Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 3:45 pm on 15 December 2021.
I'll keep my remarks brief in this debate, but needless to say that I will be voting against the motion on the order paper today. And that's not because I don't believe that devolution should exist; I campaigned vigorously for the further powers for the Senedd in the referendum back in 2011. But, having lived through an experience where we had the dreadful legislative competence Order system, which was around in my first term in the Senedd, I can tell you this, Mr ab Owen and everybody else who has contributed to the debate: the reality is the LCM system is much fairer and much more respectful of devolution than ever the LCO system was, which preceded it.
Now, we must look at LCMs as tools that can be used effectively by the Welsh Government to expedite the implementation of its policies. That is one of the reasons why LCMs sometimes come forward, and, as Huw Irranca-Davies has quite rightly said, they can be used entirely appropriately in that way in order to achieve a Government's policy objectives. In addition to that, of course, the UK Government is entitled sometimes to legislate on behalf of the whole of the United Kingdom, and it did so on behalf of the people of Wales in spite of the fact that the majority of politicians in the Senedd at the time wanted to stop Brexit, and that, I think, is what has clouded the views of many people who are taking part in this debate today on the LCM process that exists. Because the reality is that, unfortunately, because of the hostile views and the deliberate attempts to thwart Brexit from many of the political parties represented in the previous Senedd, there were more rows than there would have been about the use of LCMs in order to legislate.
And, of course, it is not true, Heledd Fychan, to suggest that this legislation is not being scrutinised effectively and that it's not being scrutinised by people representing Wales. It is being scrutinised. Any legislation that is undertaken by the UK Parliament is scrutinised by far more people than are scrutinising legislation passing through the Senedd. We have 650 MPs, 800 and odd members of the House of Lords, and don't forget either that there are people representing Wales who are representing people in Parliament in both the Lords and the Commons. So, the people of Wales are having a say on these matters and there are opportunities then for there to be a further discussion and debate here in the Senedd through our processes.
Now, where I would agree is that I do think, as with all legislative processes, that there are things that could and should, quite rightly, be done to improve the LCM processes, especially around the time that is available in order to scrutinise. And as Huw Irranca-Davies quite rightly has pointed out, there are times also when the information accompanying LCMs, the memorandums that accompany LCMs, could be improved. I'm very much with the LJC committee in terms of wanting to see improvements on that front, but it is a mistake to say that the LCM process is one that tramps all over devolution. It does not. It is a tool to respect devolution. That's why it was written into the Government of Wales Act as it was, and it is certainly a darn sight better than its predecessor.
If I can just say this also, the Senedd legislates on a range of different matters. Sometimes, the majority of people in north Wales and representing seats in north Wales vote against the decisions that are taken by politicians predominantly from the south in the Senedd. I don't baulk too much about that. I don't suggest that we need a process that allows for some respect of the fact that people in north Wales might disagree and their representatives might disagree. I accept that that is democracy. And we must respect the fact that the UK Parliament remains sovereign in the UK, across the whole of the UK. And of course devolution must be respected, but we must not forget the fact that the UK Parliament remains sovereign. So, it is for this reason and the others that I've cited that I'll be voting against this motion on the order paper, and would suggest that others should do likewise. Thank you.