---

Government of Wales Bill

On the amendment dealing with whether we use the word ““parliament”” or ““senedd”” to describe the present Assembly, I consider this a matter of considerable principle. Members of the Committee may ask, ““What is in a name?””. As Shakespeare put it,"““A rose by any other name would smell as sweet””." But not when one is dealing with parliamentary draftsmanship and not when names are symbolic of the hopes and aspirations of a whole community. That is, essentially, what the amendment is about. I shall make my submissions briefly. First, there is a very solid precedent for the use of the word ““senedd””, at least in its English form. In the legislation of 1978, which preceded the referendum of 1979—the Committee will remember that the Act of Parliament set up the very structure of that institution but it was up to the Welsh people to accept it or not and in the event they did not—the term used for the body was not ““assembly”” or ““parliament””, but ““senate””. Therefore, one should always remember that there is that solid and respectable precedent to be built upon. Secondly, I do not believe there is anything pejorative in the use of the word ““senate””. Some people in Wales have argued that it has indeed an unfortunate connotation, coming from the Latin senex, meaning an old man and, therefore, that it depicts a body of senile people. I am quite sure that the average age of Members in the Welsh Assembly at present is somewhat younger than that of both Houses at Westminster. We also have the precedent of the Scotland Act 1998. The Scots achieved a parliament. As the jurisdiction, particularly the legislative jurisdiction, of the Welsh body was not exactly on a par with Scotland, it might be argued that that distinction should be drawn. But we are now dealing with a Bill that closes that gap considerably. Part 3 of the Bill will enable substantial legislative decisions to be made on a fairly regular basis. Part 4 will create a full-blown legislature. It will be up to the Welsh people whether or not they opt for it, but that option will be there. That enabling legislation will be a fact and a reality if this Bill passes. Furthermore, there have been, as Members of this House are well aware, very many home rule Bills over the past century or so—I think they go back to about 1880. In each case, as far as I know, there was a reference, not to an assembly, but to a parliament. Therefore, bearing in mind that in 1978 a body that did not have half the authority held by the present body was called a senate, it would be retrograde and strange to adhere to the term ““assembly””. I heard, with great respect, the contribution of the noble Lord, Lord Anderson of Swansea. However, the short point is that there is no such term of art in the nomenclature ““assembly”” as to tie this House to any particular form of constitution. It is a general term. Again, it seems that if we adopt this amendment—I doubt whether the Government will be so completely accommodating—it would not do more than show respect for the hopes and aspirations now generally held by a majority in Wales as to a form of government that would be worthy of the Welsh nation.