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

Diolch, Llywydd. Well, last week, the UK justice Secretary announced that seven new regional Ministry of Justice offices will be opened across Wales and England as part of the UK Government's Places for Growth programme, with 22,000 roles moving out of London by 2030. This move will see more than 2,000 more roles in areas like finance, human resource and digital move out by 2030, with 500 of those heading to Wrexham, Swansea, Cardiff and Newport.

A new collaboration centre will also open in Cardiff for teams to meet up or attend training and for home workers to use when they need to be in the office. The UK justice Secretary said:

'By having more of our staff based outside London we can recruit the best people wherever they live so that the justice system benefits from more diverse backgrounds, outlooks and experience.'

And the Welsh Secretary added:

'We want to make full use of the talent and potential of the Welsh workforce and moving hundreds of roles to Wales will help us achieve that objective.'

How will you engage positively with this, both to this end and to ensure synergy with devolved services, maximising the strengths of both Governments to a common end?

Well, I thank you for the question and I do support the proposal that has been made and welcome the statement that's been made. I can inform you, in fact, that myself and the Minister for Social Justice met approximately several hours ago with Lord Wolfson to actually discuss the very announcement and what the implications would actually be. These, of course, aren't new jobs, but they're jobs that, as individuals retire or leave, will be transferred to seven new regional hubs.

I think what is unclear is the timescale over which this will happen, because it seems that there are a number of factors. The point I made is: well, of course, if there are going to be significant numbers of Ministry of Justice jobs transferring to Wales, there might be opportunities in terms of doing something about the appalling state of the Cardiff Civil and Family Justice Centre—an issue where there are real concerns in terms of the facilities that are available, but just the very message that is sent out by the state of that civil justice centre and the need for a new purpose-built civil justice centre in Cardiff. And that would be an opportunity, wouldn't it, to actually look at where Minister of Justice facilities are placed. Unfortunately, it doesn't look as though there is going to be any significant progress on the civil justice centre, but, in terms of the jobs, we will of course give every co-operation and liaise and engage over how best to facilitate this, as we are doing in fact over other areas of co-operation within the justice field with the Ministry of Justice and with the various areas that are within Welsh Government responsibility. 

Thank you, and, of course, a new collaboration centre will also open in Cardiff. But responding to your statement, 'Legal Aid and Access to Justice', here three weeks ago, I referred to that week's UK Government announcement of additional funding into the family mediation scheme to help thousands more families avoid the courtroom to last July's House of Commons Justice Committee report on the future of legal aid, which identified a real need for a more flexible scheme that allows anyone with a legal problem who cannot afford a lawyer to access early legal advice, and to the UK Government's legal aid means test review as part of its broader legal support action plan, and asked what engagement you've had with the UK Government regarding these matters and the consultation that will follow. Your response then, unfortunately, failed to answer my question and made no reference to the actions regarding legal aid currently being taken by the UK Parliament and current UK Government. So, therefore, how will you engage positively with this to ensure synergy with devolved services, maximising the strengths of both Governments to a common end?

Thank you for the question. There is no doubt that, the last decade, the legal aid cuts have had an absolute disastrous impact on our communities and have disenfranchised many of our Welsh citizens from access to justice. In terms of the review—the two reviews, of course—the one review is in respect of criminal legal aid, with Lord Bellamy. I, in fact, met with Lord Bellamy to discuss that; I again raised the issue of Lord Bellamy's proposals with regard to criminal legal aid, and, in particular, some of the recommendations that are being made on the need to properly fund to deal with the issue of some of the advice deserts that we actually have. And we're still awaiting a decision from UK Government as to what they intend with that.

As important, if not actually more important, is actually the civil justice review, that I believe Lord Wolfson is engaged with at the moment. And obviously, there are significant areas there of concern to us, which are with regard to socioeconomic issues and legal aid, and generally other areas with regard to civil justice access. So, we look forward to really seeing what the proposals are that will be forthcoming. Obviously, means testing is relevant in both criminal legal aid and indeed in civil legal aid. As things stand at the moment, though, in terms of the massive cuts that there have been to legal aid, and the impact on our communities, an important lifeline is, of course, the single advice fund that the Minister for Social Justice is responsible for, and which has helped in the region of 250,000 cases for 130,000 Welsh citizens over the past couple of years.

Thank you. Thank you very much for acknowledging that. Well, last week, the UK Government announced that it will be bringing forward a Brexit Freedoms Bill—[Laughter.]—to end the special status of EU law, to make our businesses more competitive and our people more prosperous. I didn't make up the name of the Bill; that's the Bill's name. This Bill will allow EU law to be more easily amended or removed in the future. The UK Government also published a 'The benefits of Brexit' White Paper, setting out how regulations will be reviewed to, for example, create a fit-for-purpose regulatory framework for artificial intelligence, and to deliver cleaner air, create new habitats and reduce waste. Responding, you stated that you want to engage with the UK Government constructively regarding the Bill, but expressed concern that it might lead to reductions in farming and fishing standards, as well as environmental protections.

However, at the time of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill, the UK Government agreed that UK-wide frameworks to replace the EU rule book would be freely negotiated between the four UK Governments, in areas such as food, animal welfare and the environment, setting standards below which none can fall, with the existing common arrangements maintained until these are agreed. And of course, a number of these frameworks are being considered by Senedd committees currently. So, how will you therefore engage positively with the proposed UK Bill to ensure synergy with devolved powers, maximising the strengths of both Governments to a common end?

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

Well, thank you for the question. And you do raise a valid point, and that is: how will we engage, what will the synergy be, what will the principles be of that particular engagement? The problem with the document you refer to is it really is a number of headlines—there isn't anything you can take within there that actually gives you any indication of what the direction the UK Government might be. They may say, 'Well, maybe that isn't the purpose of the Bill', but I'll give you a 'for example'. It refers to EU law, and says how wonderful it is that we've taken back control and the supreme court is now the Supreme Court in the United Kingdom as a result of our leaving the EU. But then, at the same time, the UK Government wants to introduce legislation that actually debars the Supreme Court from actually dealing with the issues of judicial review, the rule of law and so on. So, on the one hand, it's about empowering the Supreme Court, on the other hand, 'Well, we'll only empower it insofar as it doesn't interfere with what we want to do and the way in which we choose to operate.' So, I think there are a number of principles and contradictions that exist within it. Certainly it would be relevant in terms of looking at how that interacts with the frameworks. Now, of course, the frameworks were massively intruded upon by the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, and, of course, there are still outstanding legal issues in respect of that. But all I can do is repeat to the Member again that, of course, we will seriously engage; we will engage as a responsible Government on the basis of the principles that have been agreed between us. I just hope that the meeting we had last Saturday was an aberration and not a reflection of the way in which the UK intends to proceed in the future in those discussions. 

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhys ab Owen. 

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. At the end of January, my Scottish National Party colleague, Kirsty Blackman, asked a question about post-legislative reviews within the Wales Office. In response to that question, Simon Hart, the leader of the Welsh Conservatives, according to the Brexit opportunities Minister, answered that work was under way to assess the Wales Act 2017. As you know, Cwnsler Cyffredinol, this is a key piece of legislation with regards to the devolution settlement. In addition to that, the Welsh Government is suggesting that we consent to the Health and Care Bill, which will give UK Ministers power to amend the Government of Wales Act 2006, another key piece of legislation with regards to our devolution settlement. Given all the other steps that the UK Government are doing to undermine devolution, are you concerned about handing over that power? Also, were you aware of the review of the 2017 Act? And, if so, when were you going to notify the Senedd? Diolch yn fawr. 

Well, thank you for the question. The first thing is, in respect of all UK Government legislation, the Member is aware of the principles that are applied. One of the difficulties that arises, and particularly in the Bill that he's mentioned, is that there are a number of issues where there are issues of competence, there are cross-border issues that come into play and there are issues of disputed competence. The process, it has to be said, of engagement over what will be consented to, what will not be consented to, is certainly taken very, very seriously, and the issue of devolution integrity is right at the fore. We do not consent to something unless ultimately we accept that Wales will be better off as a consequence of the outcome of whatever is consented to, and, of course, it's not the Welsh Government that consents; the Welsh Government recommends to the Senedd to consent through the legislative consent motion process. 

In terms of the Wales Act 2017, I think there are likely to be a number of issues that are going to emerge as a result of a series of future reviews with regard to that particular Act. I think there are issues that are going to arise with regard to the review of the Human Rights Act 1998, for example, and I think there are other areas as well that we will be concerned with. But, any developments that do take place that engage me, I will certainly report back to this Senedd on developments. 

Diolch yn fawr, Cwnsler Cyffredinol. Now, we've had the long-awaited inter-governmental relations report, which sets to build a better relationship between the UK Governments, based on principles of mutual respect and to build and maintain trust. But the truth is, Cwnsler Cyffredinol, there is intense mistrust between the Governments, fundamental competing outlooks about the future of the constitution and the politics of the United Kingdom, and also attempts to reassert the sovereignty of the UK Parliament over devolved nations. Therefore, what is being done to implement the machinery and processes set out to assert mutual respect and trust into a positive and constructive inter-governmental relationship? Further, will discussions regarding the machinery and process involve us here in the Senedd? Diolch.   

Well, look, can I say that, firstly, the inter-governmental review, and the process that the Member has seen, is an important one? It is certainly, in my view, a significant step forward, but it's a cautious step forward, because we have to see how it will work. It does certainly outline the issues of respect and integrity that should apply constitutionally in terms of devolved government. And it's interesting to note the review actually uses the term 'devolved government', as opposed to 'devolved administration', of course, until you start looking at the Treasury part of it, where it reverts back to 'devolved administrations', but that's as may be for the moment. I know that officials are working together and looking at the issue of the creation of the independent secretariat and the structure that will take place, and also, I think, the schedule of meetings and so on that will take place. The fact that there will be a forum for inter-ministerial meetings is obviously important, as will be the meeting of the First Ministers and Prime Minister within this process. In terms of the Senedd, yes, as a result of the inter-institutional agreement—. Well, of course, there is already an agreement that the details of meetings that will be taking place and so on will be informed, and I would hope that there will be open discussion here. I think the whole process is one where, I think, there is even written into it a commitment to openness and transparency, and that is something that I will do everything I can to uphold, because we do want to make this new review work. It is to the benefit of the people of Wales if it does work, but we're not going to make assumptions on past practice that it necessarily is bound to work. Its one core flaw, of course, is that it does not have a constitutional status. It does not have a judicable status. But maybe we're on the way towards that. I think it is actually also the first indication of a federalised constitutional structure in terms of engagement. Now, there is a long way to go, but I will of course update Members on important issues as they do arise.