We move to item 9 on our agenda this afternoon, which is a debate seeking the Assembly's agreement to introduce a Commission-proposed Bill: the Welsh Parliament and Elections (Wales) Bill. I now call on the Llywydd to move the motion. Llywydd.

Motion NDM6821 Elin Jones

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Notes the Assembly Commission’s report: “Creating a Parliament for Wales, Consultation Report”, October 2018;

2. Notes the Assembly Commission’s written statement:  The Welsh Parliament and Elections (Wales) Bill;

3. Agrees to allow the Assembly Commission to introduce a Bill to:

a) change the name of the National Assembly for Wales;

b) extend the franchise for Assembly elections;

c)  amend the law relating to disqualification; and

d) make other changes to, and associated with, the Assembly’s electoral and internal arrangements.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I move the motion on the order paper.

In July, I issued a statement on behalf of the Assembly Commission outlining our proposed two-phased legislative strategy in relation to National Assembly electoral reform. The first step would be to legislate to change the name of the National Assembly, to extend the franchise for Assembly elections, to amend the law relating to disqualification, and to make other associated changes to electoral and internal arrangements. The second phase would be to legislate during this Assembly term in relation to the size of the Welsh Parliament and the method used to elect its Members—subject, of course, to a consensus forming on these matters.

The purpose of today’s debate is to seek the agreement of Members to allow the Commission to introduce that first piece of legislation. We do so with the confidence that we have consulted widely and publicly on these proposals and held many conversations with key stakeholders.

Should you agree to allow the Commission to introduce the Bill, then we’ll have an opportunity to discuss and debate the policy detail in full as the Bill passes through the legislative scrutiny process of this Assembly. However, as I've stated previously, the proposals will only be taken forward if there is a broad consensus in favour. A supermajority of 40 Members would be required to vote in favour of a future Bill before it could reach the statute books, and it would be subject to rigorous scrutiny, consultation and debate, both within and outside the Assembly.

In my written statement of 2 October, I outlined the key objectives of the Welsh Parliament and Elections (Wales) Bill. The first objective is to change the name of the Assembly to Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament, which was the preferred title for those who responded to the public consultation on this matter. The respondents also preferred the descriptor Aelodau Senedd Cymru/Members of the Welsh Parliament, which would bring us into line with the descriptors used by legislatures elsewhere in the UK. Despite reaching an initial conclusion with regard to the descriptor, the Commissioners decided to give it further consideration and discuss it again with their party groups. These discussions are ongoing, but I urge parties and Members to try to reach a consensus at the earliest possible opportunity.

The Commission proposes that the name of the institution should take legal effect in May 2020 to ensure that the term Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament becomes familiar to the people of Wales before the 2021 Assembly—Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament—election. We will ensure that the cost of the change is kept to a minimum, and there will be no wholesale change to the Assembly’s logo. The explanatory memorandum that will be published alongside the Bill on introduction will of course include the best estimates of the potential costs and savings to which the legislation could give rise.

The second objective of the Bill will be to lower the minimum voting age to 16, with effect from the 2021 election. I know that Members will want to be reassured that significant efforts will be made to inform young people of this change and to encourage the highest level of participation. We agree, and during this legislative process, the Commission will outline what action will be taken, both by this institution and our partners on this issue.

The third objective is to implement the recommendations for legislative change made by the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee of the fourth Assembly for the clarification and reform of the legislative framework relating to the disqualifying of individuals from being Assembly Members. These changes would provide clarity about the eligibility of people to stand for election, would reduce the barriers that currently require many people to take the risk of resigning from their roles before becoming a candidate, and would, from the next Assembly election, disqualify Members of the House of Lords from becoming Members of the Welsh Parliament unless they take a leave of absence from Westminster.

Finally, the fourth aim would be to ensure that there are provisions in place that would make it possible for us to consider implementation in Wales in the event that the Law Commission makes recommendations to rationalise the legislation relating to elections. Welsh Ministers could bring forward such proposals through subordinate legislation, which would be subject to an affirmative procedure in this Chamber.

The Bill would also extend the deadline for the first meeting of the Assembly after an election from seven—as it is at present—to 14 days, in line with the arrangements in the Scottish Parliament, and would also rectify a current legislative ambiguity, by clarifying that the Assembly Commission has the power to charge for the provision of services not related to its functions.

As I stated earlier, Members will have the opportunity to discuss the detail of these reforms during the scrutiny process. And should you agree this motion today, I’m sincerely looking forward to working with you in order to create a robust piece of legislation of which we, and the people of Wales, can be proud.

