We now move on to item 7 on the agenda, which is a debate on the general principles of the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill. I call on the Llywydd to introduce the debate.

Motion NDM7115 Elin Jones

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales in accordance with Standing Order 26.11:

Agrees to the general principles of the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill.

Motion moved.

Thank you. It's a pleasure for me to open today's debate on the general principles of the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill. I'm grateful to the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee and the Finance Committee for discussing the Bill thoroughly and to everyone who's taken part in developing this Bill and scrutinising it. I will be responding in writing to the recommendations made by the two committees in full, but I'll respond to some recommendations this afternoon as well. A number of recommendations are for the Assembly Commission and the Welsh Government, and I had constructive discussions with the Counsel General about those recommendations last week.

Before turning to the key findings of the committees, I want to repeat that the general aim of this Bill is to create a more effective and accessible Senedd, ensuring that the framework of our democracy is fit for purpose, remembering that the scope of the Assembly's powers has increased significantly since it was first established in 1999. Now, this Bill is a significant step towards that aim and I welcome the fact that the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee has recommended that the Assembly does agree to the general principles of the Bill. I will be discussing the different parts in the order in which they appear in the Bill.

Now, turning to the change of name, the evidence that the committee received reflects the significant support for changing the name of the Assembly. When this institution will be celebrating its twenty-first anniversary next year, I'm confident that we'll be giving it a new name that reflects its status as Wales's national legislature. Now, different points of view were expressed during Stage 1 with regard to what the new name should be and how the related legislation should be worded. I had foreseen that the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee would express an opinion on the evidence received on those issues. I feel that the members of the committee had different views on this matter, and we would have benefited from seeing these being outlined in the report.

Now, the Bill suggests that the name of the Assembly should be changed to 'Senedd', and that the Senedd could also be called 'Welsh Parliament'. As the committee hasn't suggested a different name, I don't see any reason to amend this part of the Bill. So, it's a matter for the Members in this Siambr to decide what the name should be. It's not just an issue of changing the name of the institution itself, but of reflecting its status in the name of Members too. There's simplicity to the name Senedd, and calling us 'Members of the Senedd—Aelodau o'r Senedd'.

Now, the Bill also proposes lowering the minimum voting age to 16 and I'm pleased to see that the clear support of the public in the consultation 'Creating a Parliament for Wales' has been reflected in the evidence given to committees on this issue. Developing this part of the Bill has been a joint effort with the Welsh Government, reflecting the fact that it too intends to lower the voting age for local government elections. I'm grateful for their support to ensure a consistent approach on this.

It's appropriate that the committees have emphasised the importance of citizenship education to ensure that young people are encouraged to vote. Since I gave evidence to the committee, the strategic focus of this work, namely the democratic renewal group of the Welsh Government, has been established and has met. Civic bodies such as schools and youth organisations will take part in the work under the auspices of this group.

Now, several recommendations asked for more information about the costs and responsibilities of lowering the voting age, and I will, of course, be more than happy to do this and to update the cost assessment before Stage 3. I've discussed the points raised by the committees with the Counsel General, who will respond to their recommendations with further information.

Turning now to the funding and accountability of the Electoral Commission in Wales, the Wales Act 2017 transferred responsibility for devolved elections in Wales to this Assembly and I believe that we need to develop a new relationship between the Assembly and the regulators of those elections, namely the Electoral Commission, before the next Assembly election. I believe that the majority of Members share that opinion. Section 27 of the Bill prepares the way for this new relationship. As Members know, I explained that I foresaw that the Counsel General would table amendments to this section. The Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee is not content with this approach. In the same way, the Finance Committee also asks that draft amendments are tabled before Stage 2 discussions. I understand that this isn't all ideal. I would have preferred to include proposals that are fully formed as we tabled the Bill, but that wasn't possible at the time because delay would have meant losing the opportunity to make important constitutional changes by the time of the next Assembly elections in 2021, such as, in particular, lowering the voting age.

The Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee recommended that we should continue with this work through the local government Bill instead. I've discussed this with the Counsel General, and it seems that the Senedd and elections Bill is the most appropriate legislative medium for achieving this change in time for the 2021 elections.

I have had constructive discussions with the Counsel General in terms of what additional information the Welsh Government can share before we start the Stage 2 debate in response to recommendations made by the Finance Committee. I've explained to the committee my rationale for ensuring that the Electoral Commission should be accountable to a new committee chaired by the Llywydd. I know that other institutions in Wales funded directly from the Welsh consolidated fund are accountable to the Finance Committee, and I appreciate the concerns of the Finance Committee about this different arrangement for the Electoral Commission. But to ensure consistency with arrangements in the rest of the United Kingdom, and according to the wishes of the Electoral Commission itself, I believe that establishing a new committee would be appropriate in this case.

If that were to happen, I would, of course, take steps to get to grips with some of the concerns expressed by the Finance Committee. For example, I suggest that the Chair of the Finance Committee should be a member of the new committee to give the Finance Committee a voice as we scrutinise the work of the Electoral Commission and to ensure consistency with the statement of principles made by the Finance Committee. I've started discussing this with the Chair of the Finance Committee, and I look forward to discussions during Stage 2.

Moving to the section on disqualification: at the heart of this section is the principle that we should allow as many people as possible to stand in elections, and I was pleased to see the support of the committees for these aspects of the Bill and I will consider the specific points that they have made.

The Bill also includes provision to enable Welsh Ministers to implement recommendations on reforming electoral law made by the Law Commission. Even though support was given to the principle of these kinds of amendments, concerns were expressed with regard to the way it would implement them. So, I've accepted that recommendation and will delete section 36.

Now, I believe that the reforms in this Bill are important to strengthen democratic engagement in Wales and make operational changes to our national Senedd. Taken together, they contribute to creating a Parliament for Wales that is fit for purpose for the next 20 years and beyond, and I look forward this afternoon to hearing the opinions of my fellow Members.

