Official Report 143KB pdf
Sometimes when we have a short agenda, comrades have a tendency to get out of order. I am looking at two members in particular.
Perhaps you would like me to make a few introductory remarks, convener.
Okay, given that you have finally turned up.
The main thanks for the report should go to Craig Harper who put it all together. He consulted me on the content of the report, but it is largely his work. Colin Campbell, Keith Harding and I are very grateful for the support that Craig gave us throughout the visit.
Thank you, Bristow. Does Keith Harding or Colin Campbell wish to add anything at this stage, or will they come in on the questions?
Bristow covered our visit well.
Given that the document is so bulky, interested members should contact Keith Harding or the clerks.
Assembly members often talked about legislation from London and the secondary legislation that was bolted on to that legislation—that is symptomatic of the difference between the Assembly's relationship with the UK Government and that between the Scottish Parliament and the UK Government. All Assembly members, regardless of party, found that difference a little difficult to take on board. They also felt that their civil servants were still fairly London-centric—the civil service mindset had not changed enough to allow staff to feel like Welsh Assembly civil servants. People were residual UK civil servants.
The first two pages of the paper lay out to whom members spoke, so we will move on to page 3 of the report.
I have a brief question. I was interested to read that the bedblocking crisis had made the WLGA consider how departments could work together. Are Welsh councils further forward than we are? I note that the Assembly is also trying to promote such collaborative working.
I did not form the view that the Welsh are ahead of us on the relationship between the national health service and local government. Care of the elderly is a UK-wide issue and the Welsh have to grapple with that same issue. My judgement is that we may be slightly ahead of them in solving that problem.
As an illustration of that point, in Dumfries and Galloway, social workers and health board staff have been brought together to try to bridge the gap between those two groups on work with old and sick people. We are ahead of the Welsh.
I also got the impression that the Welsh were behind us, as far as that issue is concerned.
Is a further example that of the lead stakeholders in community planning? The paper says that
That was used as an example of an area in which different parts of the public sector were working together.
So the point is that such joint working was making a difference.
The third paragraph, which is halfway down the page, talks about
Those are good questions.
I have a supplementary question on rates. What mechanisms are in place to allow community councils to tap into rates?
The community council has a limited revenue-raising power and a decision to raise revenues is communicated to the local authority, which undertakes the collection of rates. I could be wrong about that, but that was my impression from the discussions that we held.
It may be a misnomer to use the phrase "community council", which applies mainly to urban areas. In effect, we are talking about organisations that are like parish councils. I think that they are able to raise a penny rate, although I would not swear to that.
It was as low as that.
Many of the major cities have built up huge resources—for example, they own community centres—and they run them by raising such funds. According to what was said, there was definitely a divide between urban and rural community councils. In Wales, there are the same problems as we have in persuading people to stand for councils.
Some of the facilities that those councils run perform similar functions to those run by the trusts to which some local authorities in Scotland transferred operation of some leisure facilities when they found it difficult to provide funding. In Wales, some of the facilities were transferred to the community councils, which are completely different beasts from the community councils in Scotland.
I take it that the penny rate—if the rate is a penny—is theoretically available throughout Wales?
I think that the system applies only to the bodies that I described as parish councils.
Does a two-tier system operate?
Many of the bodies have accumulated money through common-good funds.
The system was patchy. It was not used everywhere—only where there was precedent.
The system was probably more similar to that used in Scandinavia than that in Scotland. In Scandinavia, organisations called communes have control over many day-to-day services—certainly more control than parish or community councils. A different system has evolved in Wales, and a similar evolutionary process is taking place in some parts of England. It is unfortunate that the title of community council is used here, because the functions are totally different.
Ian Miller, who is the head of finance at the association, suggested that it might be useful to review local government finance in Wales. Was there support for that?
We asked about that. People felt that a review would be useful, but I do not think that the demand was as developed as it is in Scotland.
So nobody is going down that road at the moment?
Obviously, a consultation is being conducted through DETR's review. That is examining some aspects of local government finance, but is not examining whether to introduce different forms of local taxation, because it is focused.
The facility of parish councils, or what are often called town councils in England, is historical. There has been no great move to push power down to people. The councils operate in small boroughs and were established to run swimming pools or other facilities. They have simply continued to do that. That is good stuff, but I do not think that there has been a great outbreak of democracy in England or Wales that we have missed out on.
I do not think that that has happened.
I agree with Donald Gorrie.
What page of the report are you referring to? Are you still on page 4?
I am on page 5, at the paragraph after the one on community councils, which we have just discussed.
Members of the association and others recognised the problem and the need to improve the regard in which people hold councillors and their role. I do not think that they have advanced proposals on that. They were interested in hearing our reports about McIntosh, Kerley and civic education. They agree that the issue must be taken forward, but at the moment, they have not made advanced progress with it.
Is an equivalent to Kerley or McIntosh being considered?
I cannot say. Such exchanges are two-way, and I think that they were learning from us on the issue. Several people from the association and the Assembly were interested in our progress with Kerley and McIntosh. They might pursue that in the future. I got the impression that they thought that our plans were correct and showed advanced thinking on behalf of Scotland. I would not be surprised if they took a similar path, but they gave no indication that they had immediate plans to do so.
We will return to page 4.
I will return to waste management and recycling, and Bristow Muldoon's statement that that issue
That paragraph is included in the report because the association expressed concern that issues such as the environment had been squeezed because emphasis had been placed on priority services such as education and social work. Councillor Graham Court, who is the vice-president of the association, expressed concern that although most people believed that we should improve our recycling and management of waste, local authorities were sometimes unable to meet their objectives as fully as they wished to, because of the way in which expenditure was directed. That paragraph gives a general idea of problems in the Welsh system.
Are you saying that councils were concerned, but that the Welsh Assembly members did not say too much about what they were doing, and that there were no useful lessons that we could learn from them?
I think that Graham Court was just articulating a concern about his own area and the fact that the issue had been squeezed by budgetary constraint, because when push came to shove, people preferred schools to waste management.
The Welsh Assembly gave the issue some importance, but the concern was that insufficient resources were being made available to produce an effective waste management strategy. Some of the representatives felt that the issue was not being given as high a priority in Wales as in England. They felt that significantly more resources were provided in England to deal with the problem, and they asked us how the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive were dealing with the issue.
We have finished page 5 and will now discuss page 6, which says that
Just ask Keith Harding.
I am not asking Keith.
Where are we?
I am referring to paragraph 6 on page 6.
That paragraph talks about members of the Partnership Council between the Welsh Assembly and—
Yes, but it also says that
To be honest, we did not pursue that issue much. It seemed that the Assembly placed similar or slightly lesser demands on a member's time than our Parliament does on us.
So do you think that Henry McLeish should resign his Westminster seat?
Obviously, when the Scottish Parliament was established, most parties made a pragmatic decision—
We are moving away from the report.
Obviously, that was a pragmatic decision that the Scottish Conservatives did not have to face after their abject failure in the previous Westminster election.
I made a pragmatic decision when I decided to stand as a councillor.
Enough. We are discussing the report.
What sort of relationship does the Welsh Executive have with the Partnership Council that is mentioned on page 6 of the report? Secondly, I get the impression that the Welsh Assembly has been quicker at getting the Partnership Council up and running; perhaps we have taken a more evolutionary approach to the covenant. Can we learn any lessons from the Welsh structure?
There is direct contact between the Welsh Executive and the Partnership Council in that some Welsh Assembly members are also members of the council. I was quite interested in the fact that some ministers are members of the Local Government and Housing Committee and take part in all the committee's proceedings.
Under the standing orders of the Partnership Council, the Assembly membership of the council comprises
It might be interesting to have a look at that partnership agreement.
Page 7 mentions a "leadership challenge" and, in a note at the bottom of the page, a "leadership academy". Can you elaborate on the idea of a training programme for councillors? How well has that been received and who co-ordinates it?
Are you asking about how someone gets on to the course? In other words, how does someone know that they are a leadership person?
They know if they get on the course.
The Welsh programme focuses on issues that are similar to those that we are trying to address through the Kerley report; it is a sensible development that is long overdue in Scottish local government. However, I am not clear whether local authorities nominate people to go on it or whether there is self-nomination.
