The following amendment has been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Julie James.

For item 8 and item 9, I appreciate that they are half-hour debates, and I know that I've got a lot of speakers in both. I have requested that you consider a three-minute speech. I appreciate you've all probably written and researched, but, if you can, it will allow us to get everybody in in the debates. So, that's a gentle reminder. Item 8, then, is the Plaid Cymru debate on the proposed renaming of the second Severn crossing. I call on Dai Lloyd to move the motion.

Motion NDM6706 Rhun ap Iorwerth

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

Calls on the UK Government to hold a public consultation on the proposed renaming of the Second Severn Crossing.

Motion moved.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move that the National Assembly for Wales calls on the UK Government to hold a public consultation on the proposed renaming of the second Severn crossing. Naturally, I would hope that you would agree with that and vote against the Labour amendment.

Adam Price mentioned the broader context last week—that to force this decision on renaming the bridge without discussion or consultation with the people of Wales is a clear pattern of a lack of respect from the UK Government and the Welsh Labour Government towards representing the interests of our nation.

There has been a series of events that have emerged: no decision on the Swansea bay tidal lagoon, dropping plans to electrify the rail line to Swansea, the absurdity of the proposals of the iron ring at Flint castle last year, the renaming of the second Severn crossing without consultation, not giving a fair share of HS2 investment to Wales, and a bung of £1 billion for the DUP and not a penny for Wales. And the most recent one: the ceding over the European withdrawal Bill, which will mean a roll back of powers for this Parliament—the unionist parties of Britain trying to turn the clock back and bring Wales closer to England.

Now, I'm an easy-going sort of bloke, but I thought I would remind you of the history in terms of princes of Wales. In 1282, the last Welsh Prince of Wales was killed. Edward I glorified in the passing of Wales's royal family and proclaimed his newborn son as the new Prince of Wales from the ramparts of Caernarfon castle and, in an act of sophistry, reassured the people of Wales that this new prince of Wales could not speak a word of English either, like themselves. Llywelyn's baby daughter, Gwenllian, was not killed but exiled to a convent in rural Lincolnshire for the 55 years of her little life, isolated and bereft until her death in 1337. 

So, the firstborn son and heir to the English crown has been anointed as Prince of Wales ever since, and on our knees since then we have just gone along with it, some with more enthusiasm than others, which brings me to the Secretary of State for Wales. Now, I know people are saying we should be discussing more important things, but that's entirely the point. The Secretary of State for Wales should be doing more important things. I haven't detected a clamour to rename the second Severn crossing at all. I have detected lots of clamour for having a tidal lagoon in Swansea bay, rail electrification, not having a superprison in Baglan—lots of public clamour—but Prince of Wales bridge? Public clamour came there none. What we expect from a Secretary of State for Wales, while we still have one, is Cabinet assistance to bring about these truly transformative ideas and plans into action. 

The First Minister here offered no objection to the Secretary of State's plan to name the bridge—so much for standing up for Wales, or have we redefined standing up for Wales now as lying down? 

Following your direction, Deputy Presiding Officer, I will keep things brief. It’s possible that many of the people of Wales would propose alternative names to the Secretary of State. Perhaps there will be proposals that the bridge should be named after some of the true princes and princesses of Wales, such as ‘Hywel Dda Road’, ‘The Gwenllian Highway'—

Will you give way? 

Oh, here we go. Come on, then. 

You talk about Norman-era princes of Wales. Will you accept that Prince Charles, through the Tudor line, is not only descended from an ancient Anglesey family, but from Cadwaladr, the last ancient British king with a truer claim than the post-Norman claimants?  

Desperate stuff. It brings me back to the Bil ymadael. 

But why bother with the naming of bridges in any case, when there are far more important issues to be resolved? Our demands as part of this debate today are simple: give the people of Wales a chance to have their say on the name given to one of the most notable structures of our nation, or not to name it at all, rather than allowing the Conservatives to trample all over the welcome mat of Wales.

Thank you. I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport to move formally amendment 1 tabled in the name of Julie James.  

Amendment 1. Julie James

Delete all and replace with:

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Notes the renaming of the Second Severn Crossing by the UK Government, with whom responsibility rests.

2. Welcomes the Welsh Government’s intention to conduct local consultations on the naming of new trunk road bridges in Wales.

Amendment 1 moved.

Move. 

Thank you. John Griffiths. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Llywydd. First of all, I would like to make the point that names do matter. They really do matter. They send signals and they're symbolically important, and they do mean something to people. Dirprwy Lywydd, I would much prefer to be living in a republic with its strong messages of citizenship, empowerment and position from achievement and ability, rather than accident of birth. Sadly, that is not the case, but neither do we live in a principality. Wales is not the fiefdom of a prince, so the renaming of our national stadium as the Principality Stadium was unhelpful. It reinforces incorrect, misleading and careless descriptions of Wales as a principality and is therefore, I would argue, demeaning and belittling. And now the proposal to rename the second Severn crossing 'Prince Charles bridge' threatens to add to damaging misconceptions. It's ironic as well, I believe, that just as the crossing has returned to public ownership, it is proposed to rename it, not with a name the people have decided upon and want, but with one handed down from on high without even a public consultation. Many tens of thousands of motorists use the bridge every day but had no say in whether it needed a new name and, if so, what that new should be. Dirprwy Lywydd, I would say that the UK Government's actions in this matter could rightfully be characterised as—

Will the Member take an intervention, please?

Um—

You can, go on. 

Yes. 

Thank you. Am I correct, though, that it came to the Welsh Government for their opinion and they actually didn't reject the suggestion? 

Whichever way you look at it, Janet, it's a UK Government matter. The UK Government decided that a new name was required, decided what the new name should be and decided to take it forward without public consultation. So, that's where the responsibility lies. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, let me say that I believe that the UK Government's actions in this matter could reasonably be characterised and should be characterised as ham-fisted, wrong-headed and indeed patronising. If the second Severn crossing is to have a new name, it should be decided by those who have endured the tolls over so many years and indeed still endure those tolls today. In short, it should be decided by y werin nid y crachach. 

There we go. Russell George. 

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I say to Dai Lloyd that he won't be surprised that the Welsh Conservatives won't be supporting Plaid's motion today? I have to say it is curious for Plaid to call on the UK Government to hold a public consultation on an issue that has already been agreed and decided in consultation with the Welsh Government. What I can also say is that I find it strange for Plaid to suggest that it's reasonable for us in this Assembly to tell the UK Government and Parliament what they should be doing on an issue that rests with them. If the situation were reversed and Parliament were to tell this Assembly what to do on an issue within our responsibility, Members opposite would soon have something to say about that issue. 

Turning to the point of the renaming of the bridge, unlike John Griffiths I am a proud monarchist. But even if I wasn't, I believe not only does the name 'Prince of Wales bridge' mark the lifelong contribution that he has made to Wales and its society, but perhaps more importantly, this decision recognises the role of the second Severn crossing as one of the most iconic landmarks in Wales, a symbol of Wales's strong economic contribution—

Will you take an intervention?

I will in a second—to the UK, a contribution that will be boosted to the tune of an estimated £100 million a year following the UK Government's decision to abolish the tolls on the Severn crossing. 

Thank you for giving way. I'm a republican myself, but as a monarchist, would you not recognise that perhaps the person most embarrassed by all of this is the Prince of Wales?  

Well, the Prince of Wales was also consulted on the issue and was happy about the naming of the bridge in this regard.

I will say—and I've got Oscar sat next to me here as well—when we think about the £100 million and the decision to abolish, of course, the tolls on the Severn bridge, Newport is now home to the UK's fastest moving property market, according to Rightmove, and I suggest this buoyant market can be directly attributed to the imminent scrapping of the tolls. As many as 25 million motorists could save around £1,400 a year and Wales's hospitality and tourism sectors are expecting a surge in day visitors from England, while of course the haulage industry as well and the property market could also see those benefits. Now, this is what we should be talking about. I can hear Plaid Members sighing, but this is what we should be talking about today—not about the naming of the bridge. So, while I believe that the renaming of the second Severn crossing is a fitting way to formally recognise the Prince of Wales's decades of contribution to our nation on the occasion of his seventieth birthday here, the name 'Prince of Wales' is, of course, a brand as well in itself, which is recognised all around the world. So, let's focus our time today in this Chamber on the important issues of how the scrapping of the tolls will support the Welsh economy. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

It is a quixotic debate that we're having this afternoon on a matter that I'm sure is not exactly at the forefront of what people are talking about in the Dog and Duck or any other pub—

Well, they are. It's one of the few things they are talking about.

