The next group of amendments is group 5, the last group, and this group of amendments relates to regulation-making powers. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 14. I call on David Melding to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. David Melding.

Amendment 14 (David Melding) moved.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I so move. Amendments 14, 15, 16 and 17, in group 5, are amendments to clarify that the regulation-making powers in this Bill are to make consequential amendments only. Amendment 18 is a further amendment to ensure that the regulation-making powers shall lapse when the ONS confirms that RSLs have been reclassified.

The explanatory note to the Bill states that section 18 provides that the Welsh Ministers may make consequential amendments for the purpose of giving full effect to any provisions set out in the Bill. Section 18(1) of the Bill contains a Henry VIII power, where regulations are used to amend primary legislation, and provides that the Welsh Ministers may make such provision, amending, repealing or revoking any enactment they consider appropriate in consequence of any provision made by or under the Bill, or for the purpose of giving full effect to any provision made by or under the Bill. Section 18(4) provides that, where regulations are made under section 18(1), which amend or repeal an Act or Measure of the Assembly, or an Act of the UK Parliament—i.e. when exercising the Henry VIII power—the power under section 18(1) would be subject to the affirmative procedure. Section 18(5) provides that, where any other regulations are made under section 18(1) they will be subject to the negative procedure.

During the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee scrutiny we asked why the affirmative procedure does not apply to all regulations made under section 18, regardless of whether they amend primary legislation, and the Minister told us that this section provides the power to make essentially consequential amendments, and that the approach taken is in line with the Counsel General's guidance. This is another argument between the Executive and the legislature. Much as I rate the Counsel General and the previous holders of that report, and venerate, indeed, to some extent their guidance, it's what we want and what CLAC has been setting out as best practice that we should aspire to. Indeed, in the sector there was some concern expressed about the approach the Government had taken. I refer again to UK Finance, who did express their concern that the proposed power in section 18 was too wide. They may have recanted under the encouragement of the Welsh Government, but that was what they originally said, and they did make the point, as I made earlier, that it wasn't just what people that had a high degree of knowledge of the sector would interpret, but it was in that wider circle of funders who could see this as too wide and interfering a power, and potentially not as rigorous, therefore, as a narrower approach. 

In a response to this amendment at Stage 2, the Minister first argued that it would be helpful to amend the heading of section 18 to indicate more clearly the narrower scope of the power. However, in reality this makes no difference whatsoever, as headings in legislation are for guidance only. What we need to see here is an amendment that's a lot more restrictive, and which does address the concerns of how broad the current powers are. The amendment that I've proposed restricts the scope of the power and uses the wording from the Abolition of the Right to Buy and Associated Rights (Wales) Act 2018. I have to say, I'm not a great fan of that Act, but in terms of the way it's dealt with the regulatory powers it's a better model than the one the Minister's come up with. I have to say, I think it's fairly concerning that there are any Henry VIII powers in the Bill given the unusual nature of this Bill, but also that it is responding to a very particular issue in terms of ONS reclassification. So, anyway, amendment 18 in this group specifically rectifies these concerns about the open-endedness of these powers by restricting them or ending them once reassessment has been confirmed by ONS.

So, I think it's important that we look at regulation-making powers—there aren't many in this Bill, it has to be said—and have the best system available to us. We shouldn't allow, through this particular avenue, greater scope than is absolutely necessary, because what the Government thinks is consequential and necessary is not always what we think, and therefore more restrictive powers, given the ability of the executive to get its business, have to be justified here when we're dealing with the actual primary principle of this legislation. I therefore move. 

I call on the Minister, Rebecca Evans. 

Thank you. David Melding referred to some of the early concerns that were raised in respect of the amendment power, and it did appear that the concern raised by the stakeholders at the early stages stemmed from a misunderstanding of the exact scope of the power of section 18 of the Bill and a concern that funders, who may not be familiar with the legislation, might perceive an open-ended ability of Ministers to change the functions of the regulator as a risk of indefinite uncertainty, and this was set out in that written evidence from UK Finance. 

