Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:48 pm on 2 April 2019.
First, can I thank the Counsel General and his staff for the draft Bill, and also my colleagues on the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee? I think this has been one of those occasions where part of me still wishes that I was involved in legal study and that my brain was still in that groove, because like, I suspect, all of us, I want the law to be more accessible, but when I think about quite what that means, I don't think I'm sure I know what it means. I'm taking some relief from the fact that there seems to be a difference of opinion between other members of CLAC and even the Counsel General on this occasion. Because we'll be supporting what we think are the general principles of this Bill at this stage, we want to give the Counsel General the opportunity to consider how the draft Bill might be amended as it progresses. Perhaps there's a chance here to crystallise or encapsulate precisely what you mean, Counsel General, by 'accessibility'. It is the core purpose of this statute, after all.
However, Members may know we took evidence from practitioners and academics who raised, as do I and my fellow committee members, the idea of creating an efficient functioning Welsh statute book—a sort of one-stop shop, if you like. But that evidence wasn't consistent, and I don't think we need to go back 70 years, Mick, to spot that problem. Let's take, for example, the concept of codification as the home of this one-stop shop, and I invite Members to consider what that might mean. The explanatory memorandum—and I think it's been reinforced by you today, Counsel General—suggests that codification is a process that follows a period of consolidation of existing laws that fall within the Assembly's competence, that marshals that and non-consolidated law into a framework that can cope over time with amendments and the introduction of new primary and secondary legislation, as well as guidance in a given subject area.
That's not what some of our witnesses thought it meant. In fact, Professor Thomas Watkin, on whose observations we've relied on many occasions in this institution, wasn't sure what the end point was. One witness, who was speaking from a practitioner's perspective, had in mind a code Act, a primary statute from which all else flowed, existing Acts forming chapters beneath it, constrained by amending Standing Orders. So, while there will be other non-legislative steps to help our constituents find and understand current laws in Wales—this was referred to in some of the recommendations—I think I'd like to see some further clarity on what the Counsel General means by 'codification', even if that means being explicit about what it isn't, because while all legislators should strive for their laws to be just, the first requirement for them is to provide certainty. I draw Members' attention particularly to recommendations 7 and 11 of the CLAC report to underline that point.
The explanatory memorandum tells us that prior to codification in a particular subject area, the Government should consolidate existing laws wherever possible, and I, along with other Members, have queried, actually, why we've missed opportunities to do this with previous Assembly Bills. I think it would have given us the chance to test the means of overcoming three practical challenges innate in the process of consolidation. The first of those, and it is a very positive first, is the chance to use the process of restating law to recreate it as bilingual law. Where it is actual word-for-word restatement, though, are we talking about translation of existing law or the making of new bilingual law? Because, as I hope others will mention, we do then run into the issue of which of the interpretation Acts we then apply to this—whether it's the 1978 Act, or the interpretation part of this Act.
Secondly, not all the existing law within our legislative competence is made by this Parliament. As we’ve seen, a considerable body of our secondary Brexit legislation is being made by the UK Parliament, but we are more familiar with this happening with primary legislation. If we are to produce an efficient Welsh statute book, it needs to include all law applicable in Wales, I think, regardless of which parliament has made that law. How does consolidation, as distinct from interpretation, work when there is an element of Welsh Ministers and UK Ministers acting together in a piece of existing legislation?
And then thirdly, the explanatory memorandum foresees that consolidation is going to go well beyond just simply cutting and pasting old law, and will use more modern terms, settle, perhaps, on single definitions, and even update existing law. While the Bill does make some reference to the Assembly’s role in scrutinising secondary legislation in a codified future, I want to raise a point with you now, Counsel General, for future consideration, because this applies to primary, as well as secondary legislation, I think. If Welsh Government wishes to restate law that this Assembly has made in the name of consolidation, we must proactively scrutinise that restatement with facility to amend Welsh Government drafts. If codification requires changes to this Assembly’s Standing Orders, which has been suggested in evidence, Welsh Government cannot insist upon or presume those changes. If a Member is drawn in the ballot for a backbench Bill that falls within the competence of this institution, Welsh Government cannot be allowed to withhold its support merely on the grounds that it doesn't fit neatly into a code.
So, finally, Llywydd, if, as an intended or unintended consequence of this Bill the Assembly faces any restriction on its ability to pass any law within its reserved-powers competence, the Welsh Conservatives will not support it, and I really hope we can work together to avoid any possibility of that happening. Thank you