Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru

Bore da, good morning. Welcome to the in-person meeting of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee. Apologies have been received from Adam for the first item, but he'll be with us after the lunch break. As reminders, this meeting is being broadcast live on Senedd.tv and the Record of Proceedings will be published as usual. Please could Members ensure that all mobile phone devices are switched to silent mode? Senedd Cymru operates through both the medium of Welsh and English languages. Interpretation is available during today's meeting.

That takes us on to items 2 and 3, which are going to be taken together, and I would like to welcome Carolyn Thomas and Luke Fletcher, who have been invited in accordance with Standing Order 17.49 to represent the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, and the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee, as we consider these two LCMs today. So, can I welcome the Cabinet Secretary and her officials? And would you like to introduce your officials, or would they like to introduce themselves?

Yes, I'll ask officials to introduce themselves.

Claire McDonald, deputy director, economic policy division.

Jennifer Pride, head of energy delivery, Welsh Government.

Scott Tyler, head of UK legislation.

Diolch yn fawr. If I move on to the questions, the first one from me is. Unusually, neither of the LCMs sets out the position of the Welsh Government on whether or not the Senedd should withhold or grant consent. What's the Welsh Government's recommendation to the Senedd at this stage of each of the LCMs?

At the moment, both Bills are at a stage where we do need to have more discussion with the UK Government before we could recommend consent to the Senedd. We have had good engagement both at official level and also at ministerial level.

But just to briefly summarise the position across both of the Bills: we are very supportive of the proposal to establish Great British Energy, given the climate crisis we're facing and the need to move forward with renewable projects and so on, so we do see a great deal of potential there, particularly working with Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru and Ynni Cymru. But as we set out in the LCM, we are having some further discussions with the UK Government, particularly on what the role of the Welsh Ministers would be, and of course of the Senedd, in respect of aspects of the Bill. So, I'll provide some further information to the Senedd once those conversations have concluded.

And then, in relation to the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill, again we're very supportive of the Bill in relation to its role in the smooth functioning of the internal market. But, again, there are some further discussions that have to be had with the UK Government on the role of Welsh Ministers and of the Senedd. Again, positive discussions both at ministerial level and at official level, but at the moment, on neither of the Bills are we able to form a view of recommended consent.

Diolch yn fawr. Alun.

Let's separate out both LCMs for the purposes of the conversation. I'm interested that although you're not giving the Senedd any advice at the moment on support, or not, of the LCM, you seem to welcome the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill. It feels to me like a Tory Bill, if I'm quite frank with you. It feels to me like a development of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 in many ways, in the powers it gives to UK Ministers. It doesn't refer to any relationship with the trade and co-operation agreement, which I'm surprised by, and it seems to bypass the internal market Act in the way that it's being structured. So, it feels to me like a Bill—I don't know if I'm right about this—that's been picked up by a new Government that was prepared under the old Government, and I don't understand why the Welsh Government is speaking so warmly of it.

So, you are correct that this Bill was in development before the election of the new Government, but in terms of the aims of the Bill, which are to regulate product safety and essentially to make things simpler and clearer for businesses, we do welcome that.

In terms of the TCA, the Bill is a framework Bill, which is why the TCA isn't impacted in that sense, but it might be in terms of the regulations that come underneath it. So, perhaps I'll just ask officials to say a bit more about that.

No, I'd like to pursue that, if I could, before officials come in, because, yes, a framework Bill is how I would describe it as well. This committee doesn't like framework Bills, of course, and I don't like framework Bills, and I'm surprised that Welsh Ministers like framework Bills that give powers to the UK Ministers and not to Welsh Ministers. I'm interested as to how you see Welsh Government's role if this piece of legislation becomes law in the way it currently exists.

So, these are the discussions that we're having currently with the UK Government around what the role of Welsh Ministers and the Senedd would be, particularly around the wording around 'consult', which is in the Bill. Obviously, our position would be to look for consent, so that really gets to the heart of the discussions that we're having with the UK Government and the consideration that we will have to give in terms of whether or not to recommend that the Senedd gives its consent following that. But, of course, there'll be discussions to be had, then, in relation to the specific regulations that will flow from the Bill as well. In relation to the trade and co-operation agreement, I know our officials in the economy department have had specific discussions with our trade officials as well on this particular point.

