Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Chris Bryant (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 11 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill.


Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill

I think ““Sceptical”” might be the hon. Gentleman's middle name. I see he is smiling—I have managed to get a smile out of him; that must be a first. He is now trying not to smile. Now he is laughing. The only point I would make to the hon. Gentleman is that there is no academic evidence, and probably never will be. All that we have is anecdotal evidence. I merely offer my own evidence—I have not seen my work load diminish compared with that of my predecessor, who did not have a Welsh Assembly to contend with. The hon. Gentleman is right that a constituency with a smaller number of people might mean that the Member concerned has fewer people contacting them, but it might also mean that access to the Member for constituents is more difficult and that it involves considerable travelling around the constituency. Anyway, that is a matter for a different debate. The right hon. and learned Member for Kensington referred to the issue of whether there should be an English Parliament. He is right to argue that there is a danger that we would end up with two Governments. Who would take possession of Downing street? Presumably, we would have a set of English Ministers, in addition to British Ministers, and so on. I am not sure that is the direction in which British voters want to go. The hon. Member for West Worcestershire referred to the fact that on the one occasion when we had a referendum on whether there should be devolved responsibilities within the English regions, people decided, largely because they did not want more politicians, not to go down that route. In parenthesis, let me say briefly that I hear regularly, not from the right hon. and learned Member for Kensington but from others, that this is the mother of Parliaments. I again say that John Bright meant that England was the mother of Parliaments and that it was a very difficult and complicated birth. The effortless English superiority that sometimes arises in these debates is unfortunate. The right hon. and learned Gentleman referred to Wales, and I was reminded of a story, which may not be apocryphal, of Charlotte Church singing before George W. Bush when he was President—a meeting of two great minds, obviously. When Charlotte Church was introduced to the President, he asked, ““Where are you from?”” She said, ““Wales.”” He asked, ““What state is that in?”” , and she said ““Terrible.”” Discussions about issues such as this are not always informed by great intelligence. The right hon. and learned Gentleman mentioned the possibility of an English Grand Committee. It has been suggested in the past that such a Committee should sit in the Chamber, because it would obviously have a significant number of members. During the last Parliament we discussed the possibility of regional Grand Committees and arguments were presented both for and against the idea, but it has fallen by the wayside. I am not convinced by the right hon. and learned Gentleman's argument in favour of a requirement for a double majority. Neither House has ever operated a system of secondary mandates.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
523 c612-3 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Devolution Legislative process Jurisdiction Legislation England Northern Ireland Northern Ireland Assembly National Assembly for Wales Scotland Wales Scottish Parliament West Lothian question English votes for English laws
Legislation
Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk