10. Short Debate: An Oath to the People — Changing the swearing in oath for Assembly Members to pledge allegiance to the people

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 6:02 pm on 1 May 2019.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Bethan Sayed Bethan Sayed Plaid Cymru 6:02, 1 May 2019

(Translated)

As a republican, I, Bethan Sayed, do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and swear my allegiance to the people of Wales from now until the end of my term of office, that I promise to faithfully discharge the duties of my office to protect and defend the welfare, the best interests and the rights of the people of Wales.

This is the first time in this place that I’ve had an opportunity to express what’s on my mind and in my heart as a real pledge of allegiance. When we pledge allegiance, it is crucial that we believe in that oath. That is true in any part of life—it’s true in a court of law, it’s true in any conversation. This is what’s at the heart of trust. It’s crucial in the way that we represent people that we believe in what we say and that we, as representatives of the people, honour our beliefs. But, in Wales, when we take an oath in this place, many of us pledge allegiance to an institution that we don’t believe in, not through choice or malice or any attempt to mislead but because we are required to do so in order to take our seats here. In a way, we are threatened into taking an oath that we do not believe in and this is entirely unacceptable.

Now, some people have said—some people who aren’t in the Senedd any more—that this should not be a priority. They have asked why on earth am I raising something like this, which they would consider to be ostensibly meaningless. But I disagree with them entirely. This is a hugely important issue. When we take an oath, there are versions of oaths in every culture, and virtually every country in the world insists that members take oaths to maintain certain values and principles in public life. In the Assembly, we are required to adhere to the Nolan principles on public life, and morality is important, as are ethics, in almost every parliament throughout the world. These rules are in place because public expectation and opinion state that they are important, but it appears that there is no room for some Members, in their first act in this room, to pledge allegiance to something that they believe in.

This is what Members pledge to do currently, 'I—the name of the specific Assembly Member—pledge that I will be faithful to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors, in accordance with the law. So help me God.' Well, I don’t believe in that statement. I am a republican and I am very proud of that fact. I do understand that not everyone is a republican and, of course, they have every right to disagree. I respect that. That is the true nature of democracy. But that respect should work both ways. I respect Members who wish to pledge allegiance to the Queen, although I don’t fully understand why they would wish to do that or agree with their desire to do so. But my desire, and that of several other Members, not to do that is not respected. It’s not respected either in Scotland, England or other nations where the Queen is the head of state, such as Australia and Canada.

What is strange about the oath is that arrangements are in place to take a different oath on the basis of one’s religious beliefs but not in terms of an oath to the monarchy. My belief makes it impossible for me to pledge allegiance to the Queen or her heirs because I don’t fundamentally believe in the institution that she represents. It doesn’t comply with my beliefs or the kind of Wales that I want to see for the future, but, again, if I am to sit in this particular seat, I have to do that, and it makes no sense at all to me.