Previous Ministers sitting in this seat, of course, threatened to take the UK Government to court over the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, and this committee was broadly supportive of that position. I think that's a very reasonable position to take, but it's very difficult to see what is in this Bill as being very different to what was in the internal market Act in its impact on the powers and the structures of devolved legislatures. So, I'm interested that you're taking a vastly different view of this Bill now that it is a Labour Bill than when it potentially was a Conservative Bill. This worries me, because the powers of this place should be maintained whatever the colour of the Government in London.

Yes, and I've been really clear, I think the First Minister's been really clear, everybody's been really clear that our principles that sit behind our approach to legislative consent motions and UK Government legislation haven't changed at all. I know that the Deputy First Minister and Counsel General are before this committee in a couple of weeks' time and there'll be an opportunity, I think, to explore those principles in detail. But nothing's changed in that respect. I know in the past we've had Bills where we've had concerns, but we've been able to work with the then Conservative UK Government to overcome some of those and then be able to recommend consent. So, the approach to this Bill really is to explore what we can do to work with the UK Government to get to a point at which we could recommend consent, because it's the Senedd, ultimately, that has to be convinced about this, not just the Welsh Government.

Okay.

Carolyn.

If I could just ask a question on that, when the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill came before us, that was looking, again, at giving power to the Secretary of State for Wales, and then, last minute, the NUAR, the national underground asset register, was added on last minute as it was going through the UK Government. I'm not sure where that happened, but, again, that being added on last minute—. It involves planning, which is devolved to Welsh Government. So, again, I wanted to give an example of that concern when things are added on last minute that affect us as a devolved Parliament as well. So, when everything is like a framework Bill on the face of it, you've got all the regulations underneath, and that's my concern when we've got all these ddevolved areas.

I think, with this particular Bill, the regulations that relate to product safety and metrology span to some 2,500 pages, and, as I understand it, they are frequently updated to keep pace with changes, and that's part of the reason why this is a framework Bill, because things change frequently. Lots of them are technical changes in terms of weights and measures and so on, so I think that that perhaps sets that part of the Bill apart from others.

It's just the concern about the lack of involvement from the devolved—from the Senedd as well—to discuss all these matters, really, when things are added on. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for those comments, Carolyn. On to you, Natasha.

Thank you, Chair. Good morning, everyone. I'd just like to know if you could please elaborate for the benefit of the committee and committees here today what regulatory and financial impact assessments have you actually undertaken on the provision of the Bill that will ultimately impact Wales?

In relation to the Great British Energy Bill, that Bill, in itself, is actually very narrow, and what it does is enable the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero to designate a company as 'Great British Energy' and then put it on a statutory footing. So, the UK Government's impact assessment of that Bill doesn't include details in relation to financial allocations, and the reason for that is because that work will come next and it will come with the business cases in terms of the proposals for investment and so on. So, that's why that hasn't been included in the UK Government's approach thus far, and I think that seems reasonable in terms of what this Bill is specifically about, which is quite narrow.

And then, for the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill, the UK Government's impact assessment does provide a qualitative analysis for the measures that are sought, and it does provide details, then, of the kinds of market failures that the Bill is trying to help reduce and gives some examples of how the powers could be used. But, of course, those powers would be subject to the secondary legislation, and, again, that's the kind of space where we would expect to see the impact assessments in more detail in relation to the pieces of secondary legislation that might come forward.

So, you plan on eventually doing them, but when it gets to a later date.

So, we think that it would be the UK Government that would be providing that greater level of detail, particularly around the business cases. Of course, there's that interrelationship with Ynni Cymru and Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru as well, which, again, is at an early development stage, because this Bill is simply about setting up Great British Energy, and, what comes next in terms of the projects that are supported, they will obviously have the impact assessments and so on attached to them.

Okay. Thanks.

So, when will we have that?

I think it will take the UK Government some time to get to the point at which the business cases for particular projects come forward. So, with Ynni Cymru, we're essentially four years ahead of where the UK Government is at the moment—sorry, Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru; we're quite a significant way ahead. But perhaps I'll ask Jennifer to talk to us about the discussions she's had with officials.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. Yes, I think it's been really interesting watching UK Government start to mobilise what was actually a central part of the Labour Government's manifesto commitment and take that level of detailed thinking that we've actually been doing around Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru and Ynni Cymru over the last four or five years. They are still at early stages; there's a chair and there's one member of staff, I believe, now, in Great British Energy to take this thinking forward. They've outlined five principal areas around which Great British Energy will act, and, actually, they're all broadly in alignment with policies that the Welsh Government and, actually, the Senedd more broadly have endorsed over the last few years.

So, one of the key areas is around—. The entire point of GB Energy is very much around accelerating the development of renewables and making sure that the UK benefits. And the conversations that we've been around are about how can we actually work with Great British Energy and make sure that what they're doing amplifies and supports the arrangements that are in Wales. And they've been very positive to date. Discussions happened on Friday; we brought together the official from Great British Energy and officials from Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru to talk about where they might work together collaboratively, or, actually, is it best that Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru just carries on doing what it's doing. That development of onshore wind does not appear to be a key area of interest for Great British Energy at the moment, but, actually, that means that there are no real conflicts. I think where the areas for co-operation are very much around are local power plans, which very much supports that support for community energy that, in Wales, we've been doing for the last 15-plus years. And I think, again, how we can amplify that—we've been asking the UK Government to do more in this area and put more resource into this for many years, and I think that's really welcome and we have the routes and mechanisms in Wales through which that could be supported.

Okay. Luke.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. It was actually around the point, Jennifer, that you just made around what happens now with Ynni Cymru and Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru, because I'm really interested in how they will interact with GB Energy. So, does that mean now, as we're waiting for that detail from GB Energy—and, ultimately, we know that it's coming down the line—what does that actually mean for the work of Ynni Cymru now and Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru? Are we limiting ourselves in those departments? Are things being put on hold until we understand a bit better how GB Energy is going to interact with stuff?

No. Jennifer will probably say a bit more as well, but I just want to reassure all colleagues that we're still all systems go in terms of Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru and the additional funding that we've put into Ynni Cymru as well. So, Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru, we've got five particular projects that we're working on at the moment, so we'll continue to pursue all of those projects, moving those forward as well. As we've heard, the discussions are ongoing about how we might work together, but it's still relatively early days, I think, for Great British Energy, so we're not going to wait around. 

Thank you.

Luke talked about this, but I want to go into slightly more detail. What engagement has the Welsh Government had with the UK Government on the Bill, both before and after the election? 

In terms of the Great British Energy Bill?

Yes. 

So, we've had really good discussions with UK Government. I met with Michael Shanks, the lead Minister for the Bill in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, on 24 October. I did set out the welcome for Great British Energy, the focus that the UK Government is putting on renewables, and was able to set out the work that we've already been doing in this space, particularly around Ynni Cymru and Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru. So, those discussions were very good, but I was really clear that our concerns, really, are around the role of Welsh Ministers and of the Senedd as we move forward. And then I know, at official level, the discussions have been frequent and ongoing in that space as well.

Luke.

The same question as Mike, then, but in this respect with the regulation and metrology Bill. What engagement has happened with the UK Government on that front?

I met with Lord Leong on 2 October, and, again, we had a really good discussion there. That was very much focused around the role, again, of the Welsh Ministers and of the Senedd, particularly in that word around 'consult', as opposed to 'consent'. I was able to set out the Welsh Government's principles in this space, how important it is that it is the Senedd that has the chance to have its say and make decisions here for Wales for the things that we have responsibility for. Those discussions were good as well, and we agreed that our officials would work together to try and resolve some of the concerns that we have.

So, particularly on that wording of 'consent' and 'consult', where is the Welsh Government on that particular point? Because, as things currently stand within the Bill, the Secretary of State is only required to consult rather than actually seek the consent of Welsh Government Ministers when they're doing stuff in devolved areas. Where did the conversations go on that front?

So, the outcome, really, of the meeting was for officials to continue to work together. So, we haven't yet got to a point where we're able to recommend that the Senedd agrees consent, but that was the nub of the conversation really—around the word of 'consult', which is in the Bill, as opposed to 'consent', which we would like to see.

And I also made the point that consent actually can happen quickly. So, in the past, we've got examples where we've consented in a really, really quick manner, whereas consult, actually, you could go out for weeks to consult on something. So, actually, the argument that perhaps it would be time that would be leading you to consult rather than consent, I don't think that's a valid argument. 

So, if we were to find ourselves in a position where that 'consult' word is still there in the Bill, would the Welsh Government then be looking to make an amendment to that Bill, to change the wording to 'consent'?

So, at the moment, we're hoping that positive discussions will lead us to a point where we can recommend that the Senedd provides its consent.

So, if that word 'consult' is still there when we get to that point, after the discussions have happened, would it be fair to assume then the Welsh Government might not recommend consent to that Bill?

Well, I don't—. Where we are at the moment is, with that word in the Bill, and as it stands with the Bill, we haven't been able to make a recommendation to the Senedd. So, as I say, we hope those discussions will be positive, or we get to a point where we can.

The only reason I ask is I think it's important to think through what steps would happen if different scenarios play out, and that surely would be the case for you guys as well.

And I think it's worth recognising as well that there are other things that could lead us, or other changes that could be made that could lead us, to recommend consent, as we've done in different Bills in the past as well. As I say, those discussions are ongoing at the moment.

Okay.

Diolch. Alun.

I appreciate the work that's being done on these matters, and I know it can be fiendishly difficult—I accept all that. I don't like the architecture of this sort of legislation though, because what you've got is very broad Executive powers being given to UK Ministers that bypass the UK Parliament, as well as the devolved Parliaments, and they're able then to effect quite significant changes to the market. You’ve given some examples of minor changes, and that's fair enough; I've got no issue with that. I agree with you, as it happens, on those examples. But they can also make more fundamental changes without any democratic oversight at all. And even if you had powers over consent, you could make those decisions without any democratic oversight here as well. I don't like that. That's not the democracy I fought for back in the 1990s. I fought for parliamentary democracy in this country, not executive authority, and I feel uncomfortable with that. So, there's an architectural issue here about this legislation, rather than simply an argument about where the powers lie, isn't there?

I suppose that those kind of architectural discussions probably are more fundamental in terms of our approach to the way in which legislation is undertaken in any case. Perhaps that might be something for the discussions that I know you'll be having in that kind of sphere with the Deputy First Minister and the Counsel General in the coming weeks, because as you say, it's not specific to this particular piece of legislation, it is a wider issue.

But the LCM that you're potentially asking us to agree is. And that's the problem, isn't it? Because what we had over Brexit was a huge power grab by the executive, generally in London, and removed democratic accountability from the UK Parliament and from this Parliament. So what I don't want to see now is a new UK Government continuing with the same approach to how we legislate and how we govern ourselves. And I certainly don't want a Welsh Government to go hand in hand with that approach, which we opposed some years ago, and you and I have both voted against it. So it's important, I think, that we look at our values and where we're coming from as a Welsh Labour Government and as a Welsh Labour parliamentary team, and then address this legislation on that basis. And what worries me is that, even if you get the consent clauses that you're searching for, that doesn't provide any reassurance for political oversight here at all.

Those sorts of considerations are absolutely part of the conversations that we're having with the UK Government and the sorts of solutions that we could be exploring with them on the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill in particular. And in that sense, we have explored other legislative solutions, as the Cabinet Secretary has alluded to. Not to go into great detail, because I don't have it, but the Environment Act 2021, a Bill that the Senedd did support, would be one example. The coronavirus rent restriction Bill and other sorts of situations that we've looked at, as the Cabinet Secretary has alluded to, also provide more of a legislative scrutiny role for the Senedd rather than just that pure consent role for Welsh Ministers that you've mentioned.

So can I take it from that response that those are the sorts of conversations that are taking place between the two Governments at the moment? I can see lots of nodding heads. I'm hoping somebody's going to say ‘yes’ for the public record.

In terms of the conversations that we tend to have at official level on any UK Bill, there will be an exploration of the various sorts of precedents that the Senedd have supported over the past few years and beyond, as well as other potential solutions that maybe haven't been explored in the past—obviously, always through the spectrum of ensuring that our principles are respected, and also that the Senedd's positions that have been taken over the last few years are reflected in those conversations as well. Hence the reason why the various types of solutions are being explored, including the ones I've mentioned, as well as others.

I think it's important to say as well that we're working with officials who now have the authority to engage with us in a thoroughly—. You know, we go through the detail. Before this point, we didn't have the detail, and in fact a lot of the time we are re-educating about devolution, the Senedd. We have to do that. It takes time.

Twenty-five years later. 

It takes time, yes.

That's quite something. It's quite a reflection on the UK Government.

And the Treasury still haven't understood it.

I'll leave it at that, thank you.

I just wanted to make that point. The point is, of course, that LCMs are different now, aren't they? You knew you'd get an LCM through every single time because the Labour group would vote for it, the Conservatives would vote for it. The Conservatives are now not constrained to vote for it, so you're going to have to win the argument to get it through rather than rely on that 16 Conservatives are going to vote for it because it's come from their Government. It hasn't come from their Government this time. Are you making any changes in your actions in order to realise that you have to get to 31 in the meeting when it comes forward, rather than saying, 'Well, we've got 30 Labour Members, 16 Conservative Members, it's bound to go through'?  

I suppose that's a kind of political question about how we engage with the various parties within the Senedd, and I think those conversations will be absolutely critical going forward. I know that some parts of the Senedd will take a principled view on LCMs. Perhaps there is a conversation to be had in that space. I think those are, really, the kind of political discussions that we need to have, and we need all Members of the Senedd to be comfortable with the outcome and what that means as well. 

Natasha. 

Thank you, Chair. I appreciate the working together with the UK Government now. I appreciate conversations have been had, but I just wanted to know: are there any specific changes to the Bill the Welsh Government would like to see before you recommend consent going forward now? 

I think one is around what the role is for Welsh Ministers and for the Senedd. One example of a change could be around the changing of 'consult' to 'consent'. I think that would be probably one of the most simple ways in which we could address some of the concerns that have been raised. But, as the team have suggested, there are other ways in which we could look to potentially make changes as well. So, those discussions are ongoing. But on the PRM Bill, I think those discussions have been positive and they do understand the issues.   

And how likely are they to actually take place? 

Well, we're hopeful and we'll continue those discussions, but as soon as we're at a point where we can conclude those discussions—. I do wish I was able to sit here today with a solid answer for you, but as soon as we are able to, we'll provide more information. 

Sorry, Chair, just a final question from my section that I was going to ask. I appreciate I asked about time frame earlier. You've obviously had conversations—you mentioned on Friday. Have you got a timetable in place as to what's going to happen next? Can you share with the committee the stages now? 

In terms of the timetable, there's still some uncertainty from within the UK Government for both Bills, but we would expect the need for the LCM debate to come early in the new year for both Bills. And we would expect the Great British Energy Bill to be ahead of the PRM Bill. 

Okay, thanks. 

Thank you. Luke. 

Diolch, Gadeirydd. We touched earlier in the session on the interaction of these Bills with the internal market of the UK. Looking at this Bill specifically, though, what assessment has the Welsh Government made of its interaction with the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020? 

What the Bill will do is allow the law to be updated to recognise new or updated EU product requirements. And the intention then is to prevent unnecessary costs and inconvenience to businesses, providing that regulatory stability. So, clearly, that's in the interest of UK businesses and Welsh businesses. But, as I mentioned earlier, there are around 2,500 pages of legislation spanning areas that routinely need that kind of technical updating. So, that will allow us, really, to ensure that we are aligned with EU standards, ensuring that businesses are able to access the EU market and prevent passive divergence, because that was something that we were concerned about very much in the Senedd during that period when we were talking about Brexit and how Brexit would look. So, this aims to prevent that. 

So, it would be a potential positive impact on Wales-EU trade, then, especially when you consider all the combined EU provisions involved. 

Yes, it should be positive for businesses to provide them with that clarity and the ability then to access the EU market. 

Because one of the things I picked up on in the Bill is that there's a provision within that Bill to make it easier for those EU products to enter the UK market. So, the whole point of that is, essentially, to make things easier, clarity for businesses and to take things forward, yes? 

Yes. 

Great. Diolch, Cadeirydd. 

Diolch. Moving on to the Great British Energy Bill, are you planning regular discussions with the UK Government on the development of this Bill?

Yes. Those discussions have been in place for some time. I met with Michael Shanks, the Minister with responsibility for this, on 24 October, and officials are meeting regularly with their counterparts as well.

