| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Baker of Dorking: My Lords, I thank all noble Lords, particularly the Lord Chancellor, for their contributions to this debate. I congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Adams of Craigielea. We have heard lots of Scottish accents during this debate, but I thought that hers was by far the most attractive, although I do not think that one should make comments like that these days. She also made a great deal of sense. I thought for a moment that she was going to support me, because she said, "I am a democrat". She campaigned for Scottish devolution, which, as I understand it in a simple way, is Scottish votes for Scottish laws. There is only a short step from that to English votes for English laws.
The noble Lord, Lord Sewel, was the first speaker. We enjoy a remarkable identity in one respect: we have both done things and our names have been added to things which have lived beyond our ministerial life. For me, it is "Baker days". For the noble Lord, Lord Sewel, it is the "Sewel motion"; that is, a "sticking plaster" to deal with sovereignty. It gave the Scottish Parliament the power to approve any Bill which Westminster passed that affected Scotland. Unless it
10 Feb 2006 : Column 952
has that Sewel motion and that authority, Westminster cannot pass the Bill. The noble Lord did not touch on the supremacy of sovereignty in his winding-up comments. But the supremacy of Westminster by devolution is not just devolved—it is shared and divided. Scotland has now an independent Parliament that is capable of legislating for itself. As the noble Lord, Lord Elder, said, in theory, Westminster can legislate on everything because it is in the Act. But that is a dormant supremacy. It cannot be exercised without the approval of the Scottish Parliament, and the Welsh Assembly will go the same way, which is a fundamental change. The poll tax and what happened in the Thatcher years have often been quoted during the debate. Evolution changes absolutely everything—it really does—and the noble Lord was part of the author of this, which he should recognise.
For the Lord Chancellor to come up with no solution, but to have a stubborn blindness to the problems that I have put, is amazing. In a rather sad revelation, the noble Earl, Lord Glasgow, said that he thought that there was no solution to the West Lothian question. I was reminded when he was speaking of the famous Schleswig-Holstein question, which puzzled people in the middle of the nineteenth century. Palmerston said that it was so complicated that only three people know the answer: "One is Prince Albert and he is dead. The second is a Foreign Office official who is mad. And the third is me, and I have forgotten the answer". But there is an answer to the West Lothian question.
The noble Lord, Lord Laird, made a frank speech, which was a wonderful rewinding of history. He did not want Stormont, the Scottish Parliament or the Welsh Assembly. All that the noble Lord, Lord Laird, wants is the old United Kingdom as it existed, which is a wonderfully romantic view, but I have to say that it would be impractical.
Lord Laird: My Lords, that is not exactly my position. There should be that very satisfactory position or there should be total devolution, everywhere, on exactly the same basis. I am not satisfied with this unusual system of a wee bit here, a wee bit there and a different bit somewhere else.
Lord Baker of Dorking: My Lords, I accept the noble Lord's modification and I shall come to it in a moment.
I was very glad to have the support of my noble friend Lord Wakeham, particularly because he is a former Chief Whip. Former Chief Whips have antennae; they know when things are moving and something has to be addressed. So I am encouraged by the presence of my noble Lord friend, who was one of our most astute Chief Whips. He knows that this question has got to be answered one way or another.
He said that the problem will not go away, a point touched upon by several noble Lords today. A number of noble Lords have said that my Bill would create a constitutional crisis—but we are heading towards a constitutional crisis. Let us think forward to the next election, when most people believe there could be a
10 Feb 2006 : Column 953
hung Parliament. If that hung Parliament was led by a Labour Government with a small majority in the other House and they depended on Scottish and Welsh MPs to carry very controversial legislation, does not the Lord Chancellor consider that that would constitute a constitutional crisis? I think it would. Suppose a Labour Government brought in legislation and said, for example, "We are going to stop immediately the sale of all council Houses"—something, as it were, on the left—and they carried it with Welsh and Scottish MPs, what would English MPs think of that?
And not only Conservative MPs. The noble and learned Lord said there is no support, but many Labour MPs agree with me—for instance, Alan Williams, the Father of the House; Tony Wright—
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: That is two.
