WELSH DEVOLUTION AND THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY

Clearly, the main political story is the decision by David Cameron not to veto further powers for the National Assembly for Wales if two thirds of members vote for them and the Conservative Party is in power in Westminster when such a decision is made.

He also made it clear that Conservative party members would be free to campaign for or against further powers as they see fit.

Naturally, as a pro-devolutionist within the Conservative Party, I am glad that this issue has been cleared up once and for all and that we can now focus on developing policies towards the next Assembly election.

However, if you read some of the recent political commentary, you would have thought that it was only the Conservative Party that has any difference of opinion on key issues. Of course, that simply isn't the case and you only have only look at the differing policies being put forward by the three candidates for the labour leadership.

For Plaid Cymru, even the most die-hard nationalist would find difficulties in arguing that the economic viewpoint of Dafydd Wigley reflects that of Leanne Wood, and I won't even go into the diverging opinions of Kirtsy Williams and Lempit Opik!

But that's politics for you. You take a particular stance on a subject within your party and debate your opinions with your fellow members in the hope that you can persuade them of your arguments.

As Thomas Jefferson said, “I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend” and certainly I feel that my pro-devolution views should not make me withdraw from debate on the subject in the Conservative Party.

Far from it, and whilst I will continue to argue for more powers from Wales, I understand that some of my friends within the party may have a different viewpoint. My role, as a member of a democratic political movement, is to work alongside other like-minded people to persuade them of the benefits of devolution. If they do not agree, then to quote another US politician, "you can't please all of the people all, of the time".

I am a pragmatist above everything else and I made my stance on further devolution absolutely clear in the response to Lord Roberts in May of last year. It may not be to everyone's taste but if anyone has any doubts regarding where I stand on this issue, the letter to Wyn is reproduced below.

Lord Wyn Roberts
House of Lords,
London,
SW1A 0PW

Annwyl Wyn,

I am writing to you with regard to the review of Welsh devolution that you have been tasked to undertake on behalf of the Conservative Party.

It is my opinion that there has been a steady acceptance that not only is devolution here to stay in Wales but, more tellingly, that Wales was short-changed by the Labour Party relative to Scotland in the Government of Wales Act, 1998. Certainly, the new law-making powers introduced by Labour this year have actually made the situation even more confusing and have led to conflict, not clarification, between Wales and Westminster.

This review is critical as I expect that it will be a Conservative Government in Westminster that will make the final decision on a referendum for further powers in 2011. Whilst it is tempting for the bulk of the Conservative Party to reject the importance of this issue, it is critical that the decision arrived at regarding Welsh devolution reflects the realities of the new political situation in Wales.

As my nain would have said, “Yn iawn neu ddim o gwbwl”, and I believe that is the real issue facing us today – we should have a proper devolution settlement for Wales or none at all.

The fact that the Labour Party has mismanaged Wales during the last nine years, even with the current powers that the Assembly Government has at its disposal, is no excuse for assuming that we could not do better. Indeed, the Conservatives, as they have done at a local authority level, could develop a more efficient public service that could benefit the whole of the nation and create an entrepreneurial and innovative economy that would raise Wales from the bottom of the UK’s prosperity league table.

Contrary to the nationalist viewpoint, I do not believe that a Welsh Parliament is a step towards independence but a move towards equality within a Union of Parliaments within the United Kingdom, a Union that would be strengthened by having a Welsh ’Senedd’ with full law-making powers. The vast majority of the population of Wales perceive themselves as both Welsh AND British and there has been an increasing pride in Wales being able to make its own decisions over a number of key areas.

There is also the assumption by the majority of our party that Labour will always be in power in Wales within the Assembly and that our party are reluctant to grant more powers as a result of this. This is a false assumption and I believe that the hegemony of the Labour Party is over. Its position as the major political force has been broken forever in Wales, as yesterday’s council election results have shown.

We should have no fear of having further powers in a parliament in which Conservatives will play a full role. Indeed, creating a Welsh parliament will weaken and not strengthen the nationalists’ position in Wales, as few will ever have the appetite for independence, especially an independence which has Wales as a region in Europe but not in the United Kingdom. Our British ties, especially in the more populated areas in the North east and South East of Wales, will see to that.