Can I call on the Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, Mick Antoniw?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. This is a major piece of Welsh constitutional legislation, and it was given very careful and serious attention by the committee, as would be expected. The Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee scrutinised the Bill between February and June of this year. We undertook a public consultation and we heard oral evidence in formal meetings. We also sought the views of young people about votes at 16, using an online forum, Senedd Dialogue, and during a visit to Ysgol Gyfun Gymraeg Bro Edern in Cardiff, and we'd like to thank all of those who contributed to that work and to the various evidence sessions that were involved.

We made 19 recommendations in our report, aimed mainly at improving the legislation and delivering it effectively with a focus on good legislative practice. Whilst we had some reservations about the approach to legislating adopted in bringing the Bill forward, we nevertheless recommended that its general principles do be agreed.

So, turning to Part 2 of the Bill and the proposals to rename the National Assembly as the 'Senedd', we heard evidence making the case for the monolingual name 'Senedd' or 'Senedd Cymru' or the bilingual name of 'Senedd Cymru' and 'Welsh Parliament'. However, we deliberately did not express a view on a preferred name, as we believe that the choice of name must be a decision that is taken by the National Assembly as a whole, and what I do do is draw the Members' attention to the evidence we have heard on this, which has been set out within our report.

We noted that the Counsel General is considering amending the Bill using wording that may carry the risk of challenge and for that reason and for the avoidance of doubt we believe that the Welsh Government should ask the UK Government to bring forward an Order in Council under section 109 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 to modify the National Assembly's legislative competence such that the risk of challenge no longer arises.

Voting and taking part in the democratic process is at the heart of a healthy, functioning society and we therefore supported the lowering of the voting age to 16 for National Assembly elections, as provided for in Part 3 of the Bill. In our view, reducing the voting age to 16 provides an opportunity to deliver a society that is more engaged in the democratic process over the long term and should be welcomed. We are convinced that lowering the voting age will require adequate awareness raising and educational support to ensure that this opportunity is utilised by young people. For that reason, we are concerned at the apparent lack of a coherent action plan to deliver votes at 16 in readiness for the 2021 Assembly elections. In our view, Llywydd, the Counsel General and the Minister for Education were not clear enough about their plans for awareness raising and education. If 16 and 17-year-olds are to exercise their right to vote in 2021, then a clear, co-ordinated, timetabled and costed plan for awareness raising and civic education is needed as a matter of urgency.

We recognise that there is work under way to formally co-ordinate activity through a stakeholder group, as has been mentioned. Whilst its collaboration is welcome, we remain unclear as to the stakeholder group's make-up, responsibilities and operational time frame; we look forward to the further details that the Llywydd has indicated will be provided in the response on this. Given the potential influence that the stakeholder group may have, we recommended that the Llywydd should publish the membership and terms of reference of the stakeholder group, including the key milestones and time frames for delivery and, of course, the Llywydd has referred to this. Following on from this, we recommended that the stakeholder group should prepare an action plan for the co-ordination of all work related to the preparation of awareness raising and educational materials for the 2021 Assembly election, clearly identifying the lines of accountability as well as responsibility for preparing specific work streams.

We agree with the Llywydd and with the Welsh Government that the Bill should not include specific duties in relation to educational matters. We do, however, consider that guidance is necessary to ensure sufficient and consistent educational provision across Wales to that end, and we welcomed the Minister for Education's commitment during the evidence sessions to consider this matter further following advice from the stakeholder group. Therefore, we recommended that the Minister for Education should issue a statement explaining how citizenship and political education will be delivered in time for the 2021 Assembly election, including the time frame for any accompanying guidance that she intends to issue. We also recommended that the Llywydd should issue a written statement at the earliest opportunity detailing the funding being provided by each body contributing to awareness raising and education in readiness for the 2021 Assembly elections.

I'd now like to briefly cover matters relating to the electoral registration process. The administrative arrangements enabling 16 and 17-year-olds to vote in the 2021 Assembly elections need to function efficiently to ensure that the voter experience of the newly enfranchised is not a negative one. This is particularly important given that voting in the first election for which a person is eligible to vote can affect their future propensity to vote. What became apparent to us is the need for greater clarity around who is leading and co-ordinating the delivery of changes needed to ensure that the newly franchised are registered and able to exercise their right to vote in 2021. Clarity is also needed around the funding of the changes needed. We therefore recommended that the Llywydd should issue a written statement covering where these responsibilities lie for all changes needed to the electoral administration and registration processes, as well as addressing the funding of these changes.

I'd now like to address section 27 of the Bill, concerning the oversight of the Electoral Commission by the National Assembly. We agree with the Llywydd, the Counsel General and the Electoral Commission that, as a matter of principle, the Electoral Commission in Wales should be accountable to the National Assembly. However, we consider that fully developed provisions should have been included in the Bill on its introduction, rather than the approach now being suggested of amendments at Stages 2 and 3. The correspondence we received from the Llywydd and Counsel General about section 27 towards the end of Stage 1 only really served to reinforce the challenge of this task: amendments needed to the Bill will need to be significant and complex.

We do acknowledge that it would be constitutionally preferable to have arrangements in place prior to the 2021 Assembly election. In the circumstances, we recommended that provisions setting out the detailed arrangements for oversight of the Electoral Commission in Wales by the National Assembly should be removed from the Bill and, in the absence of a stand-alone Bill, included in the forthcoming local government Bill that has been promised. This, of course, has already been referred to in the comments from the Llywydd, but we believe this would have allowed for scrutiny of those provisions during a Stage 1 process, allowing engagement with stakeholders on the detail of these important provisions. It is for this reason that we made a general recommendation, repeating one made by our predecessor committee in its 'Making Laws in Wales' report, that Bills should be introduced into the National Assembly that can be reasonably considered to be fully developed at the point of introduction.

