| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Livsey: I cannot agree with much that was said by the right hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram). Many of his remarks were divisive. None the less, I am sure that the Minister will take on board the concerns that have been expressed about the importance of the regions within Wales. I am sure also that he and the Secretary of State will ensure that the Advisory Committee that is considering those matters will take the concerns on board and produce something meaningful within the regions of Wales so that true devolution can take place.
Mr. Win Griffiths: I should not have been surprised at the remarks of the right hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram), who poured scorn on the idea of the Government accepting advice, just as the Conservative Government regularly scorned advice, with the result that there were disasters such as the poll tax. The point about the Regional Committees and their advisory role is that we believe in listening to people and in being able to accept advice when it is well targeted. We have made provision in clause 62 for Advisory Committees because we believe that, on balance, we shall get good advice from them. I can understand why a Conservative might regard the role of an Advisory Committee as deceiving the people in Wales, because in a Tory context it would. The Tory Government never listened to the advice that they were given. That is the only context in which the right hon. Gentleman's words can have any meaning.
9.30 pm
Mr. Ancram: I am sure that the Minister will define what he means by a "real player"--the words that he used earlier about the northern Regional Committee. He obviously listens to advice, but how many amendments has he accepted during the passage of the Bill--not just from me, because I understand that he probably does not want to accept amendments from me, but from his right hon. and hon. Friends, and from other hon. Members? From that, we shall learn whether he takes advice.
Mr. Griffiths: It is most apt that the right hon. Gentleman should have made those remarks this evening, when, in earlier debates, we have said that we want to listen. I pointed out that he had made constructive comments in the debate on amendments and that we wanted to examine ways in which we could, perhaps, take on board some of those ideas. I am quite sure that, at the end of the Committee's proceedings, we shall have accepted a number of amendments, or the ideas contained in them.
We believe that the Regional Committees will give Members of the Assembly the opportunity to focus on their areas and to give advice to the assembly to develop national strategies in Wales that take account of regional sensibilities. I know that taking account of sensibilities was not a strong point of the Conservatives when in government. I am afraid that I cannot scorn the concept of receiving advice in the way in which the right hon. Gentleman and his Government did when in office. I hope that the Committee will allow the clause to be added to the Bill.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 62 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 63 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Dafis:
I beg to move amendment No. 412, in page 31, line 23, leave out 'likely', and insert 'financial, social and environmental'.
The Chairman of Ways and Means (Sir Alan Haselhurst):
With this, it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 413, in page 31, line 36, after 'business', insert 'and other organisations'.
Mr. Dafis:
Amendment No. 412 relates to costs and benefits. Amendment No. 413 relates to organisations that are concerned with social and environmental issues, rather than confining it to business organisations.
I take it that integrating sustainable development--again that phrase, which means integrating environmental and social equity considerations into all areas of policy--will be a central theme of the National Assembly, as indeed the Government claim it to be their central theme.
The assembly will come into existence at a time when sustainable development, environmental sustainability, will be rising to the top of the agenda--there is not much doubt about that--globally and at the European and United Kingdom levels. It is important that the same
should happen at national level. It is already beginning to happen at local level, through the local Agenda 21 process. We may have an opportunity to debate the whole issue of sustainable development more comprehensively when we reach part VI, which concerns the new development agency.
Let me establish straight away that, when we speak of costs and benefits and cost-benefit analysis, we are not just talking in traditional economic terms. I hope that we are talking not merely about financial costs and benefits, but about social and environmental costs and benefits, which are a key component of sustainable development. As it stands, clause 64 seems to refer only to financial and, in the traditional sense of the word, economic costs and benefits. If I am right about that, it is old-fashioned thinking--old-style COBA. That is inappropriate in this day and age: nowadays it is wrong to separate financial considerations from those that are environmental and social. We cannot erode our environmental capital, or indeed our social assets, without imperilling economic welfare.
The amendments make it explicit that any regulatory appraisal and study of cost compliance must be comprehensive in the way that I have outlined. The outcome of an appraisal of that kind could be significantly different from the outcome of the narrow appraisal provided for by clause 64 as it stands.
I do not wish to say any more now, as there will be further opportunities. The amendment is tabled in the same spirit as amendments Nos. 401 and 402 on the Environmental Audit Committee, to which the Minister responded positively. I trust that the amendments will receive a similar response, enabling the assembly to benefit from an up-to-date response to policy.
Mr. Win Griffiths:
Clause 64 is a significant and radical innovation in itself. It builds on the non-statutory compliance cost assessments that have been part of Government practice for some time when new laws or regulations are to be introduced. It is vital for the assembly to create an economic environment in Wales that promotes healthy and sustainable economic growth, and a more widespread prosperity than Wales has enjoyed in the past. That means an economic policy that respects the environment, and recognises that there is economic as well as social benefit in conserving the beauty and ecological diversity of Wales. It means a policy that works actively to bring greater prosperity to our more socially deprived communities.
All those will overwhelmingly be matters for the policy of the assembly. In the Bill, we aim to create the framework, and, in doing so, we must be careful not to build in procedures that risk becoming excessively bureaucratic. If we attempt to legislate for procedures that try to constrain the assembly's policies, we multiply the opportunities for legal challenges on procedural grounds; we also risk entrenching the status quo, while warring interest groups battle for control of the assembly's procedures as a way of controlling its policies.
We are not opposed to a procedural framework that lays some basic duties on the assembly. Hence, the Bill refers to local government, to regulatory appraisals and to the voluntary sector. We are also committed to tabling an amendment that recognises the importance of the principle of sustainable development.
Having said that, the Government cannot accept the amendments, because they would broaden the scope of the regulatory appraisal beyond the specific aspect of the costs that may be added to business. We believe that a social, environmental and financial appraisal of all secondary legislation is not necessary in the context of the clause. The consultation process should only include business.
It is important for the assembly to consider the financial costs that will be laid on business as a result of regulations that it introduces. If there are serious costs, it is right that representatives of business should be consulted.
Placing additional legal constraints on the assembly is going too far. As a democratic body, the assembly will be free to develop its own policies. It will have to account for its success or failure to the people of Wales when the time comes to be re-elected. Its processes will be much more public and open than we have been used to. That, and not more complex statutory provision, however well intentioned, is the best way to ensure that the assembly has proper regard for the social and environmental consequences of its actions.
I ask the hon. Member for Ceredigion (Mr. Dafis) to take account of the fact that we shall table an amendment on sustainable development, which will deal with the concerns that he has expressed. He wants to bolt the provisions in the amendments on to the clause, but it has a specific purpose, so that is not the most appropriate way to achieve his objectives.
Mr. Dafis:
I am not altogether convinced by the Minister's response. I am glad to hear that the Government intend to table an amendment on sustainable development. It should be worded carefully, and should impose a duty on the assembly to have regard to sustainable development in the formation of its policies: it should not merely have to consider sustainability. It is important to put this issue at the heart of the assembly's activities.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |