As we all know by now, the solution to every problem in Wales is to form a committee. The more serious committees are called commissions or conventions instead.
The recent announcement of a new Welsh Government-backed constitutional commission chaired by Prof. Laura McAllister and The Rt Rev. Rowan Williams has generated a lot of buzz; given the credentials and profiles of the chairs that’s to be expected. I don’t think there’s any question that this is going to be a serious piece of work even if there’s some confusion over the terms of reference.
Nevertheless, the sobering reality is that Wales is currently averaging a commission to look at the Senedd’s powers, electoral reform or constitutional reform roughly once every three to four years. Yes, that often.
That’s before including the other non-constitutional committees, conventions and commissions – for example, the Diamond Review (student finance), the Senedd-commission review into digital media and the Burns Commission (Newport bypass alternatives).
What everyone needs to keep in mind before they get too excited about the latest commission is the poor track record we have in Wales of turning pages in a report into real things.
- Report: Empowerment and Responsibility: Legislative Powers to Strengthen Wales (pdf; Oggy Bloggy Ogwr summary).
- Chaired by: Sir Paul Silk.
- Tasked with: Consultation on the range of devolved law-making powers in Wales.
Another echo of the Richard Commission, Silk II focused on the Senedd’s non-financial powers. This included the question over how powers were devolved to Wales as well the range/number of those powers. The Commission recommended a switch to a “reserved powers model” where instead of powers being devolved line-by-line to Wales, only the powers kept by the UK Parliament are listed in law.
The Commission proposed a fairly wide-ranging package of new or extended powers in public transport regulation, harbours, the rail franchise, energy consents and marine licensing. While not recommending outright devolution of broadcasting, it was recommended there should be a greater say in Wales. Additionally, while devolution of policing and youth justice was recommended, there was a presumption in favour of devolving the criminal justice system in its entirety pending the outcome of a detailed review.
Outcome: Unsurprisingly, the UK Government were far more enthusiastic about the Senedd getting extra financial powers than they ever were about devolving additional law-making powers. In fairness, large chunks of Silk II were included the Wales Act 2017 – such as a reserved powers model and the devolution of various regulatory and consent powers. The biggest absentee was the devolution of policing and criminal justice, while the Brexit process has since seen the UK Government increasingly encroach into devolved policy areas, making the “reserved powers model” seem almost redundant.
Verdict: Mixed Outcome.
