Last year, this blog discussed proposals by the Welsh Assembly Government to introduce legislation to suspend the ‘right to buy’ for council house tenants in Wales.
This was to be one of the first ‘Legislative Competence Orders’ which would, under the 2006 Government of Wales Act, essentially give Wales the power to pass its own laws, albeit after seeking permission from the House of Commons and its all-party Welsh Select Committee.
Given the emotive content of the legislation, commentators had suggested that politicians in Cardiff Bay should have chosen something that would have been passed with little opposition, thus embedding the legislative process for subsequent laws.
By focusing on housing laws in this way, some thought that the Assembly was ‘picking a fight’ with its bigger relative in St Stephen’s Green as it was clear that there would be difficulties with this issue from the start.
Indeed, as the Labour Party, in its wisdom, has set up a process whereby the UK Parliament could discuss and vote on the legislation being put forward by the Assembly, then MPs cannot be blamed for expressing their democratic right, as they are elected by the people to represent their views.
How on earth did we end up with this constitutional mess?
Some have suggested that this was a cunning plan to ensure greater backing for full Welsh law making powers and to show that MPs in Westminster could not be trusted with passing Welsh laws.
If there is any grain of truth in that rumour, then the stakes have suddenly been raised by the announcement at the end of last week that the Secretary of State for Wales would now essentially have a veto over laws put forward by the democratically elected members of the National Assembly.
So, as we approach the tenth anniversary of devolution in Wales, the Labour Government – which was content to let Scotland have full law making powers – has given control of Welsh legislation directly to a politician outside the National Assembly.
With a few exceptions, there has been a deafening silence from politicians and the media over this matter although bloggers such as Glyn Davies and the three Dewis on Politics Cymru have written on the issue in detail.
One can only imagine the howls of protests from the usual suspects if it had been a Conservative Government at Westminster that had given the Secretary of State for Wales a veto over the Assembly’s legislation.
Those who support further powers for Wales will see this as a retrograde step that allows Westminster to directly interfere in devolved matters. There is a small minority who believes that this is the impetus needed to ensure that there is a stronger case made for direct law-making powers for the Assembly with little intervention by Westminster.
However, this is a high risk strategy that could backfire during a recession in which the vast majority of Welsh people see the UK Parliament as the only aspect of government with the powers to make a difference to their lives in these troubling times.
It may also give fresh ammunition to critics who will argue that this whole process has emasculated the Assembly and reduced it to a glorified county council that deserves no further powers.
In my opinion, the whole point of having a National Assembly, voted for by the people of Wales, is that once matters are devolved, they should become the responsibility of the Assembly Members without any interference from London.
In now allowing the Welsh Office to essentially decide which laws can be enacted, politicians have allowed process to get in the way of demonstrating that devolution can make a real difference to the everyday lives of the people of Wales, leaving us with a legislative halfway house that does little credit to this nation or its political masters.
This was to be one of the first ‘Legislative Competence Orders’ which would, under the 2006 Government of Wales Act, essentially give Wales the power to pass its own laws, albeit after seeking permission from the House of Commons and its all-party Welsh Select Committee.
Given the emotive content of the legislation, commentators had suggested that politicians in Cardiff Bay should have chosen something that would have been passed with little opposition, thus embedding the legislative process for subsequent laws.
By focusing on housing laws in this way, some thought that the Assembly was ‘picking a fight’ with its bigger relative in St Stephen’s Green as it was clear that there would be difficulties with this issue from the start.
Indeed, as the Labour Party, in its wisdom, has set up a process whereby the UK Parliament could discuss and vote on the legislation being put forward by the Assembly, then MPs cannot be blamed for expressing their democratic right, as they are elected by the people to represent their views.
How on earth did we end up with this constitutional mess?
Some have suggested that this was a cunning plan to ensure greater backing for full Welsh law making powers and to show that MPs in Westminster could not be trusted with passing Welsh laws.
If there is any grain of truth in that rumour, then the stakes have suddenly been raised by the announcement at the end of last week that the Secretary of State for Wales would now essentially have a veto over laws put forward by the democratically elected members of the National Assembly.
So, as we approach the tenth anniversary of devolution in Wales, the Labour Government – which was content to let Scotland have full law making powers – has given control of Welsh legislation directly to a politician outside the National Assembly.
With a few exceptions, there has been a deafening silence from politicians and the media over this matter although bloggers such as Glyn Davies and the three Dewis on Politics Cymru have written on the issue in detail.
One can only imagine the howls of protests from the usual suspects if it had been a Conservative Government at Westminster that had given the Secretary of State for Wales a veto over the Assembly’s legislation.
Those who support further powers for Wales will see this as a retrograde step that allows Westminster to directly interfere in devolved matters. There is a small minority who believes that this is the impetus needed to ensure that there is a stronger case made for direct law-making powers for the Assembly with little intervention by Westminster.
However, this is a high risk strategy that could backfire during a recession in which the vast majority of Welsh people see the UK Parliament as the only aspect of government with the powers to make a difference to their lives in these troubling times.
It may also give fresh ammunition to critics who will argue that this whole process has emasculated the Assembly and reduced it to a glorified county council that deserves no further powers.
In my opinion, the whole point of having a National Assembly, voted for by the people of Wales, is that once matters are devolved, they should become the responsibility of the Assembly Members without any interference from London.
In now allowing the Welsh Office to essentially decide which laws can be enacted, politicians have allowed process to get in the way of demonstrating that devolution can make a real difference to the everyday lives of the people of Wales, leaving us with a legislative halfway house that does little credit to this nation or its political masters.
Comments
..... a tad rich I think, 50.1 percent turnout, with the "Yes" vote having 50.3 percent which represents 25.2 percent of eligible voters.
Devolution by sleight of hand is closer to the truth, as was this particular LCO, an attempt at sleight of hand.
But we have Westminster to protect the interests of the Majority.
and the LCO, read my response for on the right to buy blog entry.
SM - as they say in the politics, winning by one vote is as legitimate as winning by 10,000! Anyway, now it is here the most important issue is to get the whole process to work and, in doing so, ensure that Wales gets the best deal. I would think that everyone, apart from the odd blinkered view on the Labour benches that the current arrangement is a bit of a 'lob scouse' and needs improvement.
GD - I am not too sure about whether this can work. A veto for the S0S is tantamount to being in the same position prior to 1997 and takes the Assembly three steps backwards when it should be going two steps forward. However, I am sure you will come up with something relevant.
If a referendum does give legislative powers to the Welsh Assembly, it will be an even more pressing matter to replace the position of Welsh Secretary with separate posts to represent Her Majesty the Queen as Head of State and the Westminster Government in Wales. (And although the Welsh Assembly is an excellent example of representative democracy, this is not the only potential conflict of interest by concentration of powers in the current constitutional mess.)
The parallel with the Irish Free State may cause some disquiet with unionists. I feel this is unjustified. Although the situation in Ireland was dealt with in the same fashion as the Commonwealth Dominions by the Imperial Conferences of 1926 and 1930 and the Statute of Westminster of 1931, thereby enabling De Valera to manipulate matters to independence, this was not a foregone conclusion of the legal position, as illustrated by Newfoundland reverting to British (and subsequently Canadian) rule. (And if you really want to stir things up, it is arguably technically correct to observe that Wales is already a dominion of the crown, as a look at legislation before the Wales and Berwick Act, 1746, cleaned up interpretation will show.)