---

Legislative Programme and Budget Statement (Wales)

Yes, I hear what the hon. Gentleman says, which makes it even more perplexing that when introducing the 25% cuts across all Departments the Chancellor did not take that into account in Wales. Therefore, by definition, Wales was hit hardest—[ Interruption. ] Yes, of course, it is. It has to be. The logic of the argument is absolutely unimpeachable, and some allowance should have been made for that. However, there is recognition of it now, so we need to build on that and get something done. As we know, it is estimated that convergence will cost Wales about £300 million a year. At the least, there should be a Barnett floor to prevent that from happening, something described by the Holtham report as an interim measure before fuller reform of the formula. We and others across the board want to look at a needs-based formula, something that I am sure will be ongoing. It has been referred to so many times in this Committee that I shall not dwell on it now. There is a contrast between enacting the Calman commission recommendations and where we are with regard to this commission, but I shall take things in good faith and hope that we can move forward expeditiously. As for the police reform Bill, I am not at all impressed by the idea of elected police chiefs. I am concerned that, in some way, the process would become politicised. We all know that policing is by consent, and that consent will break down if it becomes politicised. I hope therefore that such points will be discussed. There is a danger of going down the politicisation road and one thing that we can say about the police service is that it is not politically motivated, despite the incidents when the miners were on strike. We will not go there now, but we know that the police service is respected as non-political, and we must at all costs keep that position in the interests of preserving the all-important issue of policing by consent.