However, I can assure you that section 18 does not provide the Welsh Ministers with an open-ended ability to change the functions of the regulator. Section 18 is a narrow power that is limited to making changes to other legislation, changes that are needed to make this legislation operate properly, in light of the specific changes that are made on the face of this Bill. Any changes made using the power in section 18 would therefore have to be closely connected with the changes made by the Bill. So, an example of the type of consequential amendment we are discussing can be found in the land registration rules. These currently set out a form of a restriction that refers to the consent to disposal of land by an RSL, which we are removing. This form will need to be updated to reflect the fact that there will no longer be a requirement for the RSL to obtain consent. It is these types of consequential amendments that need to be made to ensure that the substantive provisions in the Bill operate effectively. 

Discussions have been held with UK Finance following their initial written evidence to discuss the actual scope of the power that I referred to earlier. Following those discussions, UK Finance has confirmed to my officials that they are content with the scope of the power. Members will also note that the title of section 18 has been changed to make that narrow scope clearer within the Bill.

There are some practical difficulties with the proposed amendments. The effect of amendments 14 to 17 is that amendments could not be made to other legislation at all at any point. This would mean that, if other legislation was identified that needed to be amended to make it operate properly, it could not be easily done, which would frustrate the effective implementation of this Bill.

Turning to amendment 18, this has the effect that the consequential amendment power in section 18 of the Bill will lapse as soon as the Welsh Ministers receive confirmation that RSLs have been reclassified. But, I will stress again that this is not a power to make amendments for the purpose of achieving reclassification. The narrow power conferred by section 18 must be able to be used beyond the reclassification decision, which is expected soon after Royal Assent, as at that point there may not have been time to make the regulations. It's also possible that other Acts made or implemented after the date of reclassification will need to be amended. UK Finance has also confirmed to my officials that they are content that there is no provision for the power to automatically lapse in this Bill. For these reasons, I recommend these amendments are not supported.

David Melding to reply to the debate.

Can I just finally say, as I've said, I've followed the model in the abolition of the right to buy Act? I don't think it makes any sense to have powers that go beyond the actual purpose of the Act. There has to be a time when that point is reached and we know that what's been done has been done. Therefore, I urge the amendments are approved.

The question is that amendment 14 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We will move to an electronic vote on amendment 14. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 16, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, amendment 14 is not agreed.

Amendment 14: For: 16, Against: 37, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

David Melding, amendment 15.

Amendment 15 (David Melding) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 15 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We’ll move to an electronic vote. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 16, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, the amendment is not agreed.

Amendment 15: For: 16, Against: 37, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

David Melding, amendment 16.

Amendment 16 (David Melding) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 16 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We’ll move to an electronic vote on amendment 16. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 16, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, the amendment is not agreed.

Amendment 16: For: 16, Against: 37, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

David Melding, amendment 17.

Amendment 17 (David Melding) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 17 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We’ll move to an electronic vote on amendment 17. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 16, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, amendment 17 is not agreed.

Amendment 17: For: 16, Against: 37, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

David Melding, amendment 18.

Amendment 18 (David Melding) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 18 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We will move to an electronic vote on amendment 18. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 16, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, amendment 18 is not agreed.

Amendment 18: For: 16, Against: 37, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

David Melding, amendment 19.

Amendment 19 (David Melding) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 19 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We’ll move to an electronic vote on amendment 19. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, no abstentions, 30 against. Therefore, amendment 19 is not agreed.

Amendment 19: For: 23, Against: 30, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

David Melding, amendment 2.

Amendment 2 (David Melding) moved.

Move.

The question is that amendment 2 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] We’ll move to an electronic vote on amendment 2. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 23, no abstentions, 30 against. Amendment 2 is, therefore, not agreed.

Amendment 2: For: 23, Against: 30, Abstain: 0

Amendment has been rejected

We have reached the end of our Stage 3 consideration of the Regulation of Registered Social Landlords (Wales) Bill. I declare that all sections of and Schedules to the Bill are deemed agreed.

All sections of the Bill deemed agreed.