Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Thursday 20th October 2016 Commons Chamber

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

4. What discussions he has had with his Cabinet colleagues on EU regional funding as part of his preparations for negotiations on the UK leaving the EU.

[The Minister of State, Department for Exiting the European Union (Mr David Jones)]

The Chancellor has already announced that the Government will guarantee EU structural and investment funding signed before we leave the EU. In addition, when UK organisations bid directly and competitively for EU funding for projects, that funding will be guaranteed by the Treasury if the bids are won before our departure. Those guarantees will extend to 2020, effectively the end of this Parliament.

[Wayne David]

The Minister has quoted part of what the Chancellor said, but he also said that finance will be guaranteed to bidders

“whose projects meet UK priorities”.

Does that imply that the UK Government will try to change agreed priorities for EU expenditure?

[Mr Jones]

No. Over the coming months the Government will consult all interested parties—including the devolved Administrations, who clearly have an interest in this policy—to ensure that future funding commitments represent value for money and are in line with our strategic priorities.

Welsh Affairs

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Thursday 3rd March 2016 Commons Chamber

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

I would like briefly to refer to three issues: first, what has happened to the draft Wales Bill; secondly, the importance of the European Union to Wales; and, thirdly, the need for the third runway at Heathrow airport from a Welsh perspective.

I have to ask where the Secretary of State for Wales is this afternoon. Surely this is an important debate and his place really ought to have been in this Chamber listening to what Members have to say and responding to their remarks. It is not asking too much that he show some courteousness and political common sense by coming here. I very much hope that he will learn the lesson from his embarrassment this afternoon. The Under-Secretary will clearly take that message back to him.

Quite a significant decision has been taken by the Secretary of State over the past week—to withdraw the draft Wales Bill—but I am concerned that there has been no oral statement or even a written statement. There has been no communication with the House of Commons. We learned about the decision from the press. That is a gross discourtesy and an undermining of the parliamentary system that we are all committed to.

That brings me to my main issue. I ask the House this question: what do the following individuals and organisations have in common? They are the Wales Governance Centre, the leaders of three political parties in Wales, the Learned Society of Wales, Sir Paul Silk, Sir Emyr Jones Parry, the head of the Wales office of the Law Society, and the professor of governance and constitution at University College, London—and the list could go on. The answer is that they all said that the draft Wales Bill was not fit for purpose. There was relative unanimity on that among those in Wales who follow these issues closely—the objective experts and academics, and the people who are at the sharp end of implementing legislation. I am sure the Under-Secretary will say, “Well, yes, that is why we withdrew the Bill—we listened”, but would it not have been better if he had listened at the start?

Concern was expressed about the draft Bill right from the very beginning, when it was first published. I have a copy here, and quite a heavy tome it is. The Secretary of State said in the foreword:

“This draft Bill sets out in detail how the Government plans to deliver the St David’s Day commitments to create a stronger, clearer and fairer devolution settlement for Wales that will stand the test of time.”

It stood the test of time for four months, and then he recognised what everybody else was saying—that it was not fit for purpose and he should go back to the drawing board and start all over again.

[Mr David Jones]

I have listened to the hon. Gentleman’s criticisms, but does he not agree that it is far better to get the legislation right than to bring through hasty legislation that does not stand the test of time? In that regard, did he read the recent report by the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee that bemoaned the fact that the Blair Government of 1997 hastened through legislation that has now resulted in the West Lothian question not being addressed?

[Wayne David]

I agree up to a point. Pre-legislative scrutiny is good—it makes for better legislation—but it would have been far better if the Wales Office had recognised that meaningful constitutional change can be achieved only on the basis of a high degree of political consensus. It cannot be achieved by a Government—any Government—trying to push through legislation that does not command broad support and is seen by some people as partisan and not properly thought through. That was one of the fundamental problems with the draft Bill. Many people thought it was purely impractical and would therefore lead to bad governance. That lesson ought to be learned.

English Votes for English Laws

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 15th July 2015 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

I was coming to exactly that point. As I said in an intervention on the hon. Member for Wrexham, a mechanism has to be devised so that in areas of doubt, of which there will be many, the Speaker can apprise himself of Members’ views and take any wider evidence he requires to make that determination. It seems to me that there would be nothing to preclude him from doing so on the basis of the draft Standing Orders as they stand. My suggestion to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House is that an amendment to the draft Standing Orders should be made in order to accommodate that very procedure.

