We now move to group 6, which is a group of amendments that relate to disqualification. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 88, and I call on the Llywydd to move and speak to the lead amendment and other amendments in the group. Llywydd. 

Amendment 88 (Elin Jones) moved.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I move amendment 88, which is the lead amendment in this group. It is a technical amendment resultant from amendment 89, and I will discuss that in due time.

But I will start by asking Members to support the most significant amendment I have in this group, which is amendment 89, and a consequential amendment, namely amendment 91, which will disqualify Members of the Scottish Parliament, Northern Ireland Assembly and the European Parliament from serving in the Assembly, whilst still allowing them to stand for election to the Senedd.

Following amendments to the Bill at Stage 2, members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords could stand for election to the Senedd, but would be disqualified from serving in the Senedd, whilst MSPs, MLAs and MEPs would be able to both stand for election and to serve as Members of this Senedd. I am aware the Counsel General has noted during Stage 2 proceedings that it would be possible to disqualify MSPs and MLAs from serving through the disqualification Order. However, as I said during the Stage 2 debate, I believe that it would be better to note clearly on the face of the Bill that MSPs, MLAs and MEPs are disqualified from serving in the Assembly. This provides clarity that a person cannot hold a dual electoral mandate. The Assembly Commission does not believe that there is justification for enabling MSPs, MLAs and MEPs to serve in this Senedd, whilst MPs, members of the House of Lords and councillors are disqualified from serving here. This amendment will provide for MSPs, MLAs and MEPs to stand for election to the Senedd, but they would have to give up their membership of the other legislature in order to serve here.

And turning now to the disqualification of councillors, as I mentioned during Stage 2, the Assembly Commission does not have a position as to whether or not local authority councillors should be allowed to serve as Assembly Members or not. The Assembly Commission chose not to consult on this issue, and chose not to address it in the Bill as introduced. This reflects the fact that the fourth Assembly's Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee had not come to a firm conclusion, although the committee considered the practice of double jobbing as an Assembly Member and local authority member. Instead, the committee suggested a formal review of this issue. I'm not aware that such a review has been conducted since then.

I also ask Members to support my technical amendments 88, 90, 92, 98 and 99. Amendment 88 is consequential to amendment 99. Amendment 99 removes the current list of disqualifications from standing for election to the Senedd in Schedule 3 of the Bill, and reproduces the information in tabular form, ordered alphabetically. The new table also includes specific references to statutory deputies of disqualifying offices in order to disqualify such statutory deputies from standing for election to the Senedd too. Amendments 90, 92, 94 and 98 all remove redundant provisions in the Bill and the Government of Wales Act, the National Assembly for Wales Commissioner for Standards Measure 2009 and the Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Act 2019. And amendment 94 makes changes to the National Assembly for Wales Commissioner for Standards Measure and the public services ombudsman Act.

My only amendments in this group are amendments 25 and 31 and they would, if adopted, reverse the Welsh Government's amendment at Stage 2, which disqualifies councillors from being returned as Members of the Assembly. I think it's very important that we only restrict democratic rights the bare minimum, and I think there's a clear reason to say people should not serve in more than one legislature. That I understand. But councils are not legislatures. There is, perhaps, a possible objection that a member of a council would have a conflict of interest in our proceedings at certain times. I don't dismiss this; I think that is a possibility. But they would also bring another view of the work of a very close partner in terms of government, and we have our own mechanisms to deal with conflicts of interest. So, I do not think that this is a profound point that warrants disqualification. I have to say that, myself, I don't think that it's ideal to be a councillor and to be a Member of this place, but I think that matter can be resolved by the electorate and that's where it should stand.

Some people have said that you can't do more than one job. Well, the job of a councillor is not a full-time occupation. Indeed, we try to recruit people who are in various walks of life and employment to be councillors. It is, however, a considerable commitment. That, clearly, is recognised in the allowances that are attracted to the post of councillor, and I think we all admire the work that councillors do in terms of delivering public services, the planning system; they are really quite onerous responsibilities.

