|
Column Number: 41
Standing Committee D
Tuesday 29 June 2004
(Afternoon)
[Mr. Win Griffiths in the Chair]
Clause 30 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 31 to 38 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 39
Accounts and audit regulations
2.30 pm
Mr. Bill Wiggin (Leominster) (Con): I beg to move amendment No. 34, in page 27, line 38, at end insert—
'(d) Any draft regulations which are within subsection (3)(b) shall not be made unless a draft of the regulations has been laid before and approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament'.
Welcome back, Mr. Griffiths, and I hope you had a good lunch. It is splendid to see you in the Chair. Amendment No. 34 would add a new subsection to clause 39 so that the approval of both Houses of Parliament must be given to any regulation made under the clause that creates an offence. We are concerned that the accounting regulations dealt with in clause 39 could create a criminal offence of non-compliance, which would be introduced by the Assembly without any parliamentary procedure. We hope that criminal sanctions would not be created in regulations on accounting offences, but proper parliamentary scrutiny must be in place in the event of such regulations being brought forward.
Although the clause mirrors section 27 of the Audit Commission Act 1998, the Government's argument cannot be for consistency, because the Assembly could create a criminal offence that does not exist in England. Surely the Government are eager to ensure that Parliament is involved in regulations made under the clause, as they proclaim that one of the principles of the Bill regarding criminal law is equivalence between England and Wales. The clause allows for exactly the result that they say they do not want.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Don Touhig): Clause 39 empowers the Assembly, subject to consultation, to make regulations relating to the form and preparation of accounts by local government bodies in Wales. The regulations can also make provision concerning the public's right under the Bill to inspect documents and raise questions and objections. The Assembly can provide that a person who without reasonable excuse contravenes a particular provision of regulations made under the clause will be guilty of an offence.
Amendment No. 34 would make the Assembly's power subject to the approval of Parliament. The amendment would therefore restrict a power already
Column Number: 42
available to the Assembly by virtue of section 27 of the Audit Commission Act and the National Assembly for Wales (Transfer of Functions) Order 2001. Accounts and audit regulations allow for a different approach between England and Wales on interpreting non-compliance as an offence. However, to date, the approach has been consistent on a cross-border basis, which I hope will assuage the hon. Gentleman's concerns.
Before making regulations under this clause, the Assembly will be required to consult with the Auditor General, local government and accountancy bodies. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to fetter an existing power that the Assembly has in respect of regulations specific to Wales.
I cannot say whether you had a good lunch, Mr. Griffiths, as the hon. Gentleman mentioned, but my spies tell me that he had a busy time cycling around Westminster. I hope he feels better for it.
Mr. Wiggin: I am glad that the Minister is keeping an eye on me. I was on my bicycle, but we should not extend the powers to make that an offence—it is a helpful and environmentally sensitive way to get around.
I take the Minister's point that this is an existing power. He will have taken on board the equivalence argument that I made, so I see no point in pressing the issue further. We tabled amendments to try to get this issue right. Having drawn those concerns to the attention of the Committee, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 39 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 40
Documents relating to police authorities
Hywel Williams (Caernarfon) (PC): I beg to move amendment No. 46, in page 28, line 16, leave out 'may' and insert 'must'.
May I draw the Committee's attention to a matter that is of the utmost seriousness, given that we are debating the Public Audit (Wales) Bill, which concerns efficiency, economy and effectiveness? It cannot have escaped your attention, Mr. Griffiths, that my name has been spelled with an extra ''l'' on the amendment paper, so that, rather than being Hywel, I am miraculously transformed to ''Howeth''. There was obviously profligate use of the alphabet without prior permission. That demands the most immediate investigation on your part, and of course an immediate report to the Secretary of State and the Assembly. The question remains what to do with the extra ''l''. It cannot be ignored, destroyed or removed. I therefore suggest that it be donated to a deserving cause—perhaps to the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Wiggin)—so his constituency can become ''Lleominster'' and almost a Llan.
Column Number: 43
Mr. Wiggin: On a point of order, Mr. Griffiths. The hon. Gentleman is being generous with his l's, but my name, Bill, already ends in two l's. He should be grateful for the extra one.
