Because of the cock-up over the first Housing LCO that saw it rejected by a joint Houses of Parliament Constitutional Committee, the Welsh Government have tried again with a more wide-ranging attempt at drawing down powers on affordable housing. But, because it has been left so late it is unlikely to get through scrutiny by the ten Whitehall departments before a General Election is called.

This means that it will only get on the statute book if the Government can get all party support to push it through in what is known as the wash-up. However, as the Tories are opposing the right to buy provisions in the LCO it is unlikely to survive even that process.

In many ways this is bizarre. Only a week ago the Tories unanimously supported a referendum on full law-making powers for the Assembly and said they would vote yes. A successful referendum would give us the precise powers that are sought under this LCO. For now though they see fit to play games and deny the Assembly the right to make its own mind up on the issue.

There could though be consequences. Contained in this LCO is a provision that will give the Welsh Government the power to change the way that Council Tax discounts are set. This will enable WAG to give Councils the ability to increase charges on long-term empty homes. It also enables them to reduce Council Tax by half for serving members of the armed forces for whom their main home has become a secondary residence.

Do the Tories really want to be responsible for denying servicemen equality with England on Council Tax charges by vetoing this Legislative Competence Order?

Related posts:

1. The power to vote ‘no’
2. The miracle of the Assembly’s law-making powers
3. Tories mislead on housing order

The report identifies that requests from the Welsh Government for extra powers too often “disappear in the black hole of Whitehall”. They say that Whitehall departments’ sluggishness in clearing requests for additional devolution is creating long delays. They cited the plan to devolve extra responsibility for environmental policy, held up for nearly two years, and a bid to give the Assembly power to install fire sprinklers in new homes as examples of the slow progress.

In the report, MPs say: “We have identified some procedural problems, most notably long and unaccountable delays in the process of negotiation between the Welsh Assembly Government and the Whitehall department or departments that sometimes occurs before an LCO is referred to us.

“There is an unacceptable lack of transparency within the Whitehall clearance process. The Wales Office should provide this committee with a monthly update on the progress of all proposed LCOs together with an explanation of any delays.”

After numerous complaints about the jargon used in some LCOs, the MPs also note that, “it should not be beyond the reach of language to provide in addition a simple statement of what the LCO will enable the National Assembly for Wales to do”.

They also suggest fast-tracking the process for less controversial LCOs, and say there needs to be a comprehensive “Welsh statute book”, available on-line, so the public can access what is in an increasingly distinct body of Welsh law

However, the Peter Hain’s suggestion that the process is growing in “strength, effectiveness and transparency” is a classic piece of misdirection. He and the Committee are most probably right that the Whitehall bureaucracy can be trimmed back, in fact it will need to be if the latest LCOs on Housing and Transport are to get approval before Parliament rises for the General Election. However, that does not account for the time and money wasted in Cardiff Bay and Westminster drawing up and scrutinising these orders without any concrete benefit for the people of Wales, in terms of changes to the quality of their lives, coming out of the other end.

In addition to that of course is the sheer impracticality of elected politicians in the Welsh Assembly having to implement their manifesto pledges when there is a near-two year delay built into every legislative proposal, not to mention having to ask MPs for permission to deliver a democratically-endorsed programme for government. The process remains unfit for purpose and is far from the success story that some MPs suggest.

Related posts:

1. Health Boards face £500m black hole
2. WAG failing on public transport by Peter Black AM
3. Peter Black calls on Welsh Government to create financial stability so Councils can better use their reserves

Bydd Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol Cymru yn cefnogi’r LCO hwn gan ein bod yn credu mai yma, yn y Cynulliad, y dylai materion yr iaith Gymraeg gael eu penderfynu.

Bydd yr LCO hwn yn gam – er yn gam bach – i’r cyfeiriad hwnnw. Gan gadw hyn mewn cof, rwy’n cynnig y gwelliannau yn enw Peter Black. Er hynny, mae dau fater ynglŷn â’r LCO hwn yn peri pryder i mi ei gwmpas a’r broses o’i ddarparu.

Rwy’n credu bod angen ar y Cynulliad hwn y pwerau ehangaf bosibl i amddiffyn a meithrin yr iaith Gymraeg. Mae gennym ddyletswydd i ofalu bod y Gymraeg ar gael i genedlaethau’r dyfodol, a’i bod yn iaith fyw a llewyrchus. Mae angen hefyd i ni ofalu bod y bobl hynny sy’n dymuno defnyddio’r Gymraeg, yn gallu arfer eu hawl i wneud hynny.