But, you know, in our parliamentary system—and I don't think anyone here proposes that we shift dramatically to a congressional model, where there is complete separation between legislature and Executive—we, in effect, have double jobbing, because, in front of me there, on the front bench, is the Welsh Government. Now, presumably, that's an arduous job, and I don't say this in a sarcastic way, because I don't doubt it; I think that it is a tremendous responsibility in terms of the time commitment and the sacrifices that you have to make to serve in Executive office. But you do that and you function as Assembly Members. So, if you can combine those roles, I think it has to be said that it is at least possible to combine the role of councillor and Assembly Member. I give way.

Just as someone who stood down as a councillor in 2017, having served a year serving out my term as a councillor while an Assembly Member, I have to say that I disagree. I found that some of the decisions that we took here with regard to local government—the local government White Paper discussions, for example—it made sense to separate out—very much separate out—those different roles. And, of course, you could take a role as a Cabinet member in a local authority and a member of the Welsh Government, and you could have those four roles that he's identified. I think that that would be absurd. But, actually, if we look at the basics of it, being a councillor and being an Assembly Member, I really feel, having had that experience, that those two roles do not mix.

Well, I'm not sure that's a profound argument based on principle. I think that it's a practical argument, and it's one that you would probably make quite successfully with much of the electorate, but that's where it should rest. If you had executive responsibility in local government, I think it would be very difficult—[Interruption.] It would be very difficult to serve here. But I think that it should be for our procedures to deal with those matters.

In terms of two jobs and second jobs, many, many Assembly Members here have a second job in being landlords, yet you all take part in housing debates. Now, what's—[Interruption.] Well, I'm sorry, if you are a landlord and you rent out properties in the private sector, that is an occupation, and yet everybody here is happy to debate housing policy, Rent Smart Wales, but, when it comes to local government, you want to restrict choice, and it's not good. Thank you, David.

Well, I do think that the Member makes a good point in that many of us have additional responsibilities that we take on, which come with very considerable time commitments. And we do that as part of service that enriches our vocation here. I am a longstanding member of two governing bodies of special schools, for instance.

So, I think the point is that we have got to be careful about using law—it's the most dramatic thing that we can do—to restrict the right of the electorate to make the choices they think are best for them. There's a very profound reason to disallow people from being in more than one legislature, but I do not think that that principle is strong in terms of justifying exclusion at local government level from being a Member of this place. However, many of us personally would find it difficult to do those two roles and would not choose to take them. It's a matter for the elected Member and the electorate, in my view.

Therefore, I urge you to reverse the amendments brought in by the Government. And, as the Llywydd said, this, again, was not dealt with at introduction, it's not had a full examination. The fourth Assembly was quite split on this issue when it was examined by the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, because—in my view, anyway, as the then Chair—we could not find that firm principle that absolutely did draw a line. It doesn't. We're making a political choice here, and I don't think we should make it; we should leave it to the electorate. 

Can I call on the Counsel General?

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Government amendments in this group are of a largely technical character.

As Members will recall, even before this Bill, the Government of Wales Act 2006 already contained provision about the position of Members of Parliament elected to the Senedd and Senedd Members elected to the House of Commons. At Stage 2, we added new provision applying similar principles to members of local authorities and mirroring the language of the existing provision within the Government of Wales Act. In our consideration of those provisions, we identified that there were, however, missed consequential amendments that the UK Parliament should have made at the time of the Wales Act 2017, and so, given the Assembly's consideration of other disqualification issues, these amendments take this opportunity to correct those aspects. And I invite the Senedd to support those amendments.

Turning to the Llywydd's amendments 89, 90 and 91, the Government supports these. They would have the effect of preventing double jobbing, so that a Member, say, of the Scottish Parliament, could stand for but not be a Member of this place. As I said at Stage 2, and as the Llywydd acknowledged in her remarks, the Government had envisaged making provision to this effect by way of Order in Council, but we are happy to support the Llywydd's argument that it's more appropriate that this appears on the face of the primary legislation. So, I ask Members to support the Government's amendments 73 to 76, and express the hope that they'll also support the Llywydd's amendments as well.