From an economic point of view, I believe that the assumption that full powers for the Assembly along the lines of the Scottish Parliament, would not help Wales, as indicated by several business organisations during the original devolution debate, is no longer valid.

The real question, which must be addressed by detailed research, is how further powers would make Wales a more attractive business environment for both inward investors and indigenous businesses. Indeed, there could be a viewpoint that a more radical Assembly Government, with increased devolved powers, could use legislative powers to boost investment and profitability. This would certainly be an improvement on the current settlement where economic development policy in Wales is straitjacketed by having only one real instrument – grants to business – as the means of making any real difference to the economy.

To date, there has been little examination by policy-makers of the impact of such new legislative powers on the Welsh economy, and it is about time that a cost-benefit analysis is undertaken of the effect of additional powers, taking into account the benefit for Welsh businesses. Most importantly, such an exercise should look to learn from other small countries that have managed to buck the trend that big is best and created competitive dynamic economies.

In my opinion, we have waited too long to examine the effect of greater legislative powers on economic and enterprise development, and I was extremely disappointed that this was not discussed in any real depth during the enquiry by the Richard Commission into further powers for the Assembly. I believe the time has now come to have an honest debate to thoroughly re-examine the whole issue of the additional powers that can create competitive advantage for Welsh businesses, as opposed to grants that do little to support long term investment.

Many would argue, including many of my colleagues within the Conservative Party, that Wales is not mature enough at this stage in the devolution process to consider further powers. However, this is no excuse for not having a wider and deeper debate specifically on the effect of further powers on the competitiveness of the Welsh economy, especially as the political bandwagon towards further decentralisation from Westminster is rolling ever more quickly down the hill. To this extent, this consultation is merely one stage in the process of examining further devolution and is, I would hope not, just an event, to quote a recent Welsh politician.

With regard to the debate on devolution, I sometimes think that politicians are their own worst enemies, and arguing for more powers just because we have less than the other devolved parts of the UK is just not good enough and will attract little support from the business community. Instead, we should be arguing the case for greater powers because they make a difference to Wales and not because of any devolutional shortcomings relative to Scotland, Northern Ireland, or even Guernsey.

However, there needs to be a ‘quid pro quo’ in any new devolution settlement. If Wales, as a nation, wishes for further powers from Westminster, then the Conservative Party must reduce the current political representation at the House of Commons to reflect this, possibly halving the number of Welsh MPs, and increasing the number of AMs necessary to deal with primary legislation.

In addition, I would expect the next Conservative Government to undertake a thorough review of the Barnett formula and to look at alternative methods of funding UK regions. There is a price to be paid for greater powers and if the Welsh nation decides that this is the way forward, then greater economic self-dependency has to be part of this change.

At the same time, we must, as Welsh Conservatives, acknowledge the fact that two thirds of Wales, as well as pockets of poverty in Cardiff and Newport, are amongst the poorest parts of Europe and will need to argue strongly for fiscal support from any incoming Conservative Government to enable any regeneration to take place.

As I mentioned earlier, given the position of some of the bodies representing business during the initial devolution campaign, such a debate will clearly polarise opinion on the legislative influence of government on business, but the data shows that Wales still needs to improve its economic performance relative to the UK and the Assembly clearly has a major role to play in this.

The increasing self confidence that has come from the first stage of devolution has prompted a growing number of businesses, especially those in new knowledge-based sectors, to adopt a more positive attitude towards devolution. It has also encouraged larger businesses, especially within banking and finance, to create Welsh headquarters for their divisions which were previously managed from Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol.

With this change in attitudes by an increasing number of the wealth creators in our economy, I can only be hopeful that there are enlightened individuals within our party - be they academics, businesspeople and even politicians - that will consider the possibility of adopting a different and more positive approach to further devolution that can make a real difference to Welsh businesses and ensure a prosperous future for our economy.

Yn ddiffuant,



Professor Dylan Jones-Evans