We welcome the proposals in Part 4 of the Bill that implement recommendations from our predecessor committee in the fourth Assembly, relating to disqualification from being an Assembly Member. Our sole recommendation concerned the Llywydd and the Welsh Government ensuring that they are satisfied with the schedule that lists the categories of persons disqualified and the holders of offices who are disqualified. Finally, as has been referred to, we share the concern of the Counsel General with respect to the undesirability of conferring powers on Welsh Ministers as provided for in section 36 of Part 5 of the Bill. We have consistently cautioned against the use of subordinate legislation to implement significant policy changes, and, therefore, we recommended that section 36 of the Bill should be removed. I therefore welcome the comments and proposal from the Llywydd to remove section 36 from the Bill. Thank you, Deputy Llywydd.

Thank you. I now call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I’m very pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to this debate, to outline the Finance Committee’s recommendations in relation to the financial implications of the Bill. We’ve made 15 recommendations, and I hope that the Llywydd, as I’m sure she will, will take all of these on board as the legislation progresses. She has, of course, referred to some of them, and I will refer to some of those in a moment. The committee recognises the aims of the Bill, particularly the constitutional importance of changing the name of the institution to reflect its position as the primary democratic institution in Wales. However, our main concerns are around the funding and oversight arrangements of the Electoral Commission.

Three days after the Bill was introduced, the Llywydd wrote to me indicating her intention to amend the Bill at Stage 2 to establish arrangements for the Electoral Commission to be financed by the Assembly, and to be accountable to the Assembly, should the Assembly support such a move, of course. The Finance Committee is obviously disappointed that this policy area wasn’t more advanced prior to the introduction of the Bill, as there could be significant cost implications. During the evidence session with the Llywydd, we asked whether the intention was for the Electoral Commission to be funded directly from the Welsh consolidated fund. Since then, the Llywydd has written to the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee to say that this is her preferred option. The Llywydd has also confirmed that her preferred option is for the Electoral commission to be accountable to a Llywydd’s committee.

At the time when the Finance Committee was scrutinising the Bill, we were unable to reach a view on the appropriateness of a Llywydd’s committee, as we didn’t know how the Electoral Commission was to be funded. So, as this Assembly will be aware, the Finance Committee currently has oversight of all of the bodies directly funded from the Welsh consolidated fund, and if the proposed commission is to be directly funded and scrutinised by a proposed Llywydd’s committee, the Finance Committee has concerns that it will lose its oversight role of ensuring budget proposals are set in the context of the wider budget constraints in the Welsh public sector.  

Now, the Llywydd, of course, has indicated here today her intention that if a Llywydd’s committee is established to scrutinise the Electoral Commission, it is likely or possible that the Chair of the Finance Committee will form part of that membership. I acknowledge that that's a positive step, and it's certainly something that the Finance Committee will be keen to discuss further. I have also written to the Llywydd seeking further information on funding of the Electoral Commission. I very much hope that the Llywydd will afford the Finance Committee an opportunity to consider the cost implications of any amendments prior to Stage 2 proceedings.

If I could turn now to some of our other recommendations as a committee. In terms of the name change from the National Assembly for Wales to Senedd, which would take place in May 2020, we appreciate that the Bill tries to take a prudent approach—I think that's the word used—towards doing that, and that more expensive options weren't pursued. However, we are concerned that not all signage, for example, will be replaced on this date, and some may be replaced as late as May 2021 to coincide, of course, with the next Assembly elections. Whilst we see the benefits of this approach, we are concerned, perhaps, that this could lead to public confusion, with some signs changing now and some later on. We recommend that the Llywydd and the Welsh Government work closely together to ensure public awareness of the name change is clearly communicated.

As part of our scrutiny of the Bill, we were also keen to explore ways in which the costs of running elections could be reduced. Given the Welsh Government’s proposal to introduce a local government Bill, this, I believe, seems a good opportunity to flag up some of these important issues. We have made several recommendations that we hope that the Llywydd and Welsh Government will consider and work together to streamline elections and not add to the complexities of the existing system. These recommendations include consideration of a single electoral register for Welsh local government and Assembly elections, rather than maintaining 22 separate registers; and also the potential for automatic registration. For example, 16-year-olds could automatically be registered to vote upon receipt of their national insurance number. We also believe the Welsh Government should undertake a review of the fees paid to returning officers as part of the maximum recoverable allowance, with a view, of course, to considering whether savings can be made.

Finally, turning to the implementation of the Law Commission’s recommendations, I am pleased to hear that the Llywydd has given her commitment to removing section 36 of the Bill. We agree with the Counsel General that it is not appropriate for Welsh Ministers to change electoral law through subordinate legislation as it risks reforms being made without sufficient scrutiny, and we are pleased that the Llywydd has taken this onboard. So, with those few comments, may I say that we look forward to continuing our engagement with this Bill's journey through the Assembly? Thank you very much for listening.

Can I now call the Counsel General and Brexit Minister, Jeremy Miles?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. In opening, may I recognise the comments of the Llywydd on our productive discussions, and thank her for those? I also wish to thank the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee and the Finance Committee for their scrutiny work on the Bill and for their report, and I'd also like to thank the Chairs for their contributions to this debate. I want to address the recommendations that require a response from the Welsh Government—first of all, the recommendations of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee.

In terms of recommendation 4, I can confirm that the Welsh Government will clarify in our explanatory memorandum for the local government Bill how the reforms proposed to current electoral legislation would look in that context.

In terms of recommendation 6, I still believe that it would be within the legislative competence of the Assembly to amend the opening words of the Government of Wales Act 2006. I note the additional comments made by the committee on an Order in Council, but the timetable for ensuring that these important reforms are delivered means that introducing such an order would be extremely challenging.

In terms of recommendation 7, these are issues for the Welsh Government. We work closely with the electoral administrators and the Electoral Commission through the Wales electoral co-ordination board and other fora. We will be publishing further financial information when subordinate legislation amending the canvassing process is brought before the Assembly.

In terms of recommendation 10, the Welsh Government has consulted in the past on improving the registration system. We will improve provisions in the local government Bill, which is in the pipeline. But, in our view, further changes shouldn't be made to the registration process while other changes to the franchise and the canvassing system are being done. That would create great risk for the integrity of devolved elections here in Wales.  

