I welcome very much the Secretary of State here today, and I would genuinely welcome him back again so that the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, which I now Chair, can constructively engage on scrutiny and, indeed, help him improve the Wales Bill. Now, they may not discuss this ad nauseam in the Dog and Duck, but I’m more than happy to buy him a pint in the Mountain Hare in Brynna if he accepts our invitation; maybe even two, Secretary of State, and I’ve never bought two drinks for anybody. [Interruption.] Not for all of you. [Laughter.]

None of us, surely, want to end up with a Bill that does, indeed, give some neat steps forward for Wales, but has some worrying unintended consequences that could even roll back the devolution settlement. Our committee—I want to pay tribute here to committee members past and present, and previous Chairs as well—has been taking extensive evidence from expert witnesses, and we’ll continue receiving evidence throughout the summer. There has been a cautious welcome for some of the changes made since the original draft Bill, which was universally derided, but some common and serious concerns are already becoming clear.

Despite categorical reassurances from the Secretary of State for Wales, witnesses to the committee have raised concerns that the new justice impact assessments may, when used in concert with existing powers currently available to the Secretary of State, be used to veto future made-in-Wales legislation. This raises the possibility that this provision extends, or at least reinforces, the ability of the UK Government to impede the will of the Welsh Government and of this National Assembly. It has been proposed that these JIAs serve no useful purpose, or could even be harmful to the interests of Wales, and, therefore, it is proposed that they should be dropped.

The Bill proposes that we move to a reserved-powers model, of the sort that is used in Scotland, but not identical, where the Welsh Government would be able to legislate on any matter not expressly reserved to the UK Parliament. The original draft Bill was heavily criticised for drawing that list of reservations so widely that it reduced, clearly, the ability of Wales to legislate on many matters. But, even now, witnesses are telling us that the full spirit of the reserved-powers model is not self-evident, and there are widespread concerns that some of the reserved powers could actually roll back devolution. That wouldn’t be acceptable, Secretary of State, so changes will have to be considered and made.

To alleviate concerns over how to deal with the ongoing evolution of a body of law that is made in Wales or relates to Wales, and the implications of this for a distinct, though not necessarily separate, jurisdiction, the Secretary of State for Wales has established the justice in Wales working group. Indeed, this approach would, of course, be welcome. But our committee is hearing that the First Minister of Wales and the Welsh Government have not been invited to set the terms of reference and have not yet been formally invited to participate, and the working group will only report to UK Ministers and not to the Welsh Government. Yet, with a rethink, I would say to the Secretary of State for Wales that a standing group considering the growth in Wales’s legislation over time has real merit, but only if the Welsh Government is directly involved.

There is more, of course, and this is why we’ve asked the Secretary of State for Wales to appear before us to share his thinking, I have to say, and to consider what leading constitutional and legal experts have told us must change. One of the expert witnesses told the committee that a Wales Bill needs to be ‘aspirational’. I challenged that and asked why it shouldn’t just be a pragmatic and practical statement of what currently exists. The witness said,

‘Because I think constitutions send messages about what kind of politics you are conducting in a country, what kind of society you want to live in, what kind of aspirations you have for your future generations.’

She went on:

‘And all these messages, symbolic or not, at declarative level or at a very technical level—I think the constitution should go further than just technical and legalistic expressions of political reality.’

There are some welcome parts of this Bill. It is better than the original draft. It has some wins for Wales, but it also has some potential bear-traps that could actually roll back our devolution settlement. I, therefore, extend again a warm welcome to the Secretary of State for Wales—no stranger to this Senedd, to this parliament—to come back again to our committee and help us improve the Bill for the good of Wales, for the good of the people of Wales and for the good of a more durable constitutional settlement.