[Wayne David]

The right hon. Gentleman makes an extremely important point, and I can well understand the validity of his case. However, he suggests an interpretation of the draft Standing Orders which means that the Speaker may be asked to make a subjective decision. I suggest that that is fraught with difficulties.

[Mr Jones]

As I just said, it seems to me that a further amendment should be made to the draft Standing Orders to accommodate that.

I am conscious of your strictures about time, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I want to say to my hon. Friend the Deputy Leader of the House and my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House that I raised this issue as long ago as 16 December 2014 with my right hon. Friend’s predecessor, William Hague, who said in reply to my question:

“In respect of a small number of cross-border issues involving a strong structural dependence—health care in Wales is one such instance—there is a strong case for a wide definition of what constitutes an English matter, so that others can be involved.”—[Official Report, 16 December 2014; Vol. 589, c. 1276-67.]

I ask the Government Front-Bench team to consider that. It seems to me that a sensible amendment could be made to the draft Standing Orders as they are now, in order to accommodate this issue of structural dependence, which is not properly addressed at the moment. As an instrument, the Standing Orders are somewhat blunt as drafted, and need to be refined.

Devolution (Scotland Referendum)

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Tuesday 14th October 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

That matter is already covered by the Wales Bill. It will be a matter for the people of Wales, in a referendum, to decide whether they want such powers. My own view, frankly, is that it is debatable.

More than four years in Gwydyr House taught me that the most problematic aspect of devolution is the cross-border effect. This matter was referred to a little earlier by the right hon. Member for Delyn (Mr Hanson). Take, for example, specialist hospital care. At present, there are disparate health systems in place in England and Wales, which mean that, effectively, Welsh patients are treated less favourably in many respects in the English hospitals where they need treatment. Waiting lists are longer and it is a source of concern to Welsh patients that although they pay their taxes at precisely the same rate as English patients, they wait much longer for treatment. That cannot be right. This is one of the matters that a new Government of Wales Act has to address.

[Wayne David]

A moment ago, the right hon. Gentleman referred to the reserved powers model. Can he explain why the Conservative Government have changed their position very recently on this issue?

Wales Bill

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Monday 31st March 2014 Commons Chamber

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State has put it on record that in his view the Barnett formula is coming to the end of its life. What progress have the Government made in reforming it?

[Mr Jones]

We have made it very clear that we need to rebalance the finances of this country before we will consider that. Let me remind the hon. Gentleman, however, that in October 2012 there was a specific agreement between the Welsh Government and the Treasury that on the occasion of each spending review there would be an assessment of the issue of convergence, and that is indeed what happened on the last occasion.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Jones]

My right hon. Friend is entirely right. The indexation proposals would amount to a damp, which would effectively smooth out any peaks and troughs in relation to overall UK income and act as a strong reassurance to the Assembly Government. While I am on my feet, I would like to thank my right hon. Friend for her part in commissioning the work of the Silk commission in the first place.

[Wayne David]

Has the Secretary of State resolved his differences with the leader of the Conservative group in the Welsh Assembly on income tax devolution?

[Mr Jones]

The leader of the Conservative group in the Welsh Assembly, and indeed the group as a whole, fully support the legislation before us.

Commission on Devolution in Wales

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Monday 18th November 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

That is very unlikely.

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

Wales is currently underfunded to the tune of £300 million. Why does the Secretary of State for Wales not come forward with a fair funding formula?

[Mr Jones]

The hon. Gentleman will know that in October 2012 the Welsh Finance Minister, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and I announced new arrangements in Cardiff, which ensured that if there were any issue of convergence, there would be further negotiations between the Welsh Finance Department and the Treasury. [Interruption.] We believe that Barnett certainly is coming to the end of its life. The issue is to rebalance the economy, which was left in such an appalling condition by the Government of whom he was a member.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 3rd July 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

I hear what the hon. Gentleman says, but frankly the word from smaller businesses in Wales is that they are frequently precluded from bidding because of the Welsh procurement process. I hope that will change under the new arrangements.

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

13. What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for the Home Department on the responsibilities of police and crime commissioners in Wales.

[The Secretary of State for Wales (Mr David Jones)]

I have discussed the responsibilities of police and crime commissioners with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. PCCs are democratically elected and accountable to the communities they serve.

