I say under the present arrangement it is possible to argue quite comfortably that we have the right to take an interest in any devolved issue since primary legislative responsibility in all areas stays at Westminster and of course fiscal and budgetary policy is also decided in Westminster.

Vivienne Sugar

Can we just pursue for a moment this issue of representation of people. It does sound a bit to me as though you are asking for the penny and the bun. You do not want the list AMs to be able to do casework, but you want to do casework that involves devolved responsibilities and Local Authority responsibilities as well, and I just want to put the question back, if there was a national list, how could you actually prevent people from taking an interest in the constituency in which they happen to live? Would not local people. Knowing that somebody was an AM, albeit elected by the list, that they would expect to be able to go to them and to get an answer, because in the same way they expect an answer from you about a whole range of things, they would expect somebody who is a member of the National Assembly for Wales to be able to correspond or speak to them about things they were worried about.

Ian Lucas

I think it is very important to understand that there is a difference being elected by an individual Member of Parliament, or Assembly Member on the First Past the Post basis to being elected on a list, because an individual who votes in the First Past the Post ballot does choose a particular individual to represent him. I have in the past had quite ambivalent views about proportional representation and I have to say that one of the things that being a Member of Parliament has changed is my attitude to proportional representation, because one of the best aspects of being a First Past the Post member is that you are directly accountable to constituents and a very valuable and valid way of learning how policy is introduced in a place like Westminster is actually applying --

Vivienne Sugar

Would you go away from additional members on a list system, a national list system, or regional list system, and instead go for multi-member constituencies, because that would give you proportionality and you would have everybody directly elected?

Ian Lucas

I think you then get the question of how big is the constituency and other technically difficult issues of that nature. As I say, my position is that I would accept the general settlement that we have at the present time, but I see no reason for differentiating between members who are elected on a First Past the Post basis and those members who are elected on a list basis. I do not see it as a question of being first class and second class representatives. They would have different functions, and I do not see any reason why, for example, list members could not perform specific functions related to scrutiny on a more national basis and individual representatives who are elected on a First Past the Post basis should see themselves working more directly towards representing their constituents. I think there could be a different role for Assembly Members, bearing in mind they are elected on an entirely different basis and I do not think that happens in other countries.

Vivienne Sugar

If you take Betty's example of the planning application, in your model if you had a list member who specialised in scrutiny of environmental issues and there was a big planning row going on in your constituency, would not local people expect then to go to that AM to discuss the particular planning problem that they were experiencing?

Ian Lucas

I think it would be unlikely that they would expect to go to their list AM. Personally, I think they would see their First Past the Post representative as being the person they should approach.

Tom Jones

I can see the ones who were voting for you at the election, which may be 13 or 14 of them, in the sense of the electorate wishing to come to you automatically, because you are their choice and therefore the First Past the Post is a very simple thought process but, as Vivienne is suggesting, if the expertise is elsewhere they would wish to have a little support from elsewhere and you can see why they would not regard it as inappropriate.

Ian Lucas

It is my duty to represent all of my constituents whether they voted for me or not, and certainly many of the people who come to see me certainly did not vote for me and it is as important that I hear from them as I hear from those people who agree with me. I think we are overstating the difficulty of differentiating between different types of Assembly Members.

Paul Valerio

Other than dealing with casework, the reality of the situation -- and forgive me for suggesting this to you -- but people are voting by and large for parties rather than individuals. I know there is one at the last election, but by and large whether it is at European level, Local Authority level they are voting for the parties. Does it make a great deal of difference as long as it fits in with the proportional system, as to the fact that there is a difference in the selection? When they are there they are all providing the same function and should be open to everybody, because excepting the irritation which has been quickly demonstrated there is no other real difference.

Ian Lucas

They are not accountable in the same way as the First Past the Post and the classic example is the Clwyd West example where four candidates clearly they did not want to see. Three of those candidates were rejected on the First Past the Post basis, but they are represented in the Assembly. Being accountable directly like that concentrates the mind and it is something that the people who have not been elected, who have different roles, I think that is underestimated sometimes.

Paul Valerio

We discussed earlier on today the case in Llanelli, Plaid Cymru only lost by a couple of dozen votes. Yes, she was defeated, but you could hardly say that she was demonstrably rejected by the party. She was of course elected by the regional system. So it is not really as black and white as I think some people are making it out to be.

Ian Lucas

You either win or you lose.

Dr Laura McAllister

With respect, that is not quite the case. By First Past the Post very few people get an overall majority of votes cast in terms of their -- I know some of you here are in that position; some of you are not -- if you are fighting a marginal seat then the chances are you will be elected with minority votes cast and the point that we are trying to set to you as an alternative to that set out in your paper is in Clwyd West the three candidates who were rightly defeated in the First Past the Post system nevertheless had a large percentage of votes from people in that area. Similarly, in the case of Llanelli, the defeated Plaid Cymru candidate lost by 21 votes, which suggests that she did have a good percentage of support. It is a little bit disingenuous to suggest there are straightforward winners and losers by the First Past the Post system. It is not quite as easy as that. They gave votes, they amalgamated the three opposition parties who did not win and off the top of my head the share of the vote would be at least as big as the candidate.

Lord Richard

With respect to everybody this is a peripheral point. It is not a major point, despite the considerable irritation we have had from a number of people. There was a separate issue that you have a list candidate, which has elements of proportionality. The second issue is if you are going to have an element of proportionality how do you do it? If you are not going to have it, you have an increase in the number of members of the Assembly, but by doing it in the way suggested by some of you you have two members as opposed to one member of the constituency and then if you have two member constituencies there is no guarantee that they will be for a specific party and how on earth could the relationship work if you had two people with the same constituency link dealing with constituency problems? Those are the sort of issues we really want to look at.

Ian Lucas

In fact that happens all the time. That situation exists very commonly in Local Government elections where you have two member wards.

Lord Richard

Yes and it causes a problem.

Ian Lucas

Yes, it does, but we are just indicating that in certain respects the present system does as well.

Gareth Thomas

But our collective view is that we should stick within the present system.

Ian Lucas

Subject to our observations. I think the particular point of irritation was individuals who chose to be both candidates in the First Past the Post cases and also on the list.

Betty Williams

Can I just add, I would not like Mrs Sugar to go away from here thinking we are complaining about our case. We are not complaining about our case. We are simply saying even amongst the AMs it is different; it is different between the AMs and the First Past the Post people. That is simply what I am saying.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth

Following up the two previous answers and because I am perhaps not very quick on understanding, but I have got the impression from the note and the original presentations you made that you did not terribly like the arrangements, the electoral arrangements posed by the Government of Wales Act, but that you thought that it was part of the deal.

Ian Lucas

Yes.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth.

But with one or two exceptions, and if we get the first exception clear. The first exception that at least one of you made was that you did not like closed lists. You wanted open lists.

Gareth Thomas

That was a comment I made.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth

But that is one thing that from the settlement that you think could be looked at again?

Gareth Thomas

Because the electoral arrangements are in the main only capable of being amended by legislation in this place, because electoral arrangements are a reserved power and because my basic premise is it is too early to change the present custom. I would rather have an open list system. I would rather have a national list system, but I am afraid we are going to have to accept it. It is an inexorable part of the logic, we accept the status quo as it is.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth

At the moment, with your reservations, for that reason at the moment you accept the present system and a closed list and not a national list and you also accept the fact that if you are on two lists, if you stand in two ways, that the present system of people being rejected in a constituency seat being elected on a list seat should continue.

Gareth Thomas

Yes, but that should not preclude the parties as an internal arrangement outwith with legislation, or through standing orders within the Assembly, deciding as a matter of good practice to remove what appears to be an element of abuse in the system and to preclude members of their own party from standing on both the list and for a specific seat.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth

You removed my misunderstanding.

Gareth Thomas

I believe that was the consensus of our group unanimously.