Is it obligatory?
No.
Who co-ordinates the training or determines the level that someone should be trained to? It might be interesting to find out whether there is a model that we could examine.
I am not able to answer that question in full. Perhaps Craig Harper could follow it up and provide some clarification.
I was interested to find out that the Partnership Council has undertaken a best value review of the location of polling stations in the electoral process. Perhaps we could consider that issue at some point, as it is a matter that comes up every now and again.
What if the electoral process fails the best value review?
Good question.
Councillor Jones reflected that there might be similar concerns in Scotland that the local government reorganisation in 1996 had perhaps not been done in the best way. Perhaps there was the slightest suggestion that there might have been an attempt at gerrymandering.
Surely not.
Can we keep to the report, please?
The councillors were expressing exactly the same reservations that we have expressed. They were just a bit hacked off with the fact that natural communities have been divided arbitrarily.
Do members have any comments on page 9 of the report? Interestingly, at the top of the page, it says:
The people from Plaid Cymru to whom I spoke felt much the same. It was a bit odd that so much power should be centralised in one person, but there you go.
Regional autonomists often agree with nationalists.
Although this Parliament's local government portfolio was not strictly within the remit of the Minister for Finance, local government finance was. Even before the recent Cabinet reshuffle, the minister already had a very significant role in the development of local government.
Do members have any comments on page 10 of the report?
With great difficulty. It needs the permission of the Secretary of State for Wales, and if he does not agree, it does not happen.
If the Welsh Assembly feels the necessity to sponsor a bill, it must persuade the secretary of state to support the bill and to argue for its inclusion in the Government programme at Westminster. The process is obviously quite difficult and would still be subject to the same crowding-out problems that Scottish bills had before devolution.
The report also says:
Certainly if we went by what the taxi drivers in Wales say about the Welsh Assembly, it would close next week.
It cannot possibly be the same as what the taxi drivers of Shetland were saying about their council.
Be careful.
On a couple of occasions, people said that there were five different levels of government in many areas because of the community councils—or whatever we wish to call them. Even supporters of Welsh devolution were saying that the Welsh Assembly did not have enough power to be a legitimate body and a number of them wanted the Assembly's powers to be extended to give it a more substantial role.
It is coming over loud and clear that the Welsh Assembly wants more powers. Has it given the Scottish Parliament any advice on our seeking more powers? Does it think that we should push the boat out a bit more?
That was not suggested to us. The people we met simply felt that they would like the Welsh Assembly to have the powers that we have. They recognised that it was considerably more difficult to achieve that in Wales because of the greater extent to which the Welsh legal and other systems of government are entwined with those of England.
Wales was colonised.
However, the people we met felt that they could achieve a great deal more if they had powers similar to those of the Scottish Parliament.
The powers of the Welsh Assembly are totally inadequate. At Westminster, I asked a Welsh colleague why on earth we were voting for all this rubbish, and his answer was that it was the most that could be got through the system. Most Welsh Labour MPs were against devolution as a whole, so the legislation for the Welsh Assembly had to be carefully balanced. It appears that, from experience, members of the Welsh Assembly have seen the total inadequacy of their powers. They will put considerable pressure on Westminster, which could help our case.
We did not have any meetings with Welsh MPs, so I do not know what they think of the current set-up.
It is interesting that Welsh Assembly members are considering a way of relaxing the public sector borrowing requirement rules, just as we are in Scotland. It is fascinating how many parallels there are between our situation and theirs. They are examining things independently of us, but we are both focusing on similar issues.
We turn now to page 11 of the paper.
There is a reference to the panel of subject committee chairs meeting the House of Commons Welsh Affairs Select Committee. Was that demanded, is it useful, and could something similar be developed in Scotland?
The reason why there is so much liaison between the Welsh Assembly and Westminster is that the Assembly requires Westminster to take forward issues for it in a number of areas. I am not sure that it would be an advantage for us to have a similar arrangement. If the Scottish Parliament wants to address an issue that is part of the devolved settlement, it can simply act. If the Welsh Assembly identifies a course of action that it believes to be to the benefit of Wales, it often needs to persuade the House of Commons to support that.