On recommendations 11, 12 and 13, the Welsh Government is creating the stakeholder group and will do as the committee recommends, with the caveat that the work will be wider in scope than recommendation 12 suggests. We are committed to engaging as wide a range of stakeholders as possible in our work on raising awareness about the franchise changes contained in the Bill and in the forthcoming local government and elections Bill. We will publish the terms and reference and work plan for our stakeholder engagement group in the near future.

On recommendation 14, the Minister for Education will issue a written statement to outline the delivery of citizenship and political education across Wales from the summer of 2020. On recommendation 15, these are also matters for the Welsh Government, and will be considered as part of the budget-setting process for 2020-21. As the awareness-raising campaign will cover the extension of the franchise for both Assembly and local government elections, I'm afraid it simply isn't possible to single out the cost incurred for each election in a meaningful way. But we will consider whether there is any other information that we might be able to provide in order to give a fuller picture.

On recommendations 16 and 17, the local government Bill is not, in our view, a suitable vehicle for provisions relating to the accountability of the Electoral Commission. This is a matter for the Senedd and not for local government. The Senedd and Elections Bill is the right vehicle for these provisions, and I don't want to see any delay on this, particularly as the Assembly Commission and the Electoral Commission are in agreement that it should happen, and the Scottish Government intends to legislate, for example, in similar fashion. However, I do absolutely recognise the concerns expressed by committees, and I will say more about that later. Finally, on the CLA committee's eighteenth recommendation, we are indeed satisfying ourselves that the disqualifications set out in the Bill are appropriate, and we will table any amendments we consider necessary at Stage 2.

I turn now to the Finance Committee recommendations. We will work closely with the Llywydd to address recommendations 1 and 2 on signage and local authority costs. Recommendations 3 and 4 on electoral registration are matters for the Welsh Government. We have consulted on this and will include provisions in the local government Bill. But, as I said earlier, we do not intend to pursue further changes at the same time as those for the franchise and canvass reform, as that would create significant risks, in our judgment.

We do not accept recommendations 5 and 6. These are matters for local authorities. Neither, I'm afraid, do we accept recommendations 7 and 8. We do not consider it appropriate to address either the publication of Assembly elections expenditure or returning officer fees in primary legislation, but we do intend to address both those issues by other means. The costs requested in recommendation 11 will be included in the regulatory impact assessment for the local government Bill. We accept recommendation 12. We intend to include a wide membership on the democratic renewal steering group and sub-groups.

Finally, we also accept recommendation 13. As I mentioned earlier, it is my intention to table amendments in relation to the accountability of the Electoral Commission at Stage 2. This depends on a number of factors outside the Welsh Government's control, including whether any Minister of the Crown consent we may need to seek is given. I will provide more information on my proposals on this after the summer recess, but in light of the committee's concerns I have decided to delay moving the financial resolution for the Bill until I am in a position to provide that information. 

As I said when the Bill was introduced, it represents an important step on our devolution journey. It is important that we use our new powers in this area to ensure that our legislature can continue effectively to serve the people of Wales in a changing constitutional landscape. The Welsh Government fully supports the general principles of the Bill.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I hope you'll forgive me for starting in a slightly more celebratory mood because the central purpose of this Bill as far I'm concerned is to extend the franchise to a most important group of people and, for me, the experience of seeing how 16 and 17-year-olds contributed to the 2014 Scottish referendum was real confirmation that this is a positive move. Far from being apathetic, they seized the chance. A survey for the Electoral Commission found that 75 per cent of 16 and 17-year-olds voted in that referendum. Thousands of young people, supposedly uninterested in politics, we thought, attended the polling stations alongside their parents and grandparents despite having no previous experience of ever having done so.

But it was that experience, and how they participated in the debates that accompanied the referendum itself, which further inspired many Conservatives in Scotland to support this cause, and I think it's a really important thing to bear in mind—how the new voters conducted themselves and showed themselves so interested in full participation in that political question. That has certainly inspired me to fully support this extension of the franchise here in Wales.

And it is also about, Deputy Presiding Officer, citizenship, and the preparation for active participation in common governance. We can strengthen the concept of citizenship, its rights and responsibilities by a programme of preparation in our schools and colleges. We face a crisis of citizenship, frankly, and its connection to the duties of running a democracy, and this seems to be one way that we can start to put that right and get idealism back into the democratic process, which it absolutely needs to flourish.

However, I do believe that the extension of the franchise in any nation is a pivotal moment in its history and should be approached with all solemnity that's appropriate. As I said, I personally enthusiastically support the move to reduce the voting age, and so I will be supporting the general principles of the Bill today, and I would also recommend every Member in this Chamber to do likewise. However, as a group, we will be allowing a free vote so that Members can make up their own minds on this important constitutional reform.

However, having said that, and celebrating what we hopefully will do in the coming months, I do think it's important that this Bill is also strengthened. It is less than satisfactory to leave the question of the franchise and lowering it in local authority elections to a future Bill. We should have looked at the principle of lowering the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds, or extending it to them, to include all elections under our ambit, and that means local government elections also. We've been promised a Bill and I've no doubt one will be introduced, but this is a highly contentious area in terms of local government reform and that Bill could run into difficulty. I hope it doesn't, in terms of the franchise issues, anyway.

Can I turn to the duty to educate? While there are various arguments for and against the lowering of the voting age to 16, one common concern that's been emphasised is the need for education and awareness raising to accompany this change, and indeed for it to happen anyway, so that citizens are properly prepared for their political duties. The current level of education support was deemed to be sometimes, or even perhaps often, inadequate by a whole range of witnesses. For example, the Electoral Reform Society Cymru stated that political education is relatively poor, and that we have relatively disengaged from devolved politics in particular. That is a weakness. While noting the excellent practice in some schools, even the Minister for Education admitted that there was a variability of provision for citizenship education between schools, and acknowledged that the need for consistency in the messages that young people received in relation to political education through the new curriculum was important.

However, more positively, Welsh students are crying out for better political engagement and education. A 2017 poll showed that 60 per cent of them disagreed that they had received a really good preparation for politics, but that they wanted this to be much better. Many of them, however, did say that much of their information currently comes from sources like Facebook. And, again, I think that we need to tackle that. I think that without a strong education programme behind these changes, we do risk seeing some of the problems they ran into in Scotland, where 25 out of 32 authorities did develop guidance for headteachers—presumably the others did not—but there wasn't much central consistency, and I do think that we could improve things here by generally preparing more effectively and having that central guidance. So, I think that’s an important area.

I realise I'm out of time, but I just hope you'll indulge me in referring to the name. There are difficulties here about legal interpretation, but at the minute, I think we'd all agree that section 2 or clause 2—I can never remember if it’s section or clause—states:

'(1) The Assembly for Wales constituted by the 2006 Act is to be known as the “Senedd”.

(2) The Senedd may also be known as the Welsh Parliament.'

Well, if we got the word 'congress' into those two lines, I think we would have had political bingo and would have been able to shout, 'house'—it may have been appropriate. I think this needs improving. I think we need a bilingual name. That is really important. There are various things I will introduce when we look at this, but our view is actually very—. I should say 'my view', because the group doesn't technically have one. But my view is closely in line with the Counsel General that it should say there will be a Parliament for Wales, which will be known as Senedd Cymru. I think that is where we need to get. I would also have made comments about—

My indulgence is moving.

I know I'm out of time, but can I just record my gratitude, as a former Chair of CLAC, that the recommendations on disqualification will now take forward quite fully the work of that committee in the fourth Assembly? I'm grateful to see that.

May I too welcome the opening words of the Llywydd and congratulate her on her ambition with this Bill? Naturally, I agree with the general principles of the Senedd and Elections (Wales) Bill. After all, this emanates from the announcement in February 2017 on the establishment of an expert panel to provide unbiased advice on the number of Assembly Members, the most appropriate electoral system, and the minimum voting age for elections in Wales. In this Bill we see the name change of the institution—more on that in a moment—the lowering of the minimum voting age, and other issues such as amending the legislation with regard to disqualification. But there's no further mention made of increasing the number of Members or reform of the electoral system. These issues will be aired in the Plaid Cymru debate that follows this one, and Members will be able to vote on both issues, namely increasing the number of Assembly Members and reforming the electoral system.

It's important to note, as the Chair of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee has already done, the importance of this occasion. This is the first step in the implementation of the vital steps to create a Senedd that's fit for purpose here in Wales, and that the people of Wales deserve. Plaid Cymru is entirely supportive of those aims.

In terms of the major provisions, I'll start with lowering the voting age to 16. Of course, lowering the voting age to 16 for the Senedd elections is something that we very much welcome as a party. Some weeks ago, we had the privilege of holding a joint debate here in the Siambr between Members of this Assembly and Members of the Welsh Youth Parliament, so we look forward to and very much support the provision in the Bill for ensuring that all of the young people of Wales can influence this Senedd.

In terms of the name of the institution, this party is of the opinion that the name 'Senedd' should be used as the official name of the institution in both languages, because the Welsh language, as with this Senedd itself, belongs to all of the people of Wales and represents all of its citizens. Of course, there are examples such as the Dáil, the Knesset and the Duma that come from international examples, and enrich our experience. There is wide-ranging use of the word 'Senedd' already over the past few months here. People fundamentally know what a Senedd is. I think it's rather insulting to suggest that the people of Wales, those who can't speak Welsh, somehow can't understand what a Senedd is. I think that can be insulting to those who don't naturally speak Welsh.

It's important to note that the provision in the Bill emphasises that 'Members of the Senedd' will be the title given to Senedd Members in both languages, and that the 'Senedd Commission' will be the official name of the Commission in both languages. In terms of the intention to introduce the descriptor 'Welsh Parliament', I can understand the reason for having that strapline to explain the function of the Senedd, but there's a discussion to be had at Stage 2, as we scrutinise in greater detail, whether the provision as it currently stands in the Bill is the best way to achieve that explanatory aim. The alternative proposal of the Government is an interesting suggestion in terms of how to achieve that aim as well.

So, I'm very pleased that this debate prepares the ground perfectly for the Plaid Cymru debate, in a moment, on continuing with the work of reform to transform our Senedd and our politics here in Wales. Do vote in favour of the motion. Thank you.

Can I start by saying how excited I am to be having this conversation and this debate in this place this afternoon? Deputy Presiding Officer, I think there are times, and I say this with the greatest of respect to everybody taking part in this debate, when the tyranny of parliamentary process can suck the whole life out of any ambition and the most compelling vision. This is about delivering, for many of us, on a century long campaign for home rule and the establishment of parliaments in the British isles. Keir Hardie, when he was first elected to represent Merthyr and Aberdare—Vikki isn't here, but she'll hear about it if I forget that—when he was first elected, he was elected on the platform of home rule, and I hope that we can all, or most of us at least, unite around that ambition.

Devolution, I think, is a dreadfully ugly word; it's all about process and nothing about destination. For me, I hope that the people that I represent will share my vision about a home rule Parliament here in Wales. As Donald Dewar said, self-Government within the United Kingdom, delivering for the people of Wales, delivering for the people who elected us here, with a focus not simply on the institution but the focus on what we're here to do and here to achieve. I agree with everything that David Melding said on all of the other issues. I thought it was a speech that extended our visions here this afternoon. I would endorse the whole of the recommendations that he made. I won't pursue that argument for that reason. 

But, let me say this: we are suffering in many ways today because of a lack of preparation during the 1990s for the creation of devolved Government in Wales. That preparation of course did take place in Scotland and their journey has been far smoother, I think, as a consequence of that. But since then we have had an embarrassment of riches of commissions and committees looking at various aspects of the operation of devolved governance in Wales. And we have failed— failed completely—to take note of all of those people and all of that work. That failure must come to an end today and it must come to an end now. We need the political courage and the vision post 1999 to deliver on what we seek to achieve. 