Tom Jones

People who have been before us have said, "We do not see the need for change now; it is only 4 years old". When you say actually any major change we would recommend later on this year would take 4, 8, even 10 years to actually be bedded down, and then they say, "I did not mean that. I was looking at today. I did not expect to see Parliament in an October 2003 type of timescale". When you say to them that actually it will take much more than that with an election, then they tend to change their view. What is your timescale? When do you think it would be right, bearing in mind that perhaps during the next 4 to 8 years the Assembly and civil society in Wales will perhaps suggest measures they would like to see introduced in Wales, they might be similar to the ones on the mainland, but because of the log-jam we will be saying our Assembly in Wales could not actually pass this particular piece of legislation. How do you respond to these particular points?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Mae’r ffaith fod cyn lleied wedi trafferthu pleidleisio yn yr etholiad ddechrau mis Mai naill ai’n dangos bob pobl Cymru, y sawl a bleidleisiodd, naill ai ddim yn deall y mater neu nad oes ganddyn nhw ddiddordeb. Mae’n sefyllfa hollol newydd. Dim ond ers 4 blynedd mae hi’n bodoli, a dyna pam mae’r cytundeb hwn wedi ei gyrraedd. Mae’n golygu bod angen mwy o amser i’r peth sefydlu er mwyn i bobl Cymru allu dod yn gyfarwydd â’r corff newydd. Rwy’n credu bod y nifer a drafferthodd yn gywilyddus pan ystyriwch bwysigrwydd y corff a’r pynciau pwysig, pynciau dyddiol fel addysg ac iechyd, bywyd bob dydd pobl, sy’n ddibynnol ar y pynciau hynny. Os ystyriwch ei bod yn rhaid i ni ystyried yn ofalus iawn yr hyn sy’n digwydd a sut rydyn ni wleidyddion yn cyflwyno’r Cynulliad. Rhaid i mi ddweud, rwy’n siomedig iawn bod ymddygiad mor negyddol, pethau’n cael eu dweud fel, "O, dydyn nhw ddim wedi gwneud hyn a’r llall." Byddech yn dychmygu y byddai rhywun sydd heb wneud dim mewn 4 blynedd, ac os byddech yn un o’r bobl hynny a oedd yn oeraidd am y Cynulliad ac os yw gwleidyddion i fod yn aelodau o’r Cynulliad am 4 blynedd, yn cael gwybod nad ydyn nhw wedi gwneud hyn mewn addysg ac iechyd, ble bynnag y byddwn ni wleidyddion yn dweud bod digon o le i addysgu pobl Cymru am swyddogaeth y Cynulliad, bydd pobl yn dod i ‘nghyfarfodydd i gyda materion addysg ac iechyd i gael esboniad ohonynt. Mae’n bwnc sydd wedi ei ddatganoli a dylai’r Cynulliad delio ag ef os hoffech i fi wneud hynny. Rwy’n credu bod rhaid ystyried hynny.

Interpretation:

Because of the fact that so few actually turned out to vote in the election in the beginning of May, either shows that the people of Wales, the people that did not vote, either they do not have any understanding of the issue or no interest. It is a brand new institution. It is only 4 years old and that is why this consensus has been reached that it means having more time for it to bed down so that the people of Wales can get used to the new body, because I think the turnout was atrocious to consider, when you consider the importance of the body and that the important issues that -- daily issues such as education and health -- people's daily lives are dependent on those issues, when you consider that we have to consider very carefully what is going on and how we as politicians also present the Assembly. I must say this, I am extremely disappointed that there is negative behaviour, things are said such as, "Oh, they haven't done this, that and the other". One would imagine that somebody has not achieved anything at all in 4 years and if you were one of those people who were cool in your attitude towards the Assembly, and if politicians are to be members of the Assembly for 4 years are told they have not done this on education or health, whenever we as politicians say there is a lot of scope for educating the people of Wales on the role of the Assembly, people come to my surgery with health and education issues explained to them. It is a devolved issue and the Assembly should deal with it if you want me to. I think that has to be considered.

Ian Lucas

The assumptions you have made in your question: for example, the log-jam that you referred to in matters that the Assembly wishes to do in Wales, I personally am not aware -- I obviously have not sat through your sessions, but I am not particularly aware of the existence of that log-jam. I think that the answer to your question that I would personally put is that change should not be something that is motivated by the political class in Wales. It should be something that is motivated with the consent of the people of Wales. Therefore, I think that the major changes in the operation of the Assembly should require the consent of the people of Wales, and I think that there is much that we can do to improve the way that the existing settlement works. Speaking as a North Wales member and as a North East Wales member in particular, one of the most difficult areas I think in the operation of the Assembly is that of cross border relations. For example, the operation of the Health Service in North East Wales, where Chester hospital provides lots of services to my constituents, where Wrexham Mile hospital provides services to people in Cheshire. That has very important implications as far as funding and the care of my constituents is concerned.

I have a real concern that the simple assertion that the Assembly should have more powers and should be dealing with matters purely on a Wales basis will not take sufficient consideration of dealing with those problems, and I think it is very important, again, speaking as a North East Wales member, that I say that it is true to say my area of North Wales looks very much still towards Merseyside and to Cheshire.

(Building evacuated because of a suspected fire)

Ted Rowlands

I wondered if we could just move the subject because another major concern lies with the national legislation, and I wonder if -- your experience of the last 4 years -- we categorised the bills and there have been bills for Wales, the Health Wales Bill, for example, which is a classic example, heavily scrutinised, pre-legislation, a lot of joint scrutiny, et cetera.

The second category of bills and acts that we have identified containing substantially different provisions for Wales, and I will give an example of that: the Planning Bill and also the Education Act 2002, which we took some part in. Let us take this category: houses and factories, this type of bill where you have a substantial provision, Welsh provision, in the case of the planning bill it is very difficult for the English clauses, how effectively were those considered in the Westminster process. If it is argued that powers should reside here in legislation then how well is that being performed? The early clauses that were delivered from the Assembly, approved by the Assembly, and scrutinised within the Assembly within its own terms of the issues behind it, and then it arrives here at Westminster. I have to say, looking at it I would not be very much content about what happened to these clauses when they got here.

Ian Lucas

It is very difficult to deal with a proposal that comes from the Assembly for a particular piece of legislation as a backbencher, particularly Labour, if I may say so, Labour Member of Parliament, because it is a job lot in a sense, being done somewhere else.

What is my role to be in those circumstances? Is it my role to actually criticise the Assembly, the proposals, or is it simply to seek to improve them in minor ways, or see difficulties? I think there is a difficulty with the present system. I think there is, however, an answer to it in that I believe the draft legislation is extremely useful in operation. Obviously I am a newborn to all of this; I have been here for 2 years, but I think that if legislation is presented in draft it does give you an opportunity to actually make constructive criticisms. If you present the legislation that is not in draft form then it is very, very difficult to achieve any improvement. I also think there is a particular opportunity for draft legislation which comes with a Welsh element, because my personal view -- and I should stress that this is my personal view -- I would welcome the opportunity to actually work with Assembly Members in looking at issues in draft, so that when the policy comes through to Westminster it is not a fait accompli so to speak in which we have not been involved.

Ted Rowlands

In the Education Bill, right at the end of the Education Bill, you intervened from the ministers:

"Does my honourable friend not find it strange the Honourable Member for East Carmarthen, who is a member for Plaid Cymru, should seek to introduce something that the National Assembly has not requested."

Put aside the point you were making a point about his position, what about your own model? Would you have felt that you had any right to introduce into a bill things that had not been requested by the National Assembly on a devolved issue?

Ian Lucas

Speaking personally, I think I would have a right.

Ted Rowlands

Yes.

Ian Lucas

It is my job to scrutinise the legislation. The difficulties with that are legion to be honest, but I think I have the right to do it, because my job is to try to make laws that are passed at Westminster as good as possible. The difficulty I have is that I also favour devolution. I like the idea that the proposals are made within Wales to deal with Welsh problems. I think that working together with Assembly Members would I think increase the understanding that there is a joint role for both Members of Parliament and the Assembly working together.

Ted Rowlands

So where bills like the Planning Bill, where there are substantial differences, you should have the prelegislative scrutiny system built into the process?

Ian Lucas

Yes.

Ted Rowlands

Do you think this place is going to wear the concept of sharing legislative sovereignty in the way that actually has been suggested?

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Dyma ble rwy’n ystyried y gallech mewn gwirionedd atgyfnerthu swyddogaeth y Pwyllgor Dethol Cymreig, lle mae posibilrwydd i chi fynd yn fanwl, a gwybodaeth a thystiolaeth gan arbenigwyr a hefyd gynghori am wahanol agweddau. Felly, rwy’n credu bod cyfle i atgyfnerthu’r berthynas a gychwynnodd er 1999 gyda’r Cynulliad Cenedlaethol, yng Nghaerdydd gynt.

Interpretation:

In here I would imagine that is where you could actually strengthen the role of the Welsh Select Committee, where there is a possibility for you to go into detail, and information and evidence from experts and also advise on various aspects. So I think that there is scope there to strengthen the relationship that started since 1999 with the WAC here, formerly with Cardiff.

Tom Jones (In Welsh - then interpreted)

I orffen ar hynny, gallaf weld bod mantais i gydweithredu o safbwynt y sector gwirfoddol: mae gen i ychydig wybodaeth o hynny. Yr hyn na fyddem am ei weld yw dyblygu, y byddai’n rhaid mynd ddwywaith i wneud y pwynt, a’r perygl yw os ydych am gyflwyno mewn gwirionedd. Yn ogystal â mesur roeddem yn credu bod popeth mewn gwirionedd wedi ei ddatrys cyn hyn. Bydd yn dod â mwy o bwysau ar gyrff gwirfoddol eraill i baratoi defnydd a lobio, ac yn y blaen ac yn y blaen. Rwy’n credu bod yna werthfawrogiad o broses ddigon syml.

Interpretation:

Just to finish on that, I can see that there is an advantage of actually collaborating from the view of the voluntary sector; I have some knowledge of that. What we would not want is duplication, that we would have to go twice to make a point, and the danger is if you are going to actually represent, in addition to a bill here we thought that everything had been actually sorted out previously, it is going to bring, put more pressure on other voluntary organisations to prepare material and to lobby, and so on, and so forth. I think that there is an appreciation of quite a simple process.

Betty Williams (In Welsh - then interpreted)

Gaf fi ateb hynny. Os ydych yn ein credu, rydyn ni’n tri yn credu y byddwch am gael y ddeddfwriaeth orau i Gymru. Rhaid iddi wella drwy’r amser, ac os ydych chi fel cyrff gwirfoddol yn teimlo fel hynny, popeth yn iawn. Os oes rhaid i fi gael gwell bargen o hyn i gyd, mae’n well i chi fynd i siarad â chyrff, oherwydd gallech golli rhywbeth yn y cylch cyntaf, a dyn pam mae gweithio fel partneriaid yn eithriadol o bwysig. Fi fyddai’r cyntaf i gydnabod fel aelod o’r Pwyllgor Dethol Cymreig fod y Cynulliad yng Nghaerdydd wedi dod ymlaen â syniad newydd. Doedden ni ddim wedi meddwl am hynny, ond mae’n syniad da, a dyna lle mae’r elfen o berthynas rhwng y pwyllgorau yn bwysig.

Interpretation:

If I can just answer that, if you believe us, we three believe that you will want the best legislation for Wales. We must improve it all the time and if you as voluntary organisations feel that, okay, if I have to get a better deal from all of this, it is better to go and talk to organisations, because sometimes you might have missed something in the first round and that is why working as partners is exceptionally important. I would be the first to acknowledge as a member of the Welsh Select Committee that the Assembly in Cardiff have brought forward a new idea. We did not think of that, but it is a good one, and that is where the element of the relationship between the committees is important.

Ian Lucas

If it was a joint committee of Assembly Members and MPs and draft legislation in Parliament, then it would seem to me that an organisation like yours would come and make representations to that committee. The advantage of having the MPs there as well as the Assembly members is that they then will be involved in the entire process from the formulation of the policy through to the actual passing of the legislation.

Lord Richard

Can I put a slightly hypothetical question to you. You have a devolved matter on which the Assembly have taken a decision on which it may need therefore tidying up, it may need piggy-backing, or whatever. Why do you think that you would be in a better position to legislate than the Assembly would be if they have decided to do so on a matter which the Assembly has a clear point of view, which has been through the committee system and which now in effect because of the way in which the settlement exists at the moment it needs a legislative discussion? Why should it have to come out here? This is a question we are being asked. I struggle with the answers.

Ian Lucas

The Assembly as constructed at the present time does not have the same resources to actually implement the legislation that --

Lord Richard

That is not the evidence we have had. The Consul General's evidence is quite clear in terms of saying 5 or 6 I think it was pieces of primary legislation he had proposed I think (inaudible), so leave that point aside, that is the evidence we have.

Ian Lucas

That may be his evidence, but I am not sure that there is the same -- one of the striking things again that we are looking at here is are the resources available through the House of Commons itself, rather than the Civil Service to supply backbenchers with information with which to scrutinise? I do not know exactly what the arrangements are at the Assembly as far as I am concerned, but they do not have separate House of Commons like research departments, as I understand it. Is that correct?

Lord Richard

We have Sir Michael. Now they are developing separate facilities for backbenchers as opposed to facilities which are available to the Government, but in theory it is a corporate body and, therefore, whether you are in the legislature, or whether you are in the executive, it is here that you are supposed to be treated equally.

Ian Lucas

It may be the case that the Assembly would have the capability but it is not what the electorate voted for.

Lord Richard

I accept that too.

Ian Lucas

Which I think is a very important point.

Lord Richard

We accept that, but just look at the issues. Never mind whether it has electoral state, or indeed whether there are sufficient resources, because the evidence we have is that there would be. I come back to the question which seems to me the difficult one, which is if there is a piece of legislation that is needed for the Assembly to deal with the devolved matter why should it not be able to deal with it?