Ni all Cymru ddibynnu ar gael cydweithrediad San Steffan bob tro’r ydym yn dymuno diweddaru deddfwriaeth. Dyna pam mae angen i ni allu pasio Mesurau yma heb orfod datblygu LCO newydd bob tro. Os edrychwch ar adroddiad Pwyllgor Deddfwriaeth rhif 5, mae wedi cymharu sefyllfa Cymru â’r sefyllfa mewn gwledydd eraill, ac wedi dod i’r casgliad y byddai pwerau ehangach yn ein galluogi i sefydlu polisi mwy egnïol ar gyfer yr iaith Gymraeg. Buasai’n well gen i gael system heb gyfyngiadau na ymyrraeth San Steffan.

Mae wedi cymryd dros dwy flynedd i gyrraedd y fan hon a fyddwn i ddim yn dymuno ein gweld ni’n ceisio diweddaru’n deddfwriaeth ar gyfer y Gymraeg ymhen ychydig flynyddoedd a gorfod mynd â’n cap yn ein llaw at San Steffan unwaith eto. Yn anffodus, bydd yr etholiad gyffredinol mewn ychydig fisoedd yn ymyrryd ar y broses LCO yma. Os na fyddwn yn cefnogi hwn heddiw, bydd hi’n annhebygol y byddwn yn gallu cael y pwerau iaith Gymraeg yn nhymor Cynulliad yma. Ni allwn alluogi hyn ddigwydd.

Dylai’r system LCO a Mesurau yma ganiatáu i ni gynllunio Mesurau yr ydym ni am eu gweld, yn hytrach na’r rhai sy’n rhan o gylch gwaith y Pwyllgor Materion Cymreig. Er enghraifft, mae’n gwestiwn gen’ i a ddylid cynnwys y ddarpariaeth yn yr LCO ar gyfer apelio ar sail yr hyn sy’n rhesymol a chymesur.

Mae’r cyngor a dderbyniasom y bore ‘ma yn feirniadol iawn o’r feto yma a nid dyma yw rôl y eLCO – sef tanseilio rhannau o Deddf  Yr Iaith Gymraeg. Bydd rhaid i’r Gweinidog fod yn ofnadwy o ofalus sut y mae’n deddfu yn y dyfodol, ac rwy’n gobeithio’n arw y bydd o’n ystyried hyn pan yn mynd ati i greu Mesur.

Mae’n rhaid i mi ddweud hefyd nad rol LCO yw i benderfynu sut yr ydym yn deddfu.  Rol y broses LCO yw i benderfynu os ydym am gael y pwerau neu beidio. Mae’r LCO ger ein bron heddiw yn bell o fod yn berffaith, ond mae’n well na ddim byd.

O ran y system ei hun, mae gen’ i bryderon ynghylch y modd y mae’r Gweinidog yma, (a wnes i erioed ddisgwyl dweud hyn am Weinidog o Blaid genedlaetholgar) wedi derbyn argymhellion y Pwyllgor Materion Cymreig yn ddi-gwestiwn, heb wneud unrhyw ymdrech i bledio achos Cymru na Chynulliad Cymru. Enghreifftiau o hyn yw cynnwys trothwy uwch yn yr LCO ar gyfer sefydliadau sy’n derbyn arian cyhoeddus, y prawf “rhesymol a chymesur” neu eithrio sefydliadau cynhyrchu a thrawsyrru ynni.

Yn yr un modd, mae hyd y broses yn chwerthinllyd. Mae wedi cymeryd dros dwy flyned, gan gynnwys oedi afresymol, a dibwrpas yn y pen draw, trwy anfon yr LCO at yr Uwch-Bwyllgor Cymreig, er gwaethaf protestiadau Peter Hain i’r gwrthwyneb. Nid Llywodraeth effeithiol mo hyn.

Yn olaf, rwy’n siomedig na chafwyd cyfle gwirioneddol i’r Cynulliad hwn gyflwyno gwelliannau i’r LCO hwn. Er bod y Siambr hon yn craffu ar Fesurau yn drwyadl, ni chafodd y Cynulliad fawr o gyfle i gyfrannu at y broses hon.Er bod adroddiad y Pwyllgor Deddfwriaeth trawsbleidiol yn un academaidd a thrylwyr, ni chafodd effaith o gwbl ar yr LCO hwn. Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru, ac nid Swyddfa’r Gweinidog, ddylai weithredu fel deddfwrfa’r wlad hon.