David's amendments 25 and 31 seek to remove the provisions that would stop councillors taking up the office of Assembly Member alongside their role as members of principal councils. I don't think it is appropriate that a Member of the Senedd should also be able to sit as a member of a principal council in Wales. Each new phase of the devolution settlement has increased the powers of the Senedd, including, as Hefin David indicated in his contribution, powers in setting the legislative and financial framework for local authorities. There has been a significant shift since 1999 and what might have been appropriate then is not appropriate today. The current position of dual membership is a clear conflict of interest in decisions relating to local government, including its overall funding as part of the Senedd budget process. The Senedd also makes wide-ranging decisions about the functions of councils, their voting systems and other structural matters. 

At one point it time, it was deemed appropriate for Members of Parliament to also be Assembly Members and vice versa. That time has gone; this place is a fully functioning legislature with powers across a broad range of subject areas. We cannot expect our Members to undertake two representative roles, making decisions on behalf of the Senedd while at the same time representing a local authority. The Welsh Government has consulted twice previously on this issue and there is support for this proposal. Likewise, as Members have indicated, the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee recognised that issue in 2015. And, whilst I take David's point, it also did highlight the potential conflicts of interest and time that holding those dual roles presents. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

Thank you. I call on the Llywydd to reply to the debate. 

Just very briefly, Deputy Presiding Officer, I'd like to thank the Counsel General for his support to the amendments that will disqualify, on the face of the Bill, Members of the Scottish Parliament, Northern Ireland Assembly and European Parliament from serving as Members of this Senedd in addition to those other roles earlier mentioned.

And then there are the amendments introduced by David Melding. The disqualification of councillors has been debated this afternoon. I would just repeat that neither I nor the Commission included that disqualification in the original legislation presented because there was no mandate for us to do so. So, it is a matter for the Assembly this afternoon to decide whether that disqualification should remain on the face of the Bill or not.

Thank you. The question is amendment 88 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Amendment 88 is agreed. 

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

David Melding, amendment 23.

Not moved.

Not moved. Thank you. 

Amendment 23 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 131.

Amendment 131 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

Thank you. If amendment 131 is agreed, amendment 24 will fall. The question is amendment 131 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We therefore proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, no abstentions, 12 against. Therefore, amendment 131 is agreed and amendment 24 falls.

Amendment 131: For: 41, Against: 12, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

Amendment 24 fell.

David Melding, amendment 25.

Amendment 25 (David Melding) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 25 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object. We therefore proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 15, no abstentions, 39 against, therefore amendment 25 is not agreed.

Amendment 25: For: 15, Against: 39, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

Llywydd, amendment 89.

Amendment 89 (Elin Jones) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 89 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, amendment 89 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Llywydd, amendment 90.

Amendment 90 (Elin Jones) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 90 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object. We therefore proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 42, no abstentions, 12 against. Therefore, the amendment is agreed.

Amendment 90: For: 42, Against: 12, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 26.

Not moved.

Not moved. Thank you.

Amendment 26 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 132.

Amendment 132 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

Thank you. The question is that amendment 132 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, no abstentions, 13 against. Therefore, amendment 132 is agreed.

Amendment 132: For: 41, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

Llywydd, amendment 91.

Amendment 91 (Elin Jones)) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 91 be agreed to. Does any Member object? Amendment 91 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Llywydd, amendment 92.

Amendment 92 (Elin Jones) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 92 be agreed to. Does any Member object? Amendment 92 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Llywydd, amendment 98.

Amendment 98 (Elin Jones) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 98 be agreed to. Does any Member object? Amendment 98 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

I propose that amendments 59, 60 and 58, which appear consecutively on the marshalled list, are disposed of en bloc given their nature. Do any Members object to that? No. Therefore, David Melding, amendments 59, 60 and 58.

Not moved.

Not moved. Right, okay.

Amendments 59, 60 and 58 (David Melding) not moved.

David Melding, amendment 61.

Not moved.

Not moved.

Amendment 61 (David Melding) not moved.

David Melding, amendment 62.

Not moved.