Ian Lucas

The main aspects are I mentioned cross border issues at an earlier stage and there may be aspects of it that do relate to cross border issues and the difficulty in the United Kingdom is that it is not always the case that legislation only seems to apply to one particular part. It does not in fact only apply to that part. It may affect people in England some way; equally Welsh people may also be affected, so I think that the cross border arrangements, particularly in an area like mine are very important.

Lord Richard

Can just take this just one step further, and then again I will shut up, if it comes up at Westminster the Assembly takes a certain view as to what it is they wanted. What I do not understand is in the circumstances again in which it is a devolved matter, which the Assembly clears it, in which it has been through all the hoops and it comes out here, and there is a committee sitting up here, surely your function in those circumstances is to make sure that the Assembly gets what it wants. Your function is not to legislate afresh over the top of the Assembly's view, is it?

Betty Williams

I have arranged the Welsh Select Committee structures and the Welsh affairs one, the legislative structure, and where we can actually summon people in front of this to give evidence, in order to strengthen whatever legislative programme we have.

Lord Richard

Yes, of course you can. I am not talking about the powers you have; I am talking about whether you should exercise them.

Betty Williams

Is it not our responsibility to get the best legislation, so that we work as partners, and if it does mean relocating some aspects of it -- I am thinking, for instance, when we did the enquiry on that social inclusion one where there were matters that were to do with benefits, education, child care, Social Services, health issues, there were cross borders like that between devolved matters and matters that are certainly within the Home Office and work on pensions and systems here and in that respect you have to work together to make the best deal. I am talking about the antisocial behaviour issue that has been recently discussed, and that is an area where we do need to work together in order to get the best deal possible for the people of Wales, and in Wales, as in other parts of the UK, there are different problems of different areas and we need to identify this, and we do that by working as partners, in my view, even if it does seem duplication.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth.

Could I go back to an earlier reply Mr Lucas gave, a very interesting one about the process of scrutiny in Westminster. You said, I thought both truthfully and revealingly, that it was particularly difficult for Labour MPs to play much part in scrutinising Welsh primary legislation.

Could you add a little bit on that, (1) Secondly, that means most MPs from Wales are Labour, so that means that most of the democratically elected persons responsible for scrutinising the Welsh primary legislation have had their hands tied behind their backs.

Ian Lucas

This goes back to Lord Richard's point, Lord Richard was saying to me that my role as a Member of Parliament when the Assembly presented me with a proposal was to get it through in Westminster. Well, I personally feel uneasy about that and I think this is a problem of scrutiny generally in Westminster. I think you are very -- this is a problem with scrutiny generally and one of the frustrations and why I so much welcome draft legislation. I think it is very, very important on that issue and it is also made easier because of the carry-over we now have that did not previously exist.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth

It is a minority bill.

Ian Lucas

I believe all legislation should be put forward in draft, because I --

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth

Do you think the new Leader of the House is likely to carry forward his predecessor's objective.

Betty Williams

Wait and see is the phrase.

Ted Rowlands

I wonder if I could just complete the circle, because while the Chairman posed the question to you of what is the point if there is Welsh provisions and agreed by the Assembly, and in a sense one is expected to nod them through in a sense, doing it that way round, there are a large number, and even the Scottish experience would show, a very large number of bills where there are devolved issues, where it is actually decided for convenience or, indeed, the common sensical approach, because the bills are a mixture: the Planning Bill, for example, where there are compensation provisions, which no one feels should be different in Wales and England where the legislation will get carried through this anyway. So it is very important, irrespective of whatever power, that this process of some kind of joint responsibility is developed. For example, the third category of bills that we have looked at is acts and bills with minor differences in Wales, and I looked at one Community Care Delay Discharges Bill, which is extremely important, utterly devolved in every sense of the word in terms of the delivery and implementation, the question of (inaudible) and Social Services; a bill that had little or no difference between, certainly clauses wise, but I have to say the impression in the second reading and bits of the fourth and third reading stage, until one final moment when it was introduced, a clause order making powers to the Assembly, that this has been treated very much as an English bill. It was introduced as an English bill, the figures quoted sound like England and Wales because England only. Now if you get that type of presentation of bills in England and Wales does that not also undermine in a sense this whole idea that devolved issues can be legislatively properly presented?

Gareth Thomas

I am beginning to see which way the wind is blowing, particularly with respect, because I know reference has been made to the Sewell provision in Scotland. Let us say for argument's sake that there is a proposition that the Assembly should have full legislative powers unless it chooses to exercise the Sewell provision. Let us say for argument's sake, more often than not in the case of Wales, Sewell will be invoked, the argument would run along the lines, well, in certain categories of purely Welsh legislation, almost technical in nature, what matter of principle is at stake in allowing the Assembly to legislate on that? Well, my answer to that – and I know it might be regarded as a circular argument, but nonetheless it is fundamental, is that we have a settlement which was approved by the people of Wales, not only endorsed through a General Election in 1997 but also by referendum, and it was quite clearly stated that only secondary legislative powers would be devolved to Wales and, in fact, that was how it was put through. It might sound as if it is a circular and rather legalistic argument, but it really goes to the core of the settlement, because we take the view that what came into being 1998 is a fundamental change in the relationship between Wales and England.

Tom Jones

That then presumes that nothing happened since the referendum, so if I voted then I would have voted for the animal health powers to have been DEFRA responsible, and it seems now they would be transferred to the Assembly next year. Most people in Wales --

Gareth Thomas

The settlement has always allowed for further powers.

Tom Jones

That is a piecemeal reactive response to an issue that is what is happening now.

Gareth Thomas

Precisely. There was always give in the settlement, that is why section 22 was put in the act which allows for further transfers of secondary legislative powers.

Ian Lucas

What has been proposed is a wholly different settlement in the sense that the suggestion is an entirely different settlement. Now I do not think it is a circuitous argument, because I think it is an argument that may have force, but it has to be put to the electorate and it is an argument that I would see as having little prospect of success in my area of Wales, and I think that there may come a time when the matter needs to be put, but I think it would be entirely wrong for such a step to be taken without reference to the electorate.

Ted Rowlands

The burden of my case is irrespective of whether or not our further powers are transferred to the Assembly. There is going to be a body of legislation affecting Wales, even in devolved areas possibly, which are going to be legislatively cured, and are we content after 4 years of experience, that the processes of doing that are effective, because you have told us that in the case of say the planning clauses they should have been subject to prelegislation scrutiny. I then moved on to a bill where there was minimal change but still a profound effect and, again, you suggest should we not be looking at the whole way in which this legislation is processed here where in fact the matters of implementation are devolved.

Ian Lucas

I think we should, because I take the process of scrutiny very seriously, and I think we need to improve the existing settlement. We do not need to change it and I think it can be improved.

Peter Price

I want to clarify exactly what you see as your role when there are either Wales only bills produced by the Assembly Government and the Assembly itself or Welsh clauses in an England and Wales bill from that source. What is your role, and if I press you on some of the earlier answers, I think it was you, Mr Lucas, who said that you would not feel constrained about making changes in a bill that had come from the Assembly. Does that relate to detail, or to principle? And you have answered, I think collectively, that you would like to see more prelegislative scrutiny, and the implication was that this would narrow the number of occasions when there would be differences. Let us assume that is in place and let us assume that after prelegislative scrutiny that you have differences, either of principle or of detail, what is your role at that time?

Ian Lucas

I think that there are different pressures on a backbencher relating to legislation that comes to that backbencher. As a member of a political party, not everything that you vote for you agreed with, because one of the disciplines of being a political party is that you make compromises about particular issues, and one of the issues that is difficult for any backbench MP is when you feel sufficiently strongly to oppose your own Government party on a particular issue, so you make compromises the whole time.

In general terms, I think that -- speaking personally again -- if matters were presented to me by the Assembly then in general terms I would, in full legislation, feel constrained as a party discipline to actually support the general policy thrusts in principle of it.

Lord Richard

That cannot be just a blip; it has to be rather more firmly based than that.

Ian Lucas

I am sorry?

Lord Richard

I do not think you can elevate the whipping system up to an issue of principle. You cannot say because it is the Labour Party I go along with what the Labour Party wanted. That somehow is a principle which you could use for all the legislation that comes through. Either you have a role or you have not a role.

Ian Lucas

You asked specifically about issues of principle and issues of detail, so I am talking about issues of principle here, in general terms, because at the moment the Labour Assembly in broad terms represents something, then in broad terms then I would see my role to improve the operation of those proposals to make improvements in detail.

Peter Price

So what I understand of what you have said is by exception you might rebel as it were on issues of principle, but that would be very exceptional, but you would feel fairly free to try to make changes of detail.

Now let me just take it one stage further. We have at the moment a Labour administration in Cardiff and a Labour Government here and, therefore, when the bill comes forward there is a minister who to some degree has some commitment behind that bill. How would your role change if there were a Conservative Government here with a Labour administration in Cardiff?

Betty Williams

I think that is too hypothetical. It depends on the issue; I really do.

Ian Lucas

These are difficult issues at the best of times, and I find that dealing with issues that you do not have any major involvement with, or are expected to legislate on, is difficult. That is why I feel so strongly about being involved in a draft legislative process at an early stage. I think this is an answer to the difficulties, because I would feel much more comfortable if I had been involved in draft legislation; say my view had been rejected; I put forward a proposal which had been rejected, I would feel part of the process then, and I would accept it and I would feel more comfortable. I think the difficulty that you are outlining would lessen in my own mind and I would then be more likely, or feel more comfortable, in supporting the matter when it came up to Westminster. I have not thought about the scenario that you propose.

Gareth Thomas

Could I just come in there, as I indicated this morning, the power is there, the legislature has power to force the Minister to explain, to modify the policy, to amend, to withdraw clauses, to introduce further amendments; it is always there, the right is there. Please do not underestimate the requirement for a minister to have to explain and account for all the points that are raised, once criticisms are raised at the committee stage, and very often I know from experience ministers do refine their policy, do change their policy, because arguments are made which have validity and force, and it is an ongoing process. The electoral arithmetic here at the moment does tend, as I suggested this morning, to mean that the Government, more often than not, has its way, but the fact that the power is there --

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth.

When does it not have it?

Gareth Thomas

Parliament is a long-term project.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth

I was only exploring your expression "more often than not". So far as I can remember, the last bill effected in the Commons was the Sunday Trading Bill, the second reading.

Betty Williams

It is not only a question of rejecting the bill. It is a question of strengthening a bill through its passage. It is not a question of concentrating your mind on one that has been rejected. That is not the issue, surely. The issue is to strengthen a bill and we have examples of that when bills have been accepted, at actually one sitting of committees, and I accept the arguments made by --

Gareth Thomas

A colleague of mine told me yesterday he spent 18 hours in committee, the Health Bill. I wonder how many -- and this is not a criticism of Assembly Members -- I wonder how many Assembly Members would be able to devote 18 hours of their valuable time to that task, which is fundamental to this process. You can criticise the way in which it operates, and there are defects of the present system. We are working on improving them, but there is a culture, a Parliamentary culture, of scrutiny.

Peter Price

There is something of importance in what you have just said about the ministers changing a bill from the Assembly, the Minister being a member of the Westminster Government, changing a clause, or a section of the bill, that has come from the National Assembly, whether in response to MPs or not, and you are fully supporting his right to do just that.

Gareth Thomas

I suspect there would be a row unless he consulted the Assembly.

Peter Price

You are just making the case for a Conservative minister, who may be wholly out of sympathy, backed by a majority in the committee, because of the nature of Parliament, against the wishes of the body that has put forward this bill. Do you think that the Minister would have every justification in the committee to radically change a bill coming from the Assembly in those circumstances?

Gareth Thomas

I think it would be rather academic. Upon closer reflection, I think that scenario would be rather academic, would it not, because if one has a Conservative administration here, a Labour administration there, one is not necessarily going to find slots that are going to be freely given by the Conservative Governments over here.

Peter Price

So the legislation may not come forward at all.

Lord Richard

With respect that makes it worse.

Gareth Thomas

Nobody is pretending it is going to be easy if there is a change of Government in either place.

Sir Michael Wheeler-Booth

Is that not a reason why the Government of Wales Act sooner or later will have to be amended?

Gareth Thomas

With the experience of time, which is why the arguments for letting us see how it develops is surely a strong argument.

Tom Jones

The Conservative Governments to add to the experience.

Ian Lucas

These are very difficult questions and many of them I have not thought about before, and it is very useful to do that, but I have to say that they are hypothetical questions and I think that it is very difficult to devise a system without the experience of actually going through these difficulties and I really do believe what Gareth says, that these are the types of difficulties that need to be worked through as they happen and to believe that we can devise a system in the abstract for what might happen in these circumstances now is I think completely unrealistic.

Gareth Thomas

I can understand the desire to create a more robust system which could withstand changes of Government in another place. I can understand why that exercises the academic community, but I am afraid there is no substitute for experience and, as I say, fundamentally one is dealing with a settlement; it has its jagged edges, but it is going to have to be made to work and if there is going to be a substantial review of it let us do that with the benefit of some time, some considerable time between 1988 and whenever there is a substantial review.

Lord Richard

I think that draws it to a happy close.

Thank you very much for coming. It has been very useful and very helpful. I think it has revealed number of issues that were better revealed.