In that case, they're putting the Assembly on the map as well, and a very good thing it is too. But in terms of the amount of time that we have available for debates in this Chamber and the massive problems Wales is confronted by, I think there are better subjects for debate than this, although I always enjoy listening to Dai Lloyd's journeys down memory lane and his innovative responses to the problems that we have to grapple with. But I personally have no difficulty whatsoever in supporting the Welsh Government's decision on this. For better or worse, like it or not, we are a constitutional monarchy, and the monarchy is one of the unifying factors of the United Kingdom. We inherit these institutions from predecessor generations, and the idea that somebody like me might end up as the president of the United Kingdom or the president of a republican Wales would be far more horrifying, I think, for Members of Plaid Cymru than for the current Prince of Wales to hold the position that he has. That is always the danger, of course, with democracy—that you sometimes turn up rogue candidates for jobs. We might well have had a President Tony Blair, for example, at one time, when he was riding high in the public affections.

The overwhelming majority of people in Wales, as in the United Kingdom, do support a constitutional monarchy as the ceremonial head of state. We don't have an executive monarchy in this country, and a very good thing that is too. Power resides with the people through representative institutions like the National Assembly for Wales. I think we should glory in our monarchy because it gives massive prestige to our country in the world at large. Who could actually name the president of Germany or the president of Italy and other countries? You can't, whereas the Queen is one of the most famous people in the world and there is a massive economic benefit—although I disdain to justify the monarchy upon such a materialistic basis—but there is a massive economic benefit to this country—

Will you take an intervention?

If the Deputy Presiding Officer—

You may take an intervention.

Do you realise that Legoland in Windsor actually gets more visitors than the actual Windsor palace? This economic argument is simply not one that we should be following. Plus they make lots of money through the public purse, such as pensions and such, and through the Duchy. It's not something that we should be supporting, and that's something I would like to debate here in this National Assembly, because it is important. We should have a Welsh republic here in Wales.

Well, I'm sure that those of us who support the monarchy would be delighted to have Plaid Cymru supporting something that the people of Wales don't support. So bring it on, I say.

Of course people visit Legoland at Windsor. Maybe they're just the ones who can't get into Windsor castle on that day. Who knows? There is no doubt that there is massive popular support for the institution of monarchy in this country, and it seems to be entirely proper to name the second Severn bridge after the Prince of Wales. I would like to propose, as I did the other day, that the other Severn bridge should be named after Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, Llywelyn Ein Llyw Olaf, to represent both traditions of this house, and that would be a unifying factor, perhaps.

The motion proposes that the National Assembly for Wales

'Calls on the UK Government to hold a public consultation on the proposed renaming of the Second Severn Crossing.'

Well, what's wrong with that? I can see nothing at all wrong with that, yet we have an amendment from Labour that talks about just abdicating responsibility. It's as my colleague across the Chamber said. 'Oh, it's not our responsibility. It's not us, Guv. It's the UK Government.'

Moving on, the amendment welcomes the local consultations on the renaming of trunk road bridges in Wales. Well, wow—trunk road bridges, when we have the gateway to Wales renamed with no public consultation whatsoever—none. I heard about this and I got in the car and I drove to the Severn bridge and did a video. It's had over 50,000 views, and it kickstarted a campaign. There's a petition. Again, tens of thousands of people have signed it because this matters. This isn't actually about the monarchy. This is about dignity and democracy, and people in Wales having their say. People in this country have had enough—[Interruption.] Simply had enough. It's interesting to be in this Chamber debating this and to look at the conversations going on as I'm speaking. Clearly, this is not a matter of interest for everybody in this Chamber, unfortunately. The sooner that we have individual sovereignty in Wales for our citizens, the better. The sooner we have community sovereignty in Wales, the better, and the sooner we have national sovereignty so that we can stand on our own two feet with dignity and make our own decisions, then so much the better. I'm embarrassed listening to the so-called great left-wing republicans to my right over there. They're going to vote down this motion, I would imagine, because they're whipped by their party, as ever, with Labour. Party first, country second.

Thank you. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Transport, Ken Skates.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'd like to start by clearly thanking Members for their contributions and for this opportunity to respond. As I stated in Plenary just last week, this is a bridge owned by another Government, and we've made repeated calls in the past for transfer of ownership of the crossing to Welsh Government. However, these calls have historically been resisted. Therefore, it is a UK Government decision whether or not to hold a public consultation on naming the bridge. The request to ask the UK Government to rethink its decision was also raised last week. But to reiterate, the Welsh Government will not be asking the UK Government to rethink its decision.

I have to say, at times, it's concerned me that, sometimes, the language that's been used, not in this Chamber but certainly on social media, would suggest that people who support the royal family are less Welsh than those who don't, that you're less Welsh if you support the naming of the Severn crossing the Prince of Wales Crossing. I would urge all citizens of Wales to be more tolerant of other views and to support the diversity of views. I wouldn't wish anybody outside of Wales to think that we do not tolerate other people's views and opinions. I'd also rather we focus on the removal of the tolls of the bridge rather than the renaming of it. There was an informed and meaningful cross-party support in the Senedd for the removal of the tolls on both bridges, as well as amongst business and industry. This support, I really do strongly believe, enabled us to construct a powerful and consistent case for the UK Government for their removal, which I believe played no small part in the UK Government's eventual decision.

If we look to the future, as Russell George has said, productivity of the Welsh economy is set to be boosted by over £100 million per year. It's essential, as we exit the EU, that we take every opportunity to promote Wales globally and, indeed, at every single level. Removal of the tolls sends a very strong message internationally that Wales is open to business, and that there are no barriers to the free movement of traffic between us and England and the rest of the UK. I now call on the UK Government to ensure that there are no barriers between us and the rest of Europe.

Now, as a Government, public engagement is key to our policy making. Indeed, under the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, the ways of working determine that we must work in a collaborative way, in which people are participating fully. We will continue to consult with the public on proposals for our own assets in Wales to help to drive quality of place and local identity. I'm pleased to confirm that we will conduct local consultations on the naming of new trunk road bridges in Wales. We are currently considering consulting on the naming of the Gateway bridge at Brynmawr for section 2 of the A465, and I've recently begun discussions with Flintshire County Council over the naming of what's known currently as the new Flintshire bridge; it is the gateway to Wales in the north. And I'm also keen to conduct a local consultation over the naming of the third Menai crossing. I must stress that these will be local consultations, giving the people of their communities they provide identity for the say over their names.

I look forward to seeing what these local consultations result in, and I would urge all politicians, and all people, wherever they represent, and wherever they reside, to respect the views of local people, regardless of whether they choose a royal name or not for the infrastructure that lends them and their communities their identity.

Thank you very much. Can I now call on Adam Price to reply to the debate, please?

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. A fo ben, bid bont: he who would be a leader, let him be a bridge. That's the old saying in the Mabinogion. Well, of course, in the wake of the intervention by Alun Cairns, maybe we should overturn that to: a fo bont, bid ben—he who would be a bridge, let him lead. Why did he do this? And why did 40,000 people sign a petition opposing it? I think John Griffiths was right: in a name there is power. Symbols are important; they are significant because they do carry a message about who we are. That’s why people are concerned about these things, and I don’t think there is anything intolerant about feeling passionately about what this represents in terms of our values, as John Griffiths said.

I’m a republican as well and I don’t think it’s about being a republican or being a monarchist; I think it’s about whether you’re a democrat, to tell you the truth. Where was the voice of the people of Wales in this decision? A decision that has been imposed on us, of course, like something from days gone by, before devolution and before democracy. That’s why people are responding and saying, ‘Well, this is unacceptable.’

Several nations in the world have been going through a process of renaming things in order to free themselves from colonialism. In Canada, they’ve recently renamed Langevin bridge in Alberta—the great oppressor of native peoples—and it's become Reconciliation bridge. In Australia, of course, we know about Ayers rock, which became Uluru. Only in Wales, of course, has the process gone the other way. John referred to the Principality Stadium, and we have this bridge now. Of course, we’re still losing local Welsh place names, as we’ve been doing for centuries—a process similar to what happened in Ireland. Well, you will remember the Brian Friel drama, Translations, about the power of place names. They’re a central part of understanding who we are and our history.

Place names are the place where language and power meet. The second Severn crossing was only a bridge, but what is it now? It’s a symbol; it’s a symbol of our lack of authority. It’s a symbol of our lack of voice in our own country, a symbol of a lack of democracy: half the bridge in England, but 100 per cent of the power. [Interruption.] There’s no time. Wales has paid the majority of the tolls, and yet we had no opportunity to voice our opinion. It reminds me of that Calcutta monument—Victoria's monument—which was paid for by the Indians themselves. They and us, before long, will be the only people in the world who have paid for symbols of our own oppression, but with one big difference: they are independent. I hope that that will soon be true of Wales as well.

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.