I haven't got a huge amount to add to that which we just heard from the Llywydd. I just think it's important to point out that we have these powers and we should use them. While the more difficult questions, perhaps, have been delayed to a second Bill, there is a serious purpose in this Bill as well, and I mean particularly the change of name to this Parliament. It's not just a vanity project. The purpose behind this is to help the people of Wales understand what this place is, which is a primary legislature, a proper Parliament, and some distance away from the Assembly that was set up in 1999. We all feel the frustration, I'm sure, regardless of our parties, when we knock doors, that people still don't understand the difference between Welsh Government and the Welsh Assembly, or even what the Welsh Assembly is responsible for. If this is an opportunity to help—just one more opportunity to help people in Wales understand that—then of course we should take it. 

The Bill will be informed by public consultation. The Llywydd has referred to some of the responses there. But, of course, the views of Members themselves, who are themselves informed by their own Stage 1 consultation, will also matter. If amendments come forward, I'm sure they will be done on the basis of evidence as well as personal points of view. And if we do get permission for a draft Bill to proceed today, if I understand correctly, Stages 2 and 3 may be dealt with by a committee of the whole house rather than by the committees, as we have in the past.

Personally, and perhaps I should declare an interest at this point, because I am a Commissioner, what I'm looking for in this Bill is a quality legal instrument that is clear and that fulfils its stated objectives. And that means no framework Bill, no diverting of responsibility to secondary legislation unless it's absolutely necessary, because of all the scrutiny implications that go with that, a very transparent and analytical approach to the difference between the use of powers and duties, and, of course, no Henry VIII powers for the Government on the face of the Bill. 

This is an Assembly Bill. It's a reminder that we are the legislature—we are the Assembly—and we act on behalf of the people of Wales. It's not Governments that make law. And while it may not happen, I think we must be vigilant for any amendments that may even inadvertently undermine the fact that it's us who make the law here. While Governments may introduce them occasionally, and more frequently, it's not for Government to undermine the purpose of this law—as I say, even inadvertently—by introducing amendments that give them too many powers as opposed to us.

I do broadly welcome this debate on the Commission-proposed Bill, the Welsh Parliament and Elections (Wales) Bill. However, I am disappointed we're not progressing with some of the recommendations the Commission consulted on. Recently, the Women's Equality Network wrote to the Llywydd urging the Commission to progress with the proposals in Laura McAllister's report, promoting job sharing opportunities for Assembly Members. Women's Equality Network Wales, WEN Wales, believes that the Assembly should lead the way on this and blaze a trail. As they've said, if you start job sharing in the institution that runs Wales, you're setting a precedent for business in the third sector, contributing to the more equal Wales that we all want to see, which is set out in the future generations Act.

So, I am disappointed the Commission hasn't included these proposals in this Bill, especially as the Welsh Government has responded positively to the Assembly's Equality, Local Government and Communities Committee's recent report, 'Work it out: parenting and employment in Wales', which recommends that the Welsh Government considers the case for changing legislation so roles such as Ministers, public appointees and councillors may be job-shared. And in its response to the report, Welsh Government does say it will consider the case for changing the legislation in relation to Welsh Government Ministers, alongside any consideration that the National Assembly may give to the introduction of job sharing for Assembly Members, and I welcome that. The more flexibility we offer our politicians, the more female candidates we attract, but this should also be attractive to male candidates as well.

We will be radical and far-sighted when we enfranchise 16 and 17-year-olds via this Bill. Their voices will be strong and clear in the direction we take in promoting equality and diversity in the Assembly, and this will be strengthened by the new Welsh Youth Parliament. In support of this Bill, I hope we can also be radical and far-sighted in our considerations of the wider features and recommendations of the McAllister report, the report that you commissioned—the Llywydd commissioned—by making this a Parliament that is fit for purpose and works for Wales. We're not there yet, but we are taking the first important steps today, and I support this Bill.

I welcome the opportunity to have this debate in the Senedd today on your proposal, and the Commission's proposal, to bring forward a series of reforms to strengthen our major democratic intuition here in Wales. Twenty years have passed since the legislation establishing the National Assembly was passed, and at that time the organisation was more similar to a county council than a national parliament. We've come a long way since then, and Plaid Cymru has been consistent that the process of building a nation is but a start with the establishment of our national, democratic institutions. So, Plaid Cymru naturally supports the intention of any legislation to strengthen this body.