[Wayne David]

Does the Secretary of State share my concern that the former chief constable of Gwent yesterday told a Select Committee of this House that she was bullied out of her job?

[Mr Jones]

I heard what the former chief constable said. I want to reiterate what I said at the last Welsh Grand Committee. I have the highest possible regard for Carmel Napier. Ultimately, however, it must be for the police and crime commissioner to make that decision, and of course he is accountable to Parliament through the Home Affairs Committee.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 15th May 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

Yes, the congestion on the M4 is causing significant difficulty to Welsh commerce and, of course, to Welsh motorists. I repeat that it is a great pity that the Welsh Government did not carry out their statutory function by upgrading that road long ago. This is a matter on which I am engaged with the Welsh Government, and I hope we will be able to make further announcements in due course.

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

Will the Government introduce road tolls on the new M4 relief road?

[Mr Jones]

I must point out that the Assembly Government already have the competence to introduce road tolls, under the Transport (Wales) Act 2006. That is, of course, a matter for the Assembly Government.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 27th February 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

I will take no lessons from the right hon. Gentleman, whose party oversaw the trashing of the British economy and was responsible for the mess that we are having to clear up. The Government have created more than 1 million private sector jobs since we came to power, against the international trend, and we are proud of that.

[Wayne David]

Will the loss of the triple A status of the British economy be bad or very bad for Wales?

[Mr Jones]

The loss of the triple A status is a stark reminder of how important it is to develop sensible policies to fix the economy. I remind the hon. Gentleman that Moody’s recognises that the UK’s creditworthiness remains extremely high and points to the strong track record of fiscal consolidation. Were it not for that, we would be on a negative outlook, rather than a stable one.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 28th November 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for his efforts on behalf of that enterprise zone. He will know that I have met the potential operators of the race track. I understand that bids for enhanced capital allowances have been made by the Welsh Government to HM Treasury. As he knows, I am always happy to discuss these issues with him in person.

[Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

8. What recent estimate he has made of the number of long-term unemployed people in Wales; and if he will make a statement.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 29th February 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

I did get the thrust of that, Mr Speaker, and there might be some force in the hon. Gentleman’s argument were it not for the fact that the rail network in Wales is not a devolved issue. As such, there is no force in his argument whatever.

[Mr Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

10. What recent discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for the Home Department on crime levels in Wales.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr David Jones)]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have regular discussions with Home Office Ministers on a range of issues relating to crime in Wales.

[Mr David]

We have already lost 40 police officers in Gwent. Does the Minister believe that this cut in police numbers will help or hinder the fight against crime?

[Mr Jones]

I visited Gwent police last week, and I was delighted to see that the most recent crime figures show an 11% reduction in crime in that force area. One might have thought that, rather than talking Gwent police down, the hon. Gentleman would offer the force some support.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 18th January 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

I hear what my hon. Friend says. He can be assured that the Wales Office always does what it can to improve transport links within Wales.

[Mr Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

On the issue of railways, we have a great deal of sympathy with the Secretary of State on why she felt the need to sell her constituency home. Will she now take the opportunity to buy a home in Wales?

[Mr Jones]

My right hon. Friend’s living arrangements are entirely a matter for her, and that has of course been positively vindicated by the letter my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister recently sent to the hon. Member for Hemsworth (Jon Trickett).

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 29th June 2011 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

Yes, but I would mention to the hon. Lady that, in fact, as a consequence of electrification, the journey times from London to her constituency will be reduced by 22 minutes. I hope that she welcomes that.

[Mr Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

6. What recent estimate she has made of the number of public sector job losses in Wales during the comprehensive spending review period.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Wayne David and David Jones

Wednesday 8th September 2010 Commons Chamber

[Mr Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

Following on from the Minister’s earlier response, the Local Government Association estimates that the cost of these police commissioners will be £50 million, or the equivalent of 700 police officers. Does not he agree that it would be perverse to introduce these superannuated sheriffs at the same time as making cuts in neighbourhood policing?

[Mr Jones]

As I have already indicated, the cost of the police commissioners will not be a penny more than the authorities that they replace. The hon. Gentleman may like to know that I have already held a meeting with the Welsh Local Government Association. I have also seen the letter to which he alludes, and I have passed it on to colleagues in the Home Office. I reiterate that it will not cost a penny more than the police authorities that the commissioners will replace.