Byddaf yn cefnogi’r cynnig hwn gyda chalon drom achos fy mod i’n credu fod yr iaith Gymraeg y llawer rhy bwysig i gael ei ddefnyddio fel arbrawf cyfreithiol. Wedi heddiw, credaf fod angen i bob un ohonom ddysgu gwersi at y dyfodol.

No related posts.

Many lawyers are worried that LCOs, which are the formal mechanism to transfer law-making powers from Westminster to the National Assembly, will fall alongside other pieces of legislation when the General Election comes along and will have to start part of the process again, making a ridiculously and insultingly long process even longer.

Hopefully, the Government is giving this issue all the thought that it requires. After all, a considerable part of their government programme rests on these powers being given to the National Assembly, especially on matters such as affordable hosuing and the Welsh language. This is not to mention the poor reflection that not obtaining new powers will have on a nationalist party in government.

It is interesting to know, then, that Carwyn Jones AM, who is the Government’s Counsel General and top legal adviser, has said that:

 In my specific role as Counsel General I have given this no consideration.

Which seems odd, his current role means that he should be giving this a lot of consideration. If this is his record in the relatively harmless role of Counsel General, it sets a bad precedent for any First Ministerial ambitions.

Related posts:

1. On the starting blocks
2. All Wales Convention highlights tensions within coalition
3. Government embarrassed by Committee ruling

Welsh Liberal Democrats are concerned that the veto provision is unconstitutional and will set a precedent for other more controversial measures. Their view is supported by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments who concluded last week that ‘there is a doubt’ as to whether the clause in the LCO is ‘intra vires’.

On the Politics Show today the Presiding Officer of the National Assembly for Wales, Dafydd Elis-Thomas, echoed those doubts. His views can be heard about 32 minutes 30 seconds in on the BBC i-player, but essentially he said that he was seriously considering whether to make himself available so as to vote with the Welsh Liberal Democrats against the Government in the House of Lords on this matter.

Lord Elis-Thomas also said that some senior Lords shared his concerns including former judge and past Labour Minister Lord Elystan Morgan. The possibility of an alliance across parties and the cross benches of peers determined to maintain the integrity of the devolution process now poses a very real threat to the future of this defective LCO.

Related posts:

1. Presiding Officer calls for three votes on one day
2. Labour and Plaid Ministers accused of abusing their position
3. Position vacant?

Jenny explains: “It is essential that all new, large, planning developments take account of people’s transport habits and adopt a transport plan within the development that could, among other things, ensure that there is adequate scope for accessible public transport provision, adequate parking provision, integrated cycling links as well as ensuring that the development is accessible by foot.”

Related posts:

1. Jenny gets another chance to legislate
2. The future of social care
3. Fit for the future

After a Joint Committee in Westminster warned that the Secretary of State for Wales’ ‘veto’ over Housing powers coming to Wales could be unlawful, the Welsh Liberal Democrats are trying to prevent the Westminster government from interfering in Welsh laws.

The motion is as follows: Lord Livsey of Talgarth to move that this House declines to approve the draft National Assembly for Wales (Legislative Competence) (Housing) Order 2009. 7th Report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments

Kirsty Williams, leader of the Welsh Liberal Democrats, said:

“This is a very difficult situation as we fully support powers over housing coming to Wales but we fervently disagree with the Secretary of State’s veto powers which were added to pacify devo-sceptic MPs.

“I want to make it absolutely clear that the Welsh Liberal Democrats have been and always will be supportive of power bids that give the people of Wales the tools to get on with the job of legislating to better our country. What we object to is this Labour-Plaid coalition’s twisted form of devolution that appears to give the people of Wales the power to legislate but in reality keeps the National Assembly under the control of UK Government ministers”

Lord Livsey of Talgarth, who put down the motion in the House of Lords, said:

“The advice given by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instrument questions the legality of the Secretary of State for Wales’ power to intervene in the properly constituted transfer of power from Westminster to Cardiff Bay.

“This recent predicament confirms our original concerns at the time of drafting the Government of Wales Act that the National Assembly would have to go on bended knee to Parliament every time it wanted to implement a manifesto commitment. This is not in the spirit of devolution.”

Related posts:

1. Labour and Plaid push Welsh students towards increased debt
2. The devolution process
3. Former Plaid AM hits out at "the system"

“I want to see the biggest public debate on the Welsh language in recent years and to hear from all sectors of society in Wales … to ensure that the draft order meets the need of the people of Wales.”

He continued: “I think that the best way forward … is to move forward with consensus.

“So that there is a consensus among the people of Wales that where we are going is a sensible way forward and also that it gives the opportunity for the Welsh language to flourish, which of course it should.”

That would all be very well of course if there was a bill in front of Parliament or the Welsh Assembly that could actually change anything. However, this Legislative Competence Order will do nothing of the sort. All it actually does is give the Assembly the power to legislate.

Surely the debate that Mr.Murphy is calling for should be about which legislature is the appropriate place to pass laws on this issue. The time for a debate on the future of the language is when there are proposals in front of the Welsh Assembly.

The Secretary of State for Wales is doing the anti-devolutionists’ job for them by seeking to preempt what the Welsh Assembly will do through a premature debate. If the Welsh Affairs Committee try once more to proscribe what the Assembly can and cannot do then they will heighten the constitutional crisis that surrounds the LCO process and they will do so with the apparent support of the Paul Murphy.

Related posts:

1. Optimism or political spin?
2. Time to Act better
3. The week ahead

Power To The Pobl

The big news is, of course, that the Welsh Language LCO is upon us. To the uninitiated (and, indeed, most of the initiated) it might seem strange that Welsh language powers aren’t already devolved, but that would be to assume that the current devolution settlement was designed with … well, anything really.

Not that the LCO does anything like devolving Welsh language powers anyway. Instead, it spends three pages caveating its way around the place. Then again, in the world of the One Wales Government, where generation of heat is all important, such caveating was vital to ensure that everyone bloviated on their hot potatoes.

On the right, even the Daily Mail jumped to the aid of the comic villain of the piece, the ever-confusingly named David Davies MP. Davies, the Tory member for Monmouth who makes Sir Bufton Tufton look many things (intelligent, tolerant, sane…), opposes any expansion of obligatory Welsh language provision to private enterprise, one of the key battlegrounds in this field. In fairness to him, it is a constituency issue; he does represent the mythical Chepstow chippy (the obligatory cliché that exposes, as much as anything else, the linguistic limitations of all the journalists who’ve failed to spot the alliteration…)

But the bigger political question in all this is whether it goes far enough to get Plaid off the hook. With their core constituency already alienated by failures like the daily newspaper, Plaid need the Welsh language LCO to be a big hit. Early indications, such as the reaction from Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg, are that it’s difficult to be totemic when you’re trying to please everyone.

The Curious Case Of The Spokesperson In The Night-Time

There can be few less eventful events than a reshuffle in the spokesperson team of a minority coalition partner; I mean, who especially cares what the spokesperson thinks when their party has pledged allegiance to the other party’s Minister?

With Plaid, however, it does matter. Since joining the government eighteen months ago, Plaid’s backbenchers have established a unique constitutional settlement with the government their party belongs to, a settlement that basically amounts to “this Plaid is fictitious and any resemblance to Plaids that are members of the government coalition is entirely coincidental.” That being the case, in an Assembly sufficiently small that almost everyone is a spokesperson, the dividing line between the real and the fictional is a little more important.

And so to the case of Janet Ryder, who last week resigned as Plaid education spokesperson. As Freedom Central recounts, the chain of events was pretty strange; having voted for a number of government-opposed amendments to the Learning and Skills Measure in a committee meeting, she disappeared at the tea break, shortly after which her committee papers were retrieved by the Plaid whip. A week later, not only was she not the spokesperson, she wasn’t even on the committee.

Eventually, news of the resignation emerged, with Ryder claiming unhappiness at the lack of progress in improving the measure. As for the strange events in the committee room, however, explanation came there none, perhaps because of the perverse lack of journalistic interest in the matter. Either way, for all the pundits talk of cracks in the One Wales agreement, it seems clear that the real cracks will open where we least expect them to.

Y Barcud Oren appears fortnightly at Liberal Democrat Voice and cross-posted at Freedom Central

Related posts:

1. Y Barcud Oren #3
2. Y Barcud Oren #11
3. Y Barcud Oren #9

1. Give any extra rights to Welsh speakers;
2. Put any extra burdens on Welsh businesses;
3. Change any aspects of the law as it currently stands;
4. Transfer any powers to the Assembly;
5. Unite the nation.

And a couple it will…

1. Generate a lot of heat, and very little light;
2. Distract the media from providing a proper explanation to the Janet Ryder story. I still haven’t read one. Can you imagine a similar thing happening in London? I know she’s not a household name, but it would be nice to know what really happened.

Related posts:

1. Educational discipline
2. Labour & Plaid must listen on Learning and Skills Legislation
3. Y Barcud Oren #4