Given the narrow-mindedness of the British state and those who want to see us closing the door on our collaboration with our European neighbours, it's a requirement upon us to ensure that this institution is a platform for the aspirations of the people of Wales, and a vehicle to create the new Wales that we want to create together.

We are proud to welcome the intention of introducing votes for 16-year-olds, and it's good to see our Senedd here in the vanguard, opening doors and bringing people into the work of creating a real, new, inclusive Welsh democracy where young people are the architects of their own future, in total contradiction to what is happening in Westminster.

The purpose of today's debate, of course, is to seek the Assembly's agreement to bring more detailed proposals forward in the new year, to put some meat on the bones, as it were. We look forward to scrutinising those proposals in detail, but we must bear in mind that this is the first phase of a package of reforms following the excellent reports produced by the working group chaired by Laura McAllister. I very much hope that we will move immediately to introduce the rest of the proposals.

Like Jane Hutt, I'm disappointed that recommendations 10 and 11, in relation to increasing equal representation in terms of gender, aren't being brought forward at this point. But I do understand the background to that, of course. Quotas and job-sharing are an excellent way of providing women with an enhanced voice, and I'm very pleased that my party, Plaid Cymru, last weekend has introduced women-only shortlists in target constituencies. That's to be warmly welcomed.

Finally, I wish to turn to the proposal to change the name of the National Assembly for Wales to reflect its status as a national parliament, and I do note that the Commission's proposal at the moment is Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament. Plaid Cymru's view is that the name 'Senedd' should be used for this institution in both our official languages, and that Members should be called 'Aelodau o'r Senedd' or 'Aelod o Senedd Cymru' in Welsh, and 'Member of the Senedd' or 'Member of Senedd Cymru' in English. I do hope that we can return to this issue during the scrutiny process.

May I just make brief reference to the rationale for this stance on the name? The main aim of changing the name of the Assembly is to enhance public understanding of its function. At the moment, very many people call this institution—not the building, but this intuition—the Senedd. It's common parlance now. However, there are many who still use terms such as 'Welsh Assembly Government' or 'Welsh Government' to refer to the Assembly, because of a lack of understanding. There is no usage at the moment of 'Welsh Parliament', generally speaking, so changing the name of the institution to that would mean a change in public practice and would add another term into the mix that exists at present. The monolingual name 'Senedd' would avoid this problem, because it’s already in common parlance.

Now, during the consultation, 'Aelod Senedd Cymru/Member of Welsh Parliament' was favoured by 30 per cent of the respondents, only 1.6 per cent more than the percentage that favoured 'Aelod o’r Senedd/Member of the Senedd', which was 28.4 per cent. Now if we add the percentage who favoured the third most popular title, namely 'Aelod o Senedd Cymru/Member of Senedd Cymru', which was 13.5 per cent, then there is a clear preference for a title for Members that includes the monolingual use of the word 'Senedd', at 41.9 per cent.

There are a number of other national institutions, such as Chwarae Teg, Mudiad Meithrin, and, indeed, the title of Llywydd itself, which are the same in both languages and that causes no difficulty. I would also request, in this context, that the Commission publish any language impact assessment that has been done on the policy decision to recommend the name 'Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament' as the name of this institution and I would ask for evidence-based consideration to be given to this as we move forward.

Finally, it would be good to see our main national democratic body reflecting the nature of our ambition for a truly bilingual Wales where the Welsh language belongs to all of Wales’s citizens.

I just want to speak briefly to welcome the Bill's being introduced. It's been now seven years since we overwhelmingly agreed in a referendum that this place should have the powers of a parliament, and it's only right that we change the name to reflect that reality.

I'm pleased also that the McAllister report is being decoupled, so we can focus on the elements that we can all agree on while we still work on developing a consensus for the other elements. And I hope very much that we can proceed before too long in developing the other parts of that report too.

I think it's excellent that we're introducing votes for 16-year-olds, and many of us will have had a conversation with first-time voters who tell us that often they're reluctant to vote the first time because they don't always feel equipped to be able to make an informed decision—they don't always feel they know enough—and I think it's essential that there is a thorough political education campaign that goes forward in parallel with this change in the law, and I was pleased to hear the Llywydd say that that will be the case. But, of course, it needs to go beyond just what the Commission can provide; this needs to be embraced by schools and colleges and organisations right across Wales, and families too.

On the issue of the name of the Assembly, I noted what the Presiding Officer said about this will be debated in detail in during the next stages, and that, of course, is correct. But I agree with Siân Gwenllian that the simple Welsh-only name of 'Senedd' would be preferable. I, along with many others, campaigned in 1997, and the years before, to create this place. I did not want to recreate, in Wales, Parliament. I wanted to create something different: a different culture, a different way of doing things, a different sense of purpose. And I think there's a temptation to cleave to these old French terms to give us some sense of authority. And, actually, that's not what we should be trying to do; we should be trying to do something different.

And I think using the Welsh term 'Senedd', which I already use to describe this institution—clearly, it's only the name of the building, but I always refer to my work in the Senedd, and, certainly, the people of Llanelli I've spoken to are very clear about what that means. And I think that would be a much more appropriate way of proceeding—sending a signal of what we want to achieve here and also a signal of the place of language in our national life. And I hope that there's a chance for us to reflect on that as we go through.

I think there's a slight contradiction in saying we want powers to decide things for ourselves and then saying we're going to delegate this decision out to a result of a public consultation, which, as Siân Gwenllian has said, was far from clear cut. So, I hope that's considered further as we go through.

I will give way.

Thank you. My concern would be—. I agree with Siân Gwenllian that people are often—. My constituents get confused between the different phrases—Welsh Assembly Government, Wales Government—and this is the issue. So, for me, I would very much like to see this place called the Welsh Parliament in English and Welsh, because I believe what the issue would be—for non-Welsh speakers it would be more confusing, perhaps, again. I take your point in regard to creating something different, but I do think it would make it much easier to have UK Parliament, Welsh Parliament; UK Government, Welsh Government.

Well, there's nothing wrong with people informally saying that the Senedd is our Welsh Parliament, but I think the official name should be Senedd. In terms of the general public's understanding, we're still not quite 20 years into the being of this place; I think understanding will develop as time goes on. 

As I say, there are other reasons for choosing the term 'Senedd', not least the final point I want to turn to, which is what we refer to ourselves as. By creating the problem for ourselves of calling it a Welsh Parliament, we then come up with this ridiculous acronym for Member of Welsh Parliament—MWP. Now, I think we're inviting ridicule for ourselves by describing ourselves as 'MWP'. My infantile mind immediately thinks of what it rhymes with—'twp' and 'pwp'. This may well reflect what some of our constituents think of us, but I don't think we should give them any encouragement. I think it's a slightly absurd set of initials, which, if we weren't calling ourselves Welsh Parliament, we wouldn't create the problem of in the first place.

I think AS, Aelod Seneddol, would be perfectly straightforward. There may be an issue for Welsh language broadcasters then to distinguish between MPs, who we refer to in Welsh as AS, and us. But, frankly, it's not beyond the wit of man to come up with a solution to that—[Interruption.] Or woman, indeed; I was using it in the original sense. But, frankly, that's their problem, not our problem. But I believe sending the signal that we are Members of our Senedd would be the right signal to send. Diolch.

Thank you, Llywydd, for opening today's debate.

We in UKIP note the proposed changes in the Commission report and in your recent statement. If I can go through some of the proposals individually, as the Welsh Assembly now has tax-raising powers, we have no objection to the name changing to Welsh Parliament. Regarding the Plaid Cymru suggestion of 'Senedd', of course 'Senedd' is an excellent phrase as far as it goes for the Welsh version of what will be the Welsh Parliament, but I do tend to agree with what Russ George said, that there is not enough public awareness of the phrase for it to be the only description. So, I would tend to go for Welsh—

Would you take an intervention?

Yes, of course.

Thank you. Do you know what the Dáil is? Do you know what a Taoiseach is?

I do, actually, Llyr, but I think if you asked many members of the general public they wouldn't know what the Dáil is or the Taoiseach. [Interruption.] Oh, in Ireland, yes; okay, we have to relate it to Ireland. Well, that's an interesting point. Let me have a think about that. You've raised a good point. 

We do agree with the proposed changes relating to disqualification. We did have an issue within UKIP not so long ago over the position of Nathan Gill, who combined being a Member of the Assembly with being a Member of the European Parliament. This didn't really prove to be a very happy combination of roles. As Members may recall, Nathan was notable in Cardiff largely for his absence, although I'm sure he's been very diligent in his attendance at Strasbourg. I think that case does illustrate—[Interruption.] I think that case does illustrate the dangers of allowing politicians to 'double job', as this practice is now termed. 