Lord Baker of Dorking: My Lords, yes. But in the next government two might be enough. You never know.
As regards the Liberal Democrats, I was amazed at the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan. He said that he was not quite in touch with views in England. We can forgive him for that as he comes from the most remote part of Scotland, but I can assure him that views in England are much more strident than he thinks. He should be aware that certain distinguished members of his party support my Bill—for instance, Simon Hughes and Menzies Campbell support this measure. Not for the first time, the noble Lord is slightly out of touch with the views of the party he once led.
The noble Earl, Lord Mar and Kellie, quite openly, as I understood it, referred to an independent Scotland, which was beautifully described as the "Stuart solution". I had not heard it in quite those terms before.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, the noble Lord said that Menzies Campbell supports the Bill. Was that a reference to his quote in the Scotsman, dated 30 January, where he said:
"It would be a grave mistake to tinker with one aspect of our constitutional arrangements in isolation"?
Is that it? Is that what the noble Lord is relying on?
Lord Baker of Dorking: My Lords, we have the same release. As I have said, I quoted from it because if it is in the Scotsman it must be true. In the headline of the release he states that Scots vote not to vote on English laws. He then goes on to say that he would like a bigger consideration of the issue—I accept that—but the point I am making is that many Liberal Democrats agree with this policy and many English Liberal Democrat MPs agree with it.
The noble Lord, Lord Elder, raised the question of anomalies. He said that there were many anomalies in our constitutional set up; let us live with anomalies.
10 Feb 2006 : Column 954
My Bill addresses an anomaly—the problem of two-tier MPs. There are two-tier MPs now. The Lord Chancellor asked, "Do we want to have two-tier MPs?" If he went down to the lower House occasionally he would know that there are two-tier MPs. English MPs can vote on English matters concerning their constituents. Scottish and Welsh MPs cannot vote on matters affecting their constituents. That is a separation of powers. It cannot be gainsaid that there are two classes of MPs. The words mean what they mean, not what Humpty Dumpty wants them to mean. There are two classes of MPs; they exist. It is no good the Chief Whip shrugging. He was an English MP. If he was in opposition and a Conservative government were putting legislation through, he would be absolutely the first to support my Bill.
Then we had the farrago about two-tier Lords. This is another wonderful invention of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor, because he has no answer to the question. He says that basically, this is not a problem. My Lords, it is. Noble Lords may think that this is partisan and I am being enthusiastic, but I beg your Lordships to realise that this problem has to be addressed. In the days when Tam Dalyell called it the West Lothian question, it was a surrogate for opposition to devolution. It is no longer a surrogate. I am a supporter of devolution because I believe that that is the way we hold our country together. It is the only way. As Gladstone said:
"Subject to this governing principle, every grant to portions of the country of enlarged powers for the management of their own affairs is, in my view, not a source of danger but a means of averting it. It is in the nature of a new guarantee for increased cohesion, happiness and strength".
If the Government decide to do nothing about this, they will be promoting an English backlash. I assure your Lordships that I am not trying to provoke that. I am trying seriously to address this constitutional matter and I very much hope that your Lordships will consider it in that way.
I welcome the support of my noble friend Lord MacGregor and was glad to know that he was the midwife to the West Lothian question. This is not a subject that Tories have come to late in the day. I accept that there has always been a large number of Tories opposed to devolution. There was always a small but eloquent number in favour. That is where the party stands.
When I was Home Secretary, I was the last Secretary of State to establish a royal commission. It was on the criminal justice system and it worked very well, coming up with sensible proposals that have been implemented. But the process takes a very long time. The history of royal commissions on the constitution is not encouraging; they take a very long time, they usually have a vast number of minority reports and, as far as I know, no proposals made by a royal commission on the constitution have ever been implemented. I am not entirely sure that that is the best route, which is why I suspect that the noble and learned Lord did not suggest it.
10 Feb 2006 : Column 955
The noble Lord, Lord Howarth, has had the rather unique distinction of being an English MP for one party and a Welsh MP for another—he has had a bifurcated role. When he was the Member of Parliament for Newport, West—
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |