Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:02 pm on 12 March 2019.
Diolch, Llywydd. Can I thank the Minister for her contribution this afternoon, because it has clearly set out some of the points that are important? It is important to stress that this is not about future trade agreements—this is about the trade agreements that are currently in place between the EU and other nations and how they're transferred over to the UK.
The external affairs committee has been following the developments of the UK Government's policy for international trade, and we've taken steps as a committee to develop expertise and understanding of the possible implications for Wales of the UK's approach. We've also started work to scrutinise the implications for Wales arising from those international agreements that are being carried over, having considered around 20 in the past fortnight—and several of these will rely on the Trade Bill being approved.
As a committee, I will start by saying that we do recognise that the Trade Bill, or at least some other form of legislation along similar lines, is needed to ensure that we have a smooth transition from the trading relationships we currently have through our membership of the EU to any relationships we have when we leave the EU. Acknowledging this, we also have a range of outstanding concerns, however, regarding the drafting of the Bill insofar as it seeks to legislate over devolved areas.
A year ago, we published our first report on the Trade Bill, and we were in agreement with the Welsh Government not to approve consent on similar lines, but we actually had a few extra concerns to add. That was very much—I think we saw the Bill being written very much in the same vein as the EU withdrawal Bill at the time, and those changes that were in the EU withdrawal Bill hadn't been transferred to the Trade Bill at that point in time.
The amendments to the Bill addressed some of our concerns—not all. Concurrent powers is a clear one that we have concerns about, because we believe that, actually, the Bill has exacerbated the use of concurrent powers under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018; I'll focus my contribution on that today.
Members will know that the external affairs committee, the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee and the Llywydd have all expressed concerns over the Welsh Government's approach to legislating for Brexit, insofar as much as the primary and secondary legislation related to Brexit is being routed through the UK Parliament more than the Assembly, and that's mainly at the Welsh Government's request. Now, I understand that the Welsh Government often states that it's a capacity issue, but it is still a fact.
We have previously opposed the granting of concurrent powers in devolved areas in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, because we were concerned that it would diminish the role of this Assembly in the process of legislating for Brexit. We've taken the same position in relation to the Trade Bill, so we are consistent in our concerns. We took this position last year, we've had the opportunity to observe how the EU withdrawal Act powers have been used and we've seen significantly more of the correcting statutory instruments that engage the Assembly's competence being made in London rather than Cardiff. The CLA committee has reported that some of these instruments have made substantive policy changes and that they've not just been used to make technical changes.
Further, since the original LCM was laid, the new devolution settlement for Wales, set out in the Wales Act 2017, has also come into force. Under this settlement, the Assembly is restricted from removing or modifying UK ministerial powers in devolved policy areas where those powers are concurrent with the Welsh Ministers' powers, or where the Welsh Ministers need the consent of or to consult with UK Ministers before they can exercise those powers. Therefore, every time a new concurrent power is created, or a Welsh ministerial power is made subject to consent or consultation with UK Ministers, future Assembly legislative competence is restricted.
Now, these three developments—the use of concurrent powers to limit the Assembly's role in legislating for Brexit, the use of concurrent powers to make substantive policy changes, in contradiction to the Welsh ministerial commitments and inter-governmental agreement, and the change to the devolution settlement, have led to a continuation of our concerns around the granting of concurrent powers in the Trade Bill. We concluded that our original concern about the provision of concurrent powers was well founded and still stands in relation to this Bill.
Now, we did read the legislative consent memorandum from the Minister and the amendments to that Bill, and we concluded that perhaps the Minister found herself in a similar place to us: observing relatively unsatisfactory progress against some of the demands for changes to the Bill, yet having to acknowledge the need for legislation if we are to exit smoothly from the EU—we acknowledge that.
I think it's important to highlight that where we have greater concerns is far more on the role of this institution as the Assembly, and ensuring the ability of this Assembly to scrutinise the processes and decisions being taken. We've continually reported against those concerns, and we will continue to do so if we see them. And our consideration of the Trade Bill illustrates the often unsatisfactory balancing act that is required when considering questions of legislative consent, because we can't actually change something; it's a simple binary decision on an LCM—we either approve it in its entirety or we reject it in its entirety. So, that is one of the concerns. That's nothing to do with this Bill, but it's still an issue we have.
There has been progress made; we recognise that. Some of the amendments sought by the Welsh Government have been agreed by the UK Government—some of them based upon commitments rather than actual text at this point in time, because, as you said, they're despatch box commitments. But they're still not actually on the face of the Bill. So, we do have deep concerns.
I hope, in closing, that the Welsh Government has heard our concerns about the use of concurrent powers and the gap in scrutiny that's being created as a consequence of that, and will ensure that we do a lot more scrutiny here rather than pass them on to Westminster.