Now, I know that we have two Members here in the Assembly who are also Members of the Lords. I'm not implying in any way that they've done anything out of turn. Their cases are quite different. I know that Dafydd Elis-Thomas and Eluned Morgan have done useful things in the Lords after they were elected here. So, you can make useful contributions in two different legislatures in some cases. But I think that, on the whole, the general public will find the practice rather fishy looking and I think it's best that the door is closed on this practice, regardless of the individual contributions that some Members may have made in two different Chambers.

So, we agree with this element of the Llywydd's proposals, that, in future, Members of the Lords should not be eligible for the Assembly unless they have signed a leave of absence from the Lords. We also agree with the material relating to High Sheriffs and Lord-lieutenants and to the 14-day period—can I call it a cooling off period—after Assembly polling day.

The only point we do take issue with is over your wish to extend the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds. We feel that this is a young age at which to ask people to make political decisions. There are enough things for 16 and 17-year-olds to think about as it is without adding the difficulty of political allegiances. There is no great public support for the increase in the franchise, as far as opinion polls have shown, although, as usual, the Assembly's consultation has provided a different figure. So, we don't feel that this urge to give the vote to 16 and 17-year-olds is a great idea, and we don't agree with this part of the proposals, but the rest of them, as I say, we do support. Diolch yn fawr.

Diolch, Llywydd. I stand today, like last week, to express my frustration and disappointment. Once again, I feel the need to point out that our time—in fact, the people of Wales's time—could be much better spent. I have no doubt that these feelings will be echoed across my region.

Let's take a little reality check. Winter is coming. Some people in Wales will be facing a hard winter living on the streets, NHS staff are contemplating the chaos winter inevitably brings, the elderly and the poor will be choosing between heating and eating, and, as the United Kingdom comes ever closer to leaving the European Union, we have potentially transformational additional powers set to arrive at this Assembly. 

Changing the name of this institution, or changing our titles, will not address those issues. Changing our title from 'Assembly Member' to 'Member of Parliament', or even 'Senator', will not help any constituent. Our time should be better spent improving our constituents' lives, not our curricula vitae.

Will you take an intervention?

No, I won't. How Members today can justify paving the way to increasing the number of Members of this institution, and yet, at the same time, argue against reducing the number of MPs, shows how the jobs-for-the-boys culture is alive and well in politics today.

The taxpayer in Wales already pays for too many politicians. Scotland—[Interruption.] Scotland has around double the population of Wales, but they have fewer councillors. I sat in this Chamber when the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Public Services spoke of the need to reform local government, but he now backs away because he cannot make difficult decisions. 

I also have deep concern about reducing the age of voting. The age of 18 in the United Kingdom is accepted as adulthood. We don't allow 16-year-olds to drink, to drive, to gamble or to watch restricted films—they go to young offenders' institutions and even attend children's wards in hospitals. As for the army—what you pointed out earlier—they can only join the army with parental consent under the age of 18, because I had to sign for my son.

I believe we should leave the voting age at the age of 18. It is a rite of passage—something to look forward to and to be proud of. For these reasons, I will be voting against this motion today. Diolch.

Thank you. Can I call the Counsel General, Jeremy Miles?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate and to state the Welsh Government's support for the proposal to introduce this Bill. The Wales Act 2017 has brought new powers in this area, and it's right that they should be used to make our legislature more effective, accessible and diverse in terms of representation.

The reforms proposed for inclusion in this Bill are important in ensuring that the Assembly's role, its processes and its electoral arrangements are clear. In particular, I welcome the proposal to extend the franchise for voting in Assembly elections to 16 and 17-year-olds. Unlike Gareth Bennett, I think 16 to 17-year-olds are perfectly capable of exercising that level of democratic engagement.

I commend the Commission's aim to empower, engage and enthuse young people to participate in the democratic processes in Wales. This Government has long advocated the involvement of young people in the democratic process, which is essential to achieving a vibrant democracy. Within our own forthcoming local government and elections Bill, we will include provisions to allow 16 and 17-year-olds the right to vote in local elections.

Sixteen-year-olds can legally undertake a multiplicity of activities, so it's right and it's just that we allow them also a voice to speak up and vote on matters that affect them, just as they affect everybody else.

Would you take an intervention? I'm just curious—one of the things that came up in the course of deciding on this Bill was whether 16 and 17-year-olds might like some education through the school system about the political system, and so forth, rather than party politics. Do you have a view about whether that's better dealt with in a Bill like this, or within the Government's own local government Bill? 

I don't have a view on that. I think it's obviously important that we make sure that we have an informed electorate at all ages, and I think we should take every opportunity that we can to make sure that is the case. 

