8. 7. Debate on the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee's Report on its Inquiry on the UK Government's Wales Bill

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:23 pm on 19 October 2016.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Huw Irranca-Davies Huw Irranca-Davies Labour 5:23, 19 October 2016

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I begin by thanking all of our committee members of all parties, our excellent clerking team and the support team around us and also those who’ve contributed with expert evidence to our report?

Constitutional issues are often considered to be dry, incidental matters of little consequence to the average person in the street. But if Brexit has taught us anything, it is that constitutional issues do matter and they do engage. So, we should not be surprised that the Wales Bill has been a source of much discussion, not just between politicians, but also when people use our laws on a daily basis. The Wales Bill will determine the laws we can make to improve the prosperity and quality of life of all citizens in Wales. Our role as legislators in scrutinising the Bill is to make sure that the Assembly has the best possible framework in which to make those laws. It is also to ensure that the constitution is accessible to all.

This is not constitutional navel gazing as some would have you believe; it is about making sure that the Assembly has all the necessary tools to make laws that deliver for the people of Wales. And that is why, even though this is the fourth Wales Bill in the last 20 years, we must speak out if the Bill makes the job of legislating more complicated and if it does not deliver what was promised.

There are elements of this Bill that we welcome. In principle, we agree with the move to a reserved-powers model. We also welcome the removal of the necessity test in relation to private and criminal law, giving the National Assembly greater freedom to legislate. We welcome the ability to remove and modify some UK Minister functions without consent, with bodies such as the Food Standards Agency and the Electoral Commission having been carved out from the consent requirements. We also welcome the listing of all the main Welsh public authorities in the Bill, removing any doubt that these bodies are within the National Assembly’s legislative competence.

However, our overall assessment of the Bill is that it is a complex and inaccessible piece of constitutional law. It will not deliver the lasting, durable settlement that the people of Wales had expected. That is disappointing and it is regrettable. The Bill certainly does not offer the progressive, ambitious and aspirational settlement that many in Wales hoped for and believed is needed. Neither does it befit a modern legislature and an equal partner within the family of nations that make up the United Kingdom.

This Bill is better than the draft Bill, and we welcome the changes made by the UK Government. However, of greater importance, this Bill will not improve the devolution settlement overall, as it stands. The complex way in which the Assembly’s legislative competence is expressed, including the number and the extent of reservations and restrictions, is far too restrictive. It is out of touch and it is out of date.

In addition, the National Assembly is being prevented from taking on responsibilities that would be expected of a mature legislature. It is clear that unless the Bill is amended significantly in the House of Lords, the Assembly will lose the power to make laws in certain areas. It does not, in our view, reflect or respect the democratic will of the people of Wales as expressed in 2011.

Before discussing in detail the conclusions of our work, I would like to use some examples to explain the practical effect of the Bill and how it fails to fully empower the National Assembly as a modern legislature. So, for example, the health committee and the First Minister raised concerns about the reservation of the sale and supply of alcohol, which could impact on the ability of the Welsh Government to tackle alcohol-related health issues. We’ve also heard concerns expressed about the loss of competence in relation to the protection of children and adoption policy, and—