---

Constitutional Law

I do not intend to detain the House for long on this subject. I feel something of an interloper in these affairs, but as various right hon. and hon. Members will know, including a number of former Ministers on the Government Benches, I have ventured forth on Welsh affairs on a number of occasions, imperfectly but enthusiastically. As a Member of this Parliament, I of course take an interest in the whole of the Kingdom. The background to this debate is the Welsh Language Act 1967 and the Welsh Language Act 1993. It is instrumental to consider those for a moment in the context of the order. The order transfers competence, but it seems to me, as my hon. Friend the Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan), the shadow Secretary of State, pointed out, and as the right hon. Member for Torfaen (Mr. Murphy) made clear in a typically splendid contribution, important that we do so in a collaborative fashion and with what the latter described as a light touch. To that end, I want to draw the attention of right hon. and hon. Members to the debate on the 1993 Act, which began, as they will remember, in the House of Lords. There are two aspects of that debate that I think are pertinent to tonight's considerations. The first was the comment made by the Minister who introduced the Bill. He said:""The Bill provides for the implementation of this principle"—" that, by the way, is the principle that the Welsh and English languages should be treated on a basis of equality—""in ways which are appropriate in the circumstances and reasonably practicable".—[Official Report, House of Lords, 19 January 1993; Vol. 541, c. 836.]" That abiding principle of reasonableness seems essential to our considerations of the possibilities that might arise from the transfer of competence in the way the order plans. As I said, the right hon. Member for Torfaen made that point very clearly. The three issues I would therefore like to raise are to some degree amplifications of the remarks made by the shadow Secretary of State. It is important that we consider both the disincentive effect on companies or bodies that might want to locate in Wales and the effect on organisations already situated there of any additional cost burden. I hope that that will be considered. That is certainly a reflection of some of the less favourable sentiments that have been expressed in Wales on the back of the publication of the order. As hon. Members on both sides of the House will know, reaction has been mixed. Part of that mixed reaction has been founded on concerns about the possible additional burdens on the organisations I mentioned. The second question relates to the cost of implementation—the shadow Secretary of State raised the issue of appeals. It is inconceivable that there has been no modelling in Government of the likely costs of implementation. I appreciate that the absence of an impact assessment results in part from the very nature of the process that we are now enjoying, but none the less it would be interesting to hear what modelling has taken place. It is inconceivable that the Secretary of State has not taken a view on the likely cost that might arise from the measure. The third issue relates to the test of reasonableness. What test of reasonableness might be applied? What constraint might be placed on where this order could end up? The possible destinations could be very different, as the right hon. Member for Torfaen implied in his speech. We need to apply a test of reasonableness to this provision, and I hope that we might hear more about that from the Minister when he sums up. As I said, I periodically and with some trepidation intervene on Welsh affairs in the knowledge that many other hon. Members know far more about them than I do, including you, Madam Deputy Speaker, if I may say so. None the less, it is important that hon. Members who represent constituencies far from Wales show an appropriate level of concern about the affairs of this House and of the Assembly, and the relationship between the two.