Hywel Williams: I must now turn seriously to clause 40 and amendment No. 46, which is probing. Under the clause, if the Auditor General receives a public interest report prepared under clause 22(5) or (6) by an appointed auditor that relates to a police authority and other authorities, he must send it to the Secretary of State and the Assembly. However, the clause does not similarly require the Auditor General, when sending a document to police authorities, also to send a copy to the Assembly and the Secretary of State. When receiving, the Auditor General must send copies; when sending, he is not required to send documents to the Assembly or the Secretary of State. The amendment is probing as to why there is not an equivalent requirement in both parts of the clause.
I am aware that the Auditor General might send many documents to police authorities and that not all of them will be of interest to the Secretary of State or the Assembly. However, there could be a public interest test. After all, that is what clause 22 is all about. It deals with immediate and other reports of public interest. That clause says that auditors should make a report, and immediate reports are mentioned several times. Subsection (5) states:
''In a case within subsection (3), the auditor must send the report to the body, and a copy of the report to the Auditor General''.
Subsection (6) states that
''the auditor must send the report to the body, and a copy of the report to the Auditor General''.
Auditors must send reports to the Auditor General, but he must do so only in some cases and may do so in others. As the amendment is probing, perhaps the Minister will enlighten us as to why there is a variation.
Mr. Touhig: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for how he put that point. In fact, I think we are all grateful to him: he was the only Member who managed to introduce some humour to our Welsh Grand Committee debate on the Bill after pre-legislative scrutiny. That certainly disproves some things that are said about people in north Wales having no sense of humour. He has a great sense of humour, and we greatly appreciated it at that time.
Clause 40(1) already requires the Auditor General to send a public interest report relating to a police authority in Wales to the Assembly and the Secretary of State—in practice, the Home Secretary—as well as to the authority itself. The amendment would require the Auditor General to send to the Assembly and the Secretary of State any other document that he had sent to a police authority in Wales, irrespective of its importance or sensitivity, as the hon. Gentleman recognised. That means that the Auditor General would have to forward any document, even if it was of little importance or not entirely relevant. It could be said that he should pass on his acceptance of an invitation to the police ball, for instance, but I am sure that that is not the intention behind the amendment.
Column Number: 44
In cases in which information is not of public interest, it is more appropriate to allow the Auditor General to use his discretion as to what documentation he passes to the Assembly or the Secretary of State. I take the hon. Gentleman's point seriously, but we can safely leave it to the Auditor General to decide when it is in the public interest to send on a document—our experience has shown that. I hope that the points I have made satisfy him and that he will withdraw his amendment.
Hywel Williams: Given that explanation and reassurance, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 40 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 41 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 42
Studies on impact of statutory provisions etc
Question proposed, that the clause stand part of the Bill.
The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to take new clause 1—Comparative studies—
'(1) Studies carried out in section 41 or 42 may include comparative studies involving local government bodies in England if the Auditor General for Wales considers it desirable to do so for the purposes of his analysis of local government bodies in Wales.
(2) If local government bodies in England are to be included in any study under section 41 or 42, the consultation mentioned in sections 41(5) and 42(3) shall also include the Secretary of State and the Audit Commission.'.
The procedure is that if there is any vote on the new clause, it will occur later in our proceedings.
Mr. Wiggin: I apologise to the hon. Member for Caernarfon (Hywel Williams), who will know that my constituency already has a Welsh name—Llanllieni—but it was generous of him to offer me an extra 'l'.
New clause 1 would insert a new clause after clause 42 and thereby allow the Auditor General for Wales to extend his value-for-money studies to English local government bodies, provided he consults with the Secretary of State and the Audit Commission. The new clause would give the Auditor General the full power of comparative study, so that he would not feel confined to Welsh local government bodies and therefore unable to undertake a comprehensive analysis.
The Audit Commission in England will be able to study Welsh bodies, under schedule 2 to the Audit Commission Act, but there is no such power for the Auditor General. As the Bill stands, he must consider only Welsh bodies when carrying out comprehensive studies. Under clause 43, he must co-operate with the Audit Commission when carrying out value-for-money studies under clauses 41 and 42. However, co-operation with each other to assist with the other's value-for-money functions is not required.
Column Number: 45
Wales co-operates with England on Welsh studies, and England co-operates with Wales on English studies, but England does not have to co-operate with Wales on Welsh studies, or vice versa. I am concerned that, without the power to examine English bodies or the ability to require the co-operation of the Audit Commission, audits on Wales could be at a disadvantage compared with audits on England. It is not right that the Auditor General for Wales is in a worse position than his counterpart in England because he has to rely on the other party's good will.
| 
