Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Mark Isherwood.

Diolch, Llywydd. In your 30 September written statement—update on the development of the justice system and the legal sector in Wales—you said that, although the UK Government had rejected the Thomas commission report's central recommendation regarding the devolution of justice and policing,

'a large number of other recommendations...are achievable under the current devolution arrangements or involve some element of devolution without transferring responsibility for justice in its entirety.'

In this context, I note that, when I visited the north-west regional crime unit early last year—a collaboration between six neighbouring police forces, including north Wales—I was told that evidence given to the Thomas commission by the chief constables and police and crime commissioners in Wales was largely ignored in the commission's report.

But in your 30 September statement, you also said that you expected discussions between the two Governments on a range of topics to begin shortly, including disaggregated justice data for Wales; exploring the possibility of problem-solving courts in Wales; support for advice service providers; quality and location of court buildings; Welsh language provision in the justice system; and the organisation of the senior judiciary, including representation in the UK Supreme Court. What therefore is the state of play with these discussions?

Thank you for the question. And it is the case that, obviously, we continue to pursue the issues around the devolution of justice—I won't go into that in detail, we've rehearsed those many times. But there are also many other areas that were identified in the Thomas commission report, which have resulted, and are continuing to result, in engagement with the UK Government and with the Ministry of Justice on those areas where we can co-operate and where we can make a contribution to improve the arrangements that are already in hand.

I was due to meet with and discuss with the Lord Chancellor, with Robert Buckland. Unfortunately, the day before I was due to meet him, there was a UK Government reshuffle and he was replaced. I have written to Dominic Raab, his replacement, in order to ask for a meeting. That meeting, I think, is in the process of being arranged, but, in the interim, Lord Wolfson, who has a ministerial responsibility in this area also, I am due to be meeting, I think, imminently, to discuss these areas, to discuss ways we can work collectively better, to discuss some of the issues that you've raised. And they are issues around the operation of the family courts, drug and alcohol courts, and the pilots, women's issues, data, digitisation, and so on. So, that is ongoing work.

Thank you. Three years ago, I attended the event held in Wrexham by Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service in Wales to discuss the 'Strengthening probation, building confidence' paper, under which all offender management services in Wales sit within the National Probation Service from last year. The HM Prison and Probation Service in Wales would explore options for the commissioning of rehabilitative services, such as interventions and community payback; they would build upon the unique arrangements they already have in Wales through their established prisons and probation directorate, and on existing successful local partnerships, better reflecting the devolved responsibilities of the Welsh Government.

In your September statement this year, you said that you're

'working with Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service, the Home Office and the Police and Crime Commissioners on the Youth Justice and Female Offending Blueprints, including the establishment of a Residential Women's Centre in Wales'— which the social justice Minister referred to earlier—

'and the development of a new delivery model for the Welsh secure estate for justice and looked after children.'

What therefore is the current state of play regarding this?

Thank you for that. And, obviously, the probation service has been through an incredibly difficult time, and again is an area where there is work that is under way in looking at the way in which it could be better co-ordinated with the various integrated services within Wales. And, obviously, this is an area that I think is primed for devolution. It fits very naturally within the host of devolved services that all interlink with the probation services.

But in terms of all the other areas, in terms of the residential women's centre, the Minister has already explained the progress that's been made there on the delivery models. Those discussions continue to be under way and that work is still in progress.

Okay. Thank you. My final question, a slight change of tack, but the latest Special Educational Needs Tribunal for Wales's annual report shows that of the 149 applications not still pending at the time of the publication, only 21 were dismissed, suggesting that the SEN system's operation was broken. Concluding my response to you in yesterday's debate on the president of the Welsh Tribunals' annual report, I stated that the report refers to the Special Educational Needs Tribunal for Wales, SENTW, referring to the clear need to ensure that the education of vulnerable children is not compromised, and to the transition from SENTW to the education tribunal. In this context, it is of extreme concern to the families I've represented that neither SENTW, nor it successor body, can take any further enforcement action when the relevant public bodies fail to carry out their orders. 

This has been a recurrent theme in my casework past and present. The tribunal has confirmed that the new legislation does not change how compliance with tribunal orders are dealt with. Although the orders are legally binding, the tribunal still has no enforcement powers. However, as with any public administration, a judicial review could be brought against the local authority in the High Court, which is clearly beyond the means of the vast majority of affected families. What action, if any, do you therefore propose to address this?

Well, I thank you again for that comment, and of course the reference to the points that were raised by Sir Wyn Williams in his third report. And you do indeed make the case for the devolution of justice very, very strongly, and I endorse that.

I think the issues around the tribunals, the organisation of the tribunals, and the decisions of the tribunals are going to be a matter for what I think will be a tribunals Bill, where all these issues are going to have to be looked at, because what we are doing is actually creating a new, I suppose, structured part of the Welsh judicial system, which will incorporate the tribunals and we'll have to look at not only the operation of the tribunals themselves, their independence, but also the way in which the decisions that they carry out are actually either enforceable or operable.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhys ab Owen. 

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Wales could be a thriving independent nation—the words of the right honourable Michael Gove. I look forward to seeing him in the next Yes Cymru rally. Now, in fairness to him, and I can be fair to Tories also, he did go on to say that people in Wales benefit from having two Governments, and that devolution is the best of both worlds for Wales. I, of course, don't agree with that, but for devolution to work, there needs to be mutual respect and co-operation between Governments. And, time and time again, we are seeing the obvious breakdown in the relationship between Welsh Government and UK Government. That is clear from several legislative consent motion memoranda. With a No. 10 spokesperson saying yesterday about Boris Johnson's premiership,

'There is a lot of concern inside the building...It's just not working', and with Conservative MPs voting against and abstaining time and time again in votes in Westminster, it's about time, isn't it, that Boris Johnson puts away the bluster and starts to work constructively with the Governments of these islands. And it was disappointing yesterday to find out that Boris Johnson didn't attend the British-Irish summit once again. Do you have an update on inter-governmental discussions, especially with regard to the implementation of independent arbitration, which is sorely needed, to resolve inter-governmental disputes? 

Well, thank you for that question. I suppose just one caveat to start with is that you have to take very cautiously and carefully the comments of Mr Michael Gove, because he also said in that same statement that Mark Drakeford was one of his best friends [Laughter.]—and that immediately caused some suspicion to me. When he says that the benefit of having two Governments—. I suppose, with my background, I heard that an awful lot from Vladimir Putin, about the relationship with the Ukraine—how much better they'd be off with two Governments, and, of course, there, there's a war under way and tanks on the border. 

On the serious point, though, about the inter-governmental discussions, of course, there has been considerable progress in coming to reach what, I think, will be effectively a memorandum or a set of arrangements that will allow for a disputes process of ministerial meetings between the First Ministers and Prime Ministers on a regular basis and an inter-ministerial arrangement as well. The difficulty with all of these things, of course, is that they are very dependent on goodwill and trust, and that, sometimes, has been in short supply in recent months and years, and it doesn't have the same thing as a constitutional status, which is what is actually really required. But if it does work, it is certainly a step forward, it is a stepping stone. I've had discussions with my counterparts in the other nations of the UK, and we will do everything we can to make it work, because it is in the interest of the people of Wales, and more broadly, to make it work, but we will have to see how that develops. 

Diolch. Later on today, there's a debate about the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and I'm pleased about this, because I'm a strong believer that Acts of Parliament need to be enforceable, not only aspirational. I'm aware of three occasions that this Act has been in front of the courts and has tried to be used in a judicial review, and in each case the public authority under challenge successfully argued that the well-being duty placed on bodies by the Act was too general and too aspirational to be enforceable. Three experts say this about the Act: Dr Sarah Nason from Bangor says it doesn't endow individuals with legally enforceable rights against public bodies; Lord Thomas said on Monday to the Senedd justice committee,

'one of the problems with the future generations Act is that it is not specific and tight enough. It doesn't hold politicians...their feet—to the wheel.'

And, then, the final expert is you, Counsel General. You said here in 2014 that the principles of the Bill are far too loose and far too woolly. The Commission on Justice in Wales recommended early engagement when drafting legislation with the judiciary. Now, that's a common practice across the world. Is that happening in Wales? And isn't it time to amend the Act in consultation with the judges to give it some teeth and to make it enforceable? 

Well, thank you. You raise a whole series of points that have always been part of the discussion about what was a very innovative piece of legislation. I think I was involved in the committee that actually scrutinised the legislation that went through. And it was very innovative, and I think it still is very innovative, and I think it is also very significant in terms of the culture change that it was partly about. You're right—there is this debate in terms of legislation, in terms of enforceability of specific powers, as opposed to the aspirational part of the legislation, which seeks to create frameworks for change and changes in culture. I think, with all legislation, once it has been in force for a while, it does need to be reviewed, it needs to be assessed, and that's not just true of this particular piece of legislation. The legislation is still internationally recognised as one of the most advanced, modern and progressive pieces of legislation, and other countries have sought to emulate it. But, I think, you're right, and we look forward to the report from the commissioner and the comments she will make, and those comments will be very seriously considered, and we'll consider them also within the context of other pieces of legislation, where it's not just enough to pass the legislation but you want to know what the outcome of that legislation is and that that legislation is effective. I confide that, over the course of the coming months and years, I'm sure I will have many of my former quotes that will be thrown back at me at one stage or another, so thank you for the advance notice. [Laughter.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer (David Rees) took the Chair.

Counsel General, it's not difficult to see the lack of primary legislation this term in this place. After six months of the sixth Senedd, I'm aware of only one Government Bill that has been presented to the Senedd. Indeed, Peter Fox's Bill was opposed by Government partially because of a lack of time. In the fifth Senedd, only 32 Bills were passed in this place, as compared with 85 in the Scottish Parliament. Time and again, we hear the argument about a lack of capacity, a lack of expertise and a lack of time being used by the Welsh Government as a reason to use Westminster Bills rather than passing Welsh Bills. The lack-of-time argument was used in relation to Peter Fox's Bill. Of course, I have been sounding like a stuck record: using Westminster Bills brings complexity to the devolution settlement, ensures that Bills are not bilingual, makes accessibility more difficult, and means that no real scrutiny happens in this place. If capacity, expertise and time are a real problem, what steps are you taking in order to enable us to do our real work here as a Parliament and to pass Welsh Acts?

Can I thank him for the comments? They do raise very serious issues in terms of the legislation, the way in which legislation is dealt with and, I suppose, the course we've been on for, really, 10 years as we've learnt to become what I think is an effective legislature. There are many areas, of course, where we would like to legislate and we have to look at the priority in terms of the delivery of that legislation, and the way in which we bring forward Bills, whether we look at the Rolls-Royce type of Bill that covers just about anything and everything that will go into a particular subject matter, or whether we have a more prioritised and a more focused area in certain Acts of legislation. That is something that is actually under way at the moment in terms of looking at the way that legislation process takes place.

It is also fair to say, of course, and this is one of the anomalies within our current inter-governmental relations and so on, that the scale of the UK Government's legislative programme into areas, the issues that raises with regard to devolution integrity, the grey areas in disputes over that, the timing and the lack of advance information on legislation and so on create enormous demands in terms of those, because we have to treat those as pieces of legislation that Wales might benefit from or where we have to draw the devolution lines and so on. So, that is a significant issue, and I am certainly looking at those in terms of an overview of the impact, not just in terms of devolution integrity, but also in terms of the impact and the extent to which we are having to resort to another Government's agenda on many occasions. So, there are issues there that have to be taken. There are also still the significant Brexit and COVID issues that are there.

I did make the statement in respect of the first year of the legislative programme. I am working very hard at the moment and engaging with colleagues and officials and so on, looking at the years 2 and 3 programmes. I can assure you there's a considerable amount of primary legislation that is being looked at, particularly the manifesto commitments. There may be other commitments or aspects of them that will arise out of the recent co-operation agreement and so on, and I will happily engage with Members over that programme in due course when I'm in a position to make further announcements on it. But I can assure you there will be, certainly, a significant amount of primary legislation coming through.

Can I make one additional point, as well? It's in terms of, I suppose, partly a consequence of the last Senedd and the COVID and Brexit situation, and that is that it's not enough just to be passing the legislation; we also have to ensure that we have to, within as efficient a time as possible, be implementing the legislation as well, and each implementation piece is almost equivalent to a piece of primary legislation, as the Member will know, in its own right, and there are an enormous number of those, particularly within the education field, but within others as well.