For me, the term 'Parliament' is important, and I accept that I have moved my position on this. I was persuaded by the Deputy Minister for economy, who's persuaded me of many things in the past, I'm afraid—trouble is never far away—that the term 'Senedd' was identifiable, in a very similar way to the way that Dai Lloyd has described. However, I am persuaded. I have no objection, I should say, to the use of the term 'Senedd' in both Welsh and English. But it has become clear to me as this debate has evolved that people want us to use both languages equally, and those for whom Welsh is not their first language want us to use the term 'Parliament' and not simply the term 'Senedd'. This is not our institution. It is an institution that belongs to the people that we represent. We have an absolute responsibility to ensure that everybody feels equally represented by this institution and within this institution. And, for me, that makes it absolutely clear that this is a Parliament for Wales, for everyone in Wales; it is our Senedd, Senedd Cymru, but it is a Parliament and a Senedd, representing everybody equally, and we need to be able to do that and do that in the title of this institution. 

I listened to the comments made by my good friend from Pontypridd, and I read the report from the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee on how we will go about making this change, and I have to say, it summed up all the difficulties with constitutional change in Wales over the last 20 years. There seems to be a dispute over whether we're able to do everything we need to do because of the 2006 legislation and the rest of it. We need to be able to move more quickly, more clearly and more simply to make this change, and we need to do so along the lines and in the time frame that is being introduced by the Presiding Officer.

And when we do create this Parliament, we call ourselves Members of it. I've heard all sorts of different arguments, and I think we've really got to move away from playground banter in this debate. This is a serious, mature debate about who we are and what we are as a nation. I want to be a Member of the Welsh Parliament, an MWP, which fits well into people's understanding and expectations of what people like us are described as. People are used to MSPs, MEPs and MPs, and people will become used to MWPs. They may not be at the moment, but it's clear that we need to do that. 

My time is up, Deputy Presiding Officer, but I do wish to seek your indulgence as well. A Parliament is more than a gathering and more than a letterhead, it's more than a title. We need to have the Members and the legitimacy of an electoral system that elects those Members to make this place work effectively and to be the Parliament that the people want it to be. I regret that Plaid Cymru have put forward their debate and their motion this afternoon, which seeks to divide rather than to unify. I hope that my party will play its part in ensuring that we do have the numbers here to do the job, elected in such a way as to provide for equality and accountability. We have neither of those things at the moment, but if we are to create a Parliament that will be rooted not just in the legislation of this country but in the hearts and the minds of the people of this country, then we need the political courage to take that argument out, to make the changes, to pass the law, to create that Parliament. Thank you very much. 

I agree with the remarks the Member just made as regards being a Welsh Parliament and being Members of a Welsh Parliament. I only regret that he apparently said the opposite in the process that led to the Bill coming to us in the form it does today, because in the Llywydd's explanatory memorandum, it states, in summary:

'The purpose of the Bill is to: rename the Assembly to "Senedd".'

It then gives two other points:

'lower the minimum voting age', and then deliver a number of other reforms.

We will be opposing this Bill today, because we do not support renaming the Assembly 'Senedd'. We are not convinced—at least of yet, although I share the views of some of the particularly engaged Members who came to the session we had jointly with the Youth Parliament. I, too, was impressed; I don't rule out being convinced of the case for changing the voting age at a later point, but we are not as yet. And the other reforms—we have mixed views on those.

I was struck, a couple of years ago, by the response when Andrew R.T. Davies, then leader of the Welsh Conservatives, or at least the Assembly group, said that the Conservatives supported renaming this institution 'Welsh Parliament'. And there was, I thought, a surprising amount of media pick-up on that. I didn't think it was a terribly controversial thing to say, but the party having been, perhaps, more sceptical of devolution, at least previously, it was seen as significant. I don't see it as controversial that we should be called 'the Welsh Parliament', because that is what we are. We've had, since the last referendum, full legislative powers, at least on the areas we do, and we make laws—that's what a legislature does—and we also raise taxes. Before, I think we regulated what local councils were doing in terms of how council tax and business rates were raised, but I sat on the Finance Committee for the two new taxes we brought in, and we now also have the Welsh rates of income tax. So, I think a body that passes laws and raises significant amounts of taxes is a Parliament and it should be called such. I only regret that that is not proposed on the face of this Bill. Yes, I'll give way.

I'd like to know the Brexit Party's position—. We know the Brexit Party's position on Europe but not much else. Is it the Brexit Party's position now to rule out ever taking up the UKIP policy of abolishing the Assembly? So, you're absolutely not in favour of ever abolishing the Assembly.

We're not in favour of abolishing the Assembly.

Now, on this language point, we had a consultation, and the Llywydd's explanatory memorandum tells us that 53 per cent thought that the name 'Senedd' described well what this institution does. The explanatory memorandum does not tell us that the consultation showed—or not that I have read within it, and I have looked reasonably carefully—that 73 per cent of the consultation said we should be called a 'Welsh Parliament'. And we have in the National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Act from 2012—it states the National Assembly for Wales shall have two official languages, English and Welsh, and they should be treated equally. That is not the case in the Bill as it stands. 'Senedd' is given priority over 'Welsh Parliament', and the English version of the Bill says 'Senedd' rather than 'Welsh Parliament'. I believe that is wrong, and I believe it is a real concern that people out there aren't as engaged as we would like with this place. And that, I'm afraid, is more true amongst people who do not speak Welsh than those who do.

I will just cite the leading comment on the consultation we carried out in respect of whether we should have a monolingual Welsh name:

'Great care should be taken to ensure that it reflects all the population of Wales rather than continue to reinforce the perception of the Senedd as being for a Welsh speaking elite.'

I regret that the Bill has come forward in the way that it has.

In terms of other measures that we have, the Llywydd said in her speech that Members generally wanted to build a new relationship with the Electoral Commission. We do not. We consider that the Electoral Commission is not an effective or strong organisation. We are concerned that it does not follow due process and does not act fairly. Indeed, I would associate myself with the Metropolitan Police's remarks about the Electoral Commission, which they have recently made, and I'm not convinced that having a Llywydd's committee here along with the problems other Members have identified would assist with the Electoral Commission and its positioning. We believe it needs to be replaced. We are sorry that the bulk of this Bill—we do not support two of the key elements and a number of the other reforms. Therefore, we'll be voting against the general principles today.