Michael McMahon raises an interesting issue. Although Bristow Muldoon is correct in saying that the position is different here, there might be some merit in considering whether the Scottish Grand Committee should not sometimes meet the conveners group. John Reid is desperately looking for something for the Scottish Grand Committee to do. This is something that it could do.
He is looking for something for himself to do.
Now, now.
I support as much joint action as possible between MSPs and MPs. It is important that we work together in a number of areas, particularly when dealing with poverty and social inclusion issues. That is an area where some of the actions that can be taken to tackle problems lie within our powers and some lie within Westminster's powers. I am all in favour of co-ordinated action to deal with the problems with which we have to grapple.
I am surprised that one of the Plaid Cymru representatives indicated that she had difficulty contacting MPs, apart from at official functions, given that Plaid Cymru has four MPs at Westminster. Is she suggesting that that is not a party issue, but that MPs, regardless of their party affiliation, do not have contact with Assembly members?
If I remember correctly, the Plaid Cymru member to whom Kenny Gibson is referring represented an area in Wales for which Plaid Cymru did not have any MPs.
She was a list member.
I think that all the MPs for the area that she represented were Labour, although they may have been a mixture of Labour and Liberal Democrat. There were certainly no Conservatives.
There is one.
Behave.
There is no Conservative MP for that area.
Will members speak through the chair? We do not want a political discussion. Please stick to the agenda.
The Plaid Cymru member in question was having difficulty relating to MPs from a different party.
So she meant local MPs. This is about the relationship between list members and their local MPs, rather than the relationship between Assembly members and MPs per se.
A system of concordats has been built up, which sets out the relationships. I did not get the impression that Westminster was not prepared to listen or speak to the Welsh Assembly, or that the Assembly felt ignored. However, it might not always succeed in persuading Westminster Government departments of its point of view, which is a source of frustration. The people we met indicated that a great deal of hard work was required to get amendments made to Westminster bills or to ensure that a particular course of action was taken on issues where the Welsh perspective was slightly different from that of England or the Westminster Government. Other than the concordats, there is no system for resolving such conflicts.
At the end of the paper, you state:
I had the impression that Labour, Plaid Cymru and Liberal Democrat members were strongly of that view. I do not mention the Conservatives not because I know what view they take, but because the only Conservative member whom I met during the visit was present at our meeting only briefly and I cannot recall whether the issue of increasing the powers of the Assembly was debated while he was in the room. Keith Harding may be able to answer on that, as he had separate meetings with the Conservative members.
The issue of increased powers for the Assembly was not discussed.
The people we met were terribly conscious that, compared with us, they were not very well off in terms of what they could do or initiate.
We are not very well off compared with Liechtenstein, Luxembourg or Andorra.
Could we stick to the report on the visit to Wales?
We arrived in Wales at a strange time, with the Lib Dems and the Labour party having just established a new Cabinet. It was the first time that they had had the same set-up as us. The fact that initially the Executive did not have an overall majority has inhibited progress until now. Whatever reservations we have about the Scottish Executive, it gets things done. The Welsh suffered considerably in the first 12 months of the Assembly's existence from not being able to get things done. That did not help members' confidence or the confidence of the people of Wales in the Welsh Assembly.
Colin Campbell is not extending an official olive branch.
It is not an olive branch in the slightest. I was simply recording a historical fact.
Will you behave yourselves?
A broad group of Assembly members thought that they should have taken the same approach as members from the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties took in Scotland shortly after the election, and formed a partnership Government. That came across clearly. Donald Gorrie would probably relish the role of Assembly member in Wales even more than he does the role of MSP in Scotland, as in Wales members are in the habit of inflicting significant defeats on even the partnership Executive. The first vote that was held after the partnership Executive was formed related to subordinate legislation on genetically modified foods, and the Welsh Executive lost it by 10 votes to 42.
How could you say that about Donald?
It is interesting that, under the partnership agreement, Liberal Democrat deputy ministers are not subject to collective responsibility. They do not have to vote with the Executive. That is because they do not receive extra remuneration for being deputy ministers.
Now we are beginning to move away from the report.
Meeting continued in private until 15:32.