The responses to the consultation that the Commission has conducted suggest that if we encourage people to engage with politics at a young age, they are more likely to remain engaged as they grow older. This should ensure strong levels of public participation in the democratic process for the future, and what better way to engage young people than to allow them to take part and vote in the elections that have a direct impact upon their lives? The Welsh Government believes that it's not just young people who must be allowed a voice; the right to vote should apply to all those who have a stake in our society. Our forthcoming local government and elections Bill will therefore also enfranchise all foreign nationals legally resident in Wales to vote in Welsh local government elections. The Welsh Government believes this principle must be applied consistently across the electoral franchises of Wales, and the Government would like to explore these issues, as this Bill progresses, with the Assembly Commission.

I welcome, too, the proposal to reform the existing provisions in the 2006 Act relating to disqualification. As I think is now widely recognised, those provisions conflate two quite separate questions: on the one hand, who, if anybody, should be precluded from standing for election because of the offices they hold, and on the other hand, which of the offices that a successful candidate should resign before being able to take up their membership of the Assembly. We need clarity on this, and I hope that the Bill's proposals will help provide that.

I'm pleased to express the Welsh Government's support for the proposed introduction of this Bill. I look forward to the introduction and welcome the opportunities it brings for further debate and consideration, to ensure that our legislature continues to effectively serve the people of Wales in a changing constitutional landscape.  

Thank you. Can I now call on the Llywydd to reply to the debate? 

Can I thank Members who've contributed to the debate this afternoon? As Suzy Davies said as she started her response, we've come a long way, some distance, from the National Assembly that was first elected in 1999. We are a proper Parliament—your words—we are a proper Parliament now, and we should call ourselves that in whatever language, and I'll come on to that point later on. 

There seems to be a majority of support in this Chamber to allow young people—16, 17-year-olds—to have a vote for the National Assembly, Welsh Parliament or Senedd. Siân said it beautifully—young people are the architects of their future; they need to have a voice in the architecture of their future: pobl ifanc yn benseiri ar eu dyfodol. It's not something that's agreed by all here, and that's shared, by the way, by the consultation responses we had as well, where there was a majority in favour of 16 and 17-year-olds voting, but not universal support.

On job sharing, the points made by both Jane Hutt and Siân Gwenllian, I understand the disappointment with the fact that the expert panel recommendation on job sharing is not to be brought forward in this piece of legislation, and we had a discussion in the Commission about this. We're not currently convinced that there is a supermajority in this Chamber to introduce that as part of the legislation, but more fundamental is probably the issue around competence where it relates to an Assembly Member's right to become a Minister or a Cabinet Secretary. And I don't want to be in a position at all where Members are elected to this National Assembly who can be Assembly Members, but have not the right to become Cabinet Secretaries. We would have, in effect, two tiers of Members at that point. So, that's an issue that needs to be resolved before we undertake any legislation on this matter. Its time will come—I've no doubt about that—but its time is not yet here. 

Now, we had expressed the different views on what we call ourselves. I don't think we should overindulge ourselves in the issues of what we call ourselves or what we call this Parliament. We are to be a Parliament, a Senedd. There is obviously a divergence of views expressed here today on whether we should use the Welsh name only, Senedd, to refer to this place rather than Senedd Cymru/Welsh Parliament. Let me remind you all that we need 40 of the 60 of you to agree to this name change as part of this legislation working its way through the National Assembly and reaching Stage 4. Those of you who are advocates of 'Senedd' and its use in Welsh only—find out whether there are 40 of you who would back that, and then that's the way to make that change.

As Lee Waters said, what we call ourselves as Assembly Members, now currently from the National Assembly, derives from what we call the Senedd, the Welsh Parliament, and infantile minds—as you called yourself I think, there, Lee—will make mischief on some iterations of what we call ourselves. But, again, I would ask you—we need to agree on this; we need to have 40 of 60 of you, of us—I have a vote on this, by the way, in this particular case, as does Ann Jones, so 40 of the 60 of us need to agree on this, and we should not dwell and spend too much time on it. Some have said we need to spend more time on what the Parliament actually does, and I agree with that, but we are a Parliament, we are a Senedd, we call ourselves that and we do our work on behalf of the people of Wales, and for us to do that, let's, hopefully, today start the process of legislating on these matters. Scrutiny will follow and all of the detail can be examined at that point, but, hopefully, you'll allow the Commission to introduce this Bill for scrutiny by this National Assembly. Diolch. 

Diolch. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Okay, we'll defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.