I'll start with the extension of the franchise. As far as eligibility of residents to vote is concerned, I acknowledge there are some very strong views on both sides of the argument to lower the voting age to 16. From a personal point of view, in principle, I really don't object to the proposal to lower the voting age, but I do think it's contradictory, while we have so many activities that are prohibited until young people reach the age of 18. Both UK and Welsh Governments have concluded that there are a number of things that under 18s may not fully understand the implications of undertaking and so have legislated to protect them. If we're to maintain the principle that there are some things that the law shouldn't allow young people to do until they're 18, how can we also be exercising the principle that people who are 16 are mature enough to be part of the process that decides what they are and what they're not mature enough to partake in? It's contradictory.

Contradictory messages are also being sent to 16 to 18-year-olds right now in other ways. On the one hand, there's a whole list of things, such as intimate piercing, drinking alcohol et cetera, that this place and others have deemed young people too immature to decide for themselves to do under the age of 18. But, on the other hand, this Bill is telling them that they're mature enough to vote to decide who runs the country. I mean, which one is it?

As far as the other elements of the Bill are concerned, I can support the principle of changing the name of the Assembly, but only on the basis that the new name makes it easier for the people of Wales to understand what this place actually does. It was unhelpful in the first place that Wales's elected Chamber was called an Assembly, and I agree with what Alun Davies said earlier about devolution and about the name change for the actual Members of this place. Wales, effectively, got an elected Chamber that amounted to a poor relation's parliament, and both Wales and Scotland were sent on a supposedly evolutionary path that really meant both places would have to fight for governance to be devolved. It was unhelpful. As we all know, devolution has now moved on. So, I understand and I am supportive of the proposal to change the name of the Assembly.

Now, I have no problem with the name 'Senedd' and I also note that section 2 permits 'Welsh Parliament' to be used in place of 'Senedd', reflecting that there are two official languages in Wales, but that's where the bilingualism ends. Sections 3 to 8 rename the organs of the Assembly in Welsh as well as its Members, which is perfectly logical, of course, but then the English translation is a potentially misleading mix of English and Welsh, for example the 'Senedd Commission' rather than 'Welsh Parliament Commission'. The name 'Senedd' is currently used as an alternative for 'Assembly', so when 'Welsh Parliament' is added into the mix, it may seem to some people that the 'Welsh Parliament' is an additional institution rather than just an alternate name. The new names of Members, the Commission et cetera could also lead to the misunderstanding that there's a Senedd and a Welsh Parliament, and the proposed new names set out in sections 3 to 8 don't make our roles or those of the bodies of this place any more understandable. And, yes, you can educate people, but the more unclear you make the names of the bodies and Members of this institution, the more taxpayers' money will be needed to educate the population.

The intention of the name change is to not only reflect the reality of the Assembly's current state as a proper legislature but to aid people's understanding of what we do here. The proposed name changes in sections 3 to 8 don't make it easy for the public to understand what this place and its Members actually do, and therefore don't make it more accessible to the public. 

I feel an opportunity to increase engagement by the public with this place is currently being missed by the Bill disengaging anyone who's not a Welsh speaker or isn't up with the lingo of this Assembly, that is the majority of the Welsh population, because there's an unequal focus on the name 'Senedd'. I would therefore ask the Presiding Officer why the decision has been made to use this mixture of Welsh and English in the supposedly English translation of the Welsh names in sections 3 to 8—[Interruption.] I'm on my last three words.

Will the Member take a point?

Yes, go on. 

Well, English, for a legislature, uses the French loanword 'parliament', and in Welsh we use the Latin loanword 'senedd'.

Well, thank you, but I don't really think that helps because the point I'm trying to make is that 'Senedd', although it's a perfectly acceptable word, it's not accessible for a lot of people. I mean, how many people out there actually instantly understand what 'Member of the Senedd' means? If you've been in connection with the Assembly for some time, yes, you might—you'll be familiar with the word, but—. This is about understandability and accessibility.

So, however, having said all that, I do actually support the general principles of the Bill, and with that, I'll finish.

I just want to speak very briefly about this Bill. I rise with a heavy heart to say that I'll be voting against the general principles today, not because I don't agree with most of what's in this Bill, as I've had many conversations with the Llywydd in the past, but because of this principle of extending the franchise to younger voters aged 16 and 17. And it's not because—[Interruption.] Well, that's not the case, and it's quite an assumption for you to draw on. I'm happy to take an intervention if you want to make one. But we know that having the opportunity to vote is one of the most important privileges in our society and the vote has provided men and women with real power, giving them the ability to topple governments, to turf out local councillors and politicians, to establish new parliaments, and decide our fortunes, of course, with regard to EU membership. And the way it's always worked in our democracy is that adults have the right to vote and children don't, and as has already been said, there's been a common accepted age of responsibility for most things, and that has been at the age of 18. Of course, when I was younger, even when I was 18, I wasn't able to vote—stand for elections, rather—[Interruption.]—because you have to be 21 to be able to stand for election, even though I was able to vote at 18. [Interruption.] I'll happily take an intervention.

I dare him to make that speech in front of the Youth Parliament.

You know what I find fascinating? I hear this challenge on a regular basis. When I go to schools and people ask me what my views are on this, and I explain to them—[Interruption.]—and I explain to them that my principal point is this: it's not that I'm necessarily against 16 and 17-year-olds having the vote, it's that I'm for a common age of responsibility in this country, and that's what we don't have at the moment, because we have different ages of responsibilities—[Interruption.]—for all sorts of different things—. I'll happily take an intervention.

Would you therefore be opposed to anybody under the age of 18 being allowed to join the British military?