Amendment 62 (David Melding) not moved.

David Melding, amendment 63.

Not moved.

Thank you.

Amendment 63 (David Melding) not moved.

Llywydd, amendment 99.

Amendment 99 (Elin Jones) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 99 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, amendment 99 is agreed.

Amendment agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Counsel General, amendment 73.

Amendment 73 (Jeremy Miles) moved.

Move.

As there is an amendment to amendment 73, that amendment will be disposed of first. David Melding, amendment 73A.

Not moved.

Not moved.

Amendment 73A (David Melding) not moved.

The question is that amendment 73 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, we'll proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 50, no abstentions, four against. Therefore amendment 73 is agreed.

Amendment 73: For: 50, Against: 4, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 27.

Not moved.

Not moved. Thank you.

Amendment 27 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 133.

Amendment 133 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

The question is that amendment 133 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We therefore proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 42, no abstentions, 12 against. Therefore, amendment 133 is agreed.

Amendment 133: For: 42, Against: 12, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 28.

Not moved.

Thank you.

Amendment 28 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 134.

Amendment 134 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

Thank you. The question is that amendment 134 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I therefore proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, no abstentions, 13 against, therefore the amendment is agreed. 

Amendment 134: For: 41, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

Carwyn, amendment 134. No, I've just done that one, haven't I? David Melding, amendment 29. Sorry.

Not moved.

Not moved, thank you. I'll change my bifocals, I think. 

Amendment 29 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 135.

Amendment 135 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

The question is that amendment 135 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I therefore proceed to an electronic vote, and open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, no abstentions, 13 against. Therefore the amendment is agreed. 

Amendment 135: For: 41, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 30.

Not moved.

Not moved, thank you. 

Amendment 30 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 136. 

Amendment 136 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

The question is that amendment 136 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, proceed to an electronic vote and open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 40, no abstentions, 13 against, therefore amendment 136 is agreed. 

Amendment 136: For: 40, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 31. 

Amendment 31 (David Melding) moved.

I move.

Moved, thank you. If amendment 31 is agreed, amendments 32, 137, 33, 138, 34, 139, 35, 140, 36, 141, 37, 142, 38, 143, 39, 144, 74, 75 and 76 are all going to fall. The question is that amendment 31 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Object. Therefore, we'll proceed to an electronic vote, and open the vote. Close the vote. For the amendment 15, no abstentions, 39 against, therefore amendment 31 is not agreed.

Amendment 31: For: 15, Against: 39, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

David Melding, amendment 32.

Not moved. 

Not moved, thank you. 

Amendment 32 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 137.

Amendment 137 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

Thank you. The question is that amendment 137 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Right. We proceed to an electronic vote, and open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, no abstentions, 13 against, therefore amendment 137 is agreed. 

Amendment 137: For: 41, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 33. 

Not moved.

Not moved. Thank you. 

Amendment 33 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 138.

Amendment 138 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

Thank you. The question is that amendment 138 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Therefore, proceed to an electronic vote, and open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, no abstentions, 13 against, therefore amendment 138 is agreed.

Amendment 138: For: 41, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 34. 

Not moved. 

Amendment 34 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 139.

Amendment 139 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

The question is that amendment 139 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Proceed to an electronic vote and open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, no abstentions, 13 against, therefore amendment 139 is agreed. 

Amendment 139: For: 41, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 35. 

Not moved. 

Not moved, thank you. 

Amendment 35 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 140.

Amendment 140 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

The question is that amendment 140 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Proceed to an electronic vote, and open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 41, no abstentions, 13 against, therefore amendment 140 is agreed. 

Amendment 140: For: 41, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been agreed

David Melding, amendment 36.

Not moved.

Thank you. 

Amendment 36 (David Melding) not moved.

Carwyn Jones, amendment 141.

Amendment 141 (Carwyn Jones) moved.

Formally.

The question is that amendment 141 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Proceed to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. For the motion 40, no abstentions, 13 against, therefore amendment 141 is agreed. 

Amendment 141: For: 40, Against: 13, Abstain: 0

Motion has been agreed