CORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 371-ii HOUSE OF COMMONS ORAL EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM COMMITTEE DO WE NEED A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE UK? THURSDAY 12 JULY 2012 (CARDIFF) ANDREW R. T. DAVIES AM CARWYN JONES AM Evidence heard in Public Questions 60 - 123 USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT 1. This is a corrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others. 2. The transcript is an approved formal record of these proceedings. It will be printed in due course. 1 Oral Evidence Taken before the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee on Thursday 12 July 2012 Members present: Mr Graham Allen (Chair) Paul Flynn Simon Hart Mr Andrew Turner Examination of Witness Witness: Andrew R. T. Davies AM, Leader of the Welsh Conservative Group, gave evidence. Q60 Chair: A very warm welcome. We are a sizeable chunk of the Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee from Westminster. I apologise to the witnesses, because they are sitting a long way away from us. That is not our doing, as I would far rather you were here next to us, but, apparently, in order to capture all your words, you have to be right in line with the cameras. It does not help with the conversational feel that I think is important. Andrew R.T. Davies: It is like a Hollywood film. [Laughter.] Chair: Like on the Hill. However, set that aside, because we are here as friends and colleagues, and we want to hear what you have to say. We want to learn from you and your experience. I have to read out some health and safety things here. I welcome the public to the meeting. I think we have a member of the public here. The meeting will be bilingual. Headphones can be used for the simultaneous translation from Welsh to English on channel 1 or for amplification on channel 0. Please turn off your mobile phones and any other electronic equipment. In the event of a fire alarm, follow the directions of the ushers. Right, that has got all the formalities out of the way. Andrew, you are very welcome. It is wonderful to see you again. It was great to catch up with you last time when we made a point of coming here to meet people and establish relationships. We have been in touch subsequently, which has been excellent. You know that we are here to explore this issue of the need for a constitutional convention, not least because of possible events in Scotland in the not-too-distant future. Whichever way a referendum might go and whatever the questions are, there may be consequences for all the rest of us in the UK. Would you like to kick off with a few opening comments? You have very kindly presented some written evidence, which is extremely helpful, but I will let you say a few words. Andrew R.T. Davies: Thank you, Mr Chairman. First of all, my apologies, because the traffic in Cardiff has not been brilliant this morning, and it was hit or miss whether I would get here on time. It is a pleasure to appear before you today to participate in your deliberations. I have provided some written notes, which I hope the Committee has found 2 useful, and I am more than happy to take any questions flowing from those notes from committee members. Given the limited time that we have, maybe it would be better just to go straight into the questions, and I can try to answer them to the best of my ability. Chair: Fantastic, Andrew. Thank you again. I will now bring in Andrew Turner. Q61 Mr Turner: Regarding the First Minister’s calls for a constitutional convention, what are your views on having a constitutional convention as far as Wales is concerned, and also as far as the UK is concerned? Andrew R.T. Davies: In my paper, I outline the fact that, since the set-up of devolution, we seem to have had various conventions and fora looking at how devolution has evolved here in Wales. There was the Richard Commission, then the Holtham Commission, which looked into the financing, and we are into the Silk Commission at the moment. Most people seem to be all commissioned out, to be honest with you. The big issue is what England does in the current era in which we live. Scotland has a Parliament and Northern Ireland and Wales have Assemblies. We are responsible for 20 devolved fields here, and we make primary legislation, and so I feel that the tools are here to do the job. What people are crying out for is for politicians to get on and do the job, to be honest. It is for England to sort out how it sees the political settlement evolving in England. A lot of what we have required here in Wales has happened. Yes, there is a big discussion around the financing of devolution and, today, there is a report out about taxation, for example. However, I think that that is separate from the convention that has been talked about, and what you are looking at. I fully appreciate what we are looking at in Scotland, regarding the proposal to have a referendum in 2014, but I do not want to prejudge the outcome of that, and I think that it is too early to be discussing these proposals. Q62 Mr Turner: So, to summarise, you are saying that, in relation to Scotland, it is too early, and that we need to have the referendum first and follow on from that. In relation to Wales, you are saying that you have the tools to do the job and it is now a matter of getting on and doing it. In relation to England, you are saying that it is our job to decide what is going to happen, rather than that of the UK. Andrew R.T. Davies: At the moment, I do not think that people know. As I understand it, a commission is being set up at the House of Commons to look into this very issue. However, there is a big question about how we resolve the issue of MPs voting on matters over which their constituents have no say, because health and education, for example, are devolved to the various institutions. There is also the issue of financing and the financing of devolution. That is a constant debate and discussion that goes on in this institution, but I think that it is separate from the political convention and we should try not to mix them up, to a point. There is a uniform response from the political parties here: we all understand that the Barnett formula has reached its sell-by date. As my paper says, what I believe as a politician is that what people actually want to see is their politicians making decisions and improving the social and economic aspects of their lives. I believe that the tools reside here to do that in the fields in which we have competence. Q63 Paul Flynn: You are against having a convention, and you were disparaging about the previous ones, of which there have been rather a lot. However, do you agree that the process of devolution and the accretion of powers to Wales has resulted from those bodies? We are in a situation that is continually moving, and one in which there will be a vote in 3 Scotland. Could you look into your crystal ball and tell me what your party’s view is likely to be if there is a vote for devo max in Scotland, and also if there is a vote for independence? Andrew R.T. Davies: I would not say that I have been disparaging about the previous conventions here in Wales, because I think that they have been necessary to review the original settlement, as the Richard Commission did. The Government of Wales Act 2006 emanated from what Richard did. Then, we had the All-Wales Convention, which looked at primary law-making powers. We have had Holtham looking into the financing, and at the moment, we have part one of the Silk Commission. We still have part two of Silk to come. I would not have used the word ‘disparaging’, as I do think that those bodies were necessary at the time. However, I believe that we need politicians to start delivering rather than constantly going to conventions, and actually start to look at this whole constitutional process. From a Welsh perspective, I believe the situation is in balance at the moment. From a Scottish perspective—we are looking at the UK here obviously—yes, we know the referendum is coming in 2014, and I believe that it would be premature to bring a convention together that would almost be trying to prejudge the outcome of that referendum. If the outcome of the referendum was in favour of independence, it would merely be signalling the intention of the Scottish people for those negotiations to start. It would be opportune to consider then, but it is premature at the moment to be going down this convention route and looking to establish one imminently. In your earlier meeting on 28 June, there was a strand of thinking from some evidence that was given that we need to be doing it now because the way in which the parliamentary process works is very cumbersome and slow and it would take time to get it off the ground.