I would happily be for a consistent age of responsibility. At the moment, that age of responsibility is deemed to be 18 for most things: for drinking, for example. Even for using sunbeds; we've legislated for that here in Wales, and, as a result of that, therefore, I think that it's recognised that young people below the age of 18, including in their mental abilities sometimes, are not fully developed—not everybody; we know that people develop at different rates. [Interruption.] We know that people develop at different rates, but the fact is that their skin doesn't develop at the—their skin isn't adult skin, which is why we try to protect them. And, at the end of the day, whilst we all know people who are fully mature at age 14, even, the reality is that you're more likely to have individuals who are fully developed at the age of 18. And it's for that reason—this reason of needing a common age of responsibility—that I think that we need to—[Interruption.]—that I think need to change things.

Now, if we're talking about people making the argument that we should be allowing young people to drink at the age of 18, because they're mature enough to make that decision, which is, I think, following the logic of everybody here, the way that people might want to go, I don't advocate that. I don't think we should be reducing the age at which young people can go and buy alcohol on their own. I don't think that we should be—[Interruption.] I don't think we should be reducing the age to 18, and that's why I think that 18 is the better age in terms of an age of responsibility, and it's the one that I would advocate.

And it's a fallacy to suggest that, if you don't have a vote, you can't influence politics, because the reality is that, as politicians, we do engage in our schools, we go into schools. When I ask them what their views are on whether they think they should be entitled to vote, not everybody says that they think that they're mature enough to make an informed decision. This is why political education, of course, is important, and education about our democracy. But the reality is that many people don't feel confident enough at that age and don't think that they ought to have that responsibility put on their shoulders. And those young people inform my views that I bring to the Chamber. The views of their parents and their grandparents, of course, who are interested in the views of young people too, help to shape the representations that I make to Ministers and others in this National Assembly too.

So, in terms of engagement with young people, you can still engage, you can still listen to them, we can still represent their views, even if they don't have a direct say in those elections by extending the franchise. So, let's have a common age of responsibility and some agreement and debate on what that common age ought to be, because I think that that's a more important debate than extending the franchise when we've got different ages for different responsibilities at the moment.

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

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and, in tabling this Bill, I’m very pleased that Alun Davies has confirmed that I did that in the honourable tradition of Keir Hardie's and Donald Dewar’s home rule tradition. I hadn’t realised when I tabled the Bill a few months ago that I was doing so in that tradition. But it is important constitutional legislation for us here in Wales, and thank you for acknowledging that and reminding us of our history in that regard.

I acknowledge and recognise that both Chairs and their reports had asked for more information, of course, and earlier this afternoon I have committed to giving as much as I can of additional information to be of use to the further scrutiny processes that will face us on the journey of this Bill. I'm very pleased to hear that the Counsel General has confirmed too that he will be in a position on a number of aspects to be giving additional information to meet the needs of the two relevant committees, and the Counsel General in his contribution has confirmed that the remit for the strategic group that will be leading on the work of changing the franchise will be announced and further details will be given to the Assembly before we go on to Stages 2 and 3.

The Counsel General in his contribution also confirmed the Government’s opinion that it isn’t the local government Bill that is the appropriate Bill to introduce the accountability of the Electoral Commission in legislation, but it’s this particular Bill that is most appropriate for doing that, and I agree with that. The point, of course, in terms of devolution of the work of the Electoral Commission and making them accountable in terms of funding and general accountability to this Assembly, is that the same work is ongoing in the Scottish Parliament at the moment and there’s legislation currently before the Parliament in Scotland to introduce this accountability by 2021 as well. I think it would be good for us to run this process concurrently, and certainly the Electoral Commission is eager for that to happen in Wales and in Scotland at the same time.

Thank you to David Melding for his contribution to the debate and being so enthusiastic and robust in favour of lowering the voting age to those aged 16 and 17. That was also shared by Dai Lloyd. Some in the Chamber were slightly less enthusiastic on these particular points, but do remember that this Assembly in a previous vote had supported the principle of votes at 16 and 17 years of age, and I am confident that that majority continues in terms of introducing votes at 16 and 17.

On changing the name of the Assembly, there was a divergence of opinions. Some had changed their opinion from one debate to the next, and acknowledged that in their contributions. I am pleased—. With regard to one specific point on legislative competence on the change of name, I’m pleased that the Counsel General has placed on record his opinion that it’s unlikely on this point that there could be an Order in Council to provide clarity on the issue of competence, so that is therefore unlikely to be a way of explaining competency in a different manner than we have at present.

It’s clear from what has been put forward in contributions this afternoon that there’s a divergence of opinion in terms of changing the name. It’s not an issue for me to table any amendments on that change, particularly because the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee hasn’t put forward any recommendations of its own on that issue, but I’m sure that there will be amendments in that regard as we move towards Stages 2 and 3.

To conclude, therefore, this afternoon, I want to thank my fellow Commissioners for their commitment to collaborating—

Would you give way?

Of course, yes.

I appreciate the way that you have responded to this debate, but there are changes of opinion and differences of opinion across the Chamber, but there is also agreement across the Chamber. Would it be possible for you as Llywydd to hold discussions outwith the legislative process between Members to see where there is space available to reach agreement, and to have broader cross-party agreement across the Chamber before this Bill goes through the legislative process?

Of course, I recognise the importance of doing that, and, if I may say so, I did try to do that before tabling the legislation in the first instance by holding discussions between parties, with individual Members as well, to see where the supermajority lay. And it’s clear that we need to continue to do that work, and I would be very pleased to collaborate with everyone in this place to find a way of achieving that supermajority of 40 Members that will be needed to vote in favour of any change to the name, any change to the franchise, when it comes to passing and reaching Stage 4 in this place. In saying all of that, it's appropriate to remind Members that Stages 2 and 3 will happen in the autumn term, and there will be amendments put forward at that time. Do bear in mind the need for legislation of this kind to have a majority of 40 Members out of 60 before you table any amendments. Do continue to discuss among yourselves the issues where there isn't full consensus at the moment, and I'm sure that we can see, in due course, that this piece of constitutional legislation, which is interesting and important, will receive the approval of this Assembly. Thank you for your contributions this afternoon, and we will move forward to Stages 2 and 3 in the autumn. 

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.