Okay. Thank you. Alun.

Taking this forward, I was interested in an answer you gave earlier to Luke, because, like you, in your original answers, I'm very much in favour—. Sorry, my throat is—. Perhaps it knows what I'm going to say. [Laughter.]  I'm very much in favour, politically, of this legislation; I'd like to see the whole of the energy sector renationalised, quite honestly, but we don't need to go down that rabbit hole this morning. So, I'm very much in favour of this, but I want to be reassured that this Bill fits into a structure, a UK structure. Because I'm concerned that where the settlement is on planning doesn't provide for the Welsh Government to have sufficient breathing space to deliver on its climate ambitions and its energy ambitions. Certainly, when I held the portfolio, that was the policy of the Government; I don't know what it is now, but certainly that was our concern, and it has been our concern for many years. Also the Crown Estate, of course. There's no indication—. In fact, the indication from UK Ministers is that they have no interest in it, and they want to use this legislation in order to drive forward projects in Wales that have no recognition of the devolved structures. So, given where we are with planning, given where we are with the Crown Estate, is there the space for Great British Energy to exist alongside the structures that the Welsh Government have in place?

All this Bill does, essentially, is set up Great British Energy, or allow it to be designated, and then set out the strategic priorities for it. So, those discussions about how we will work in partnership with the UK Government, through Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru and Ynni Cymru, are ongoing at the moment, because, as we've heard, the UK Government is fairly early on in its thinking. So, whilst the legislation will set up Great British Energy, what comes next and how it does it are still part of the policy development, but we're involved in those discussions.

What we don't want to see, of course, is duplication in any way, or the two Governments inadvertently working against each other. We need to be working together and finding opportunities to collaborate, and so those are the kinds of discussions that we're having at the moment. In terms of the Bill, it is narrow, but the work that we do is much more wide ranging, I think. I don't know if Jennifer's got a bit more to say about the ways in which we might work together.

Yes, absolutely. Thank you. You talked there, Mr Davies, about a framework and where Great British Energy fits in that framework, and I think that really chimes well with what we've been doing in Wales. We've been taking a much more planned approach, as you know, in Wales, to the energy system. We've now got local energy plans across the whole of the country. We're actually able now to feed in, in a proactive way, to this strategic spatial energy plan that's now been co-commissioned between the three Governments. And actually, Great British Energy then is the opportunity to perhaps create more of the value, as that's delivered, but retain more of that value in Wales.

From my perspective, one of the problems about our policy on ownership, that we should have more of this generation owned in Wales than we previously had, has been finding the counter parties and finding those citizen representative bodies that have got the ability and the competence to invest in this. And, potentially, that's one of the areas where we can work alongside Great British Energy, to make sure that a GB stake can be taken in some of those projects that are too big and too complex for any of the community and local organisations that we support and work with. So, I think there are huge opportunities there.

I think one of the key things, really, in delivering the climate change challenges and the plans that we've got for energy is that it's not about who should make the decisions, really; it's more about how do we all work together. The structures at the UK, the Welsh, the regional and the local level all need to be pointing in the right direction, so that we've got that bottom-up project-level information that can then accelerate that delivery in Wales, I think.

I was keen to stress as well to UK Government Ministers that, actually, if they want to make rapid progress and have early wins in this space, then Wales is the place to do it, because we are so much further ahead in terms of the plans and the structures. 

I'm grateful to you for that. It's tempting me down a path of a long conversation on policy, which is not appropriate in this committee. But I'm unsure whether I'm convinced by the answers, quite honestly, on structures. Because whilst you're saying, Cabinet Secretary, that you're less concerned about who takes decisions, I'm very concerned about it, because I want to hold them to account, and I want them to take decisions that are coherent and that have coherence within the overall energy field. And my concern is that we've got two Governments operating with different powers in the same space, in the same place, and without the powers that the Welsh Government has said that it requires in terms of planning and in terms of the Crown Estate—and I very much support the Welsh Government on that issue—I'm concerned that you don't have the breathing space that you require in order to deliver on your ambitions, which I think are shared across the whole Chamber, and whilst this LCM is narrow—and I accept your argument on that—what it does do is to insert a player into the field that will have an impact on your ability to achieve your policy objectives, and that is my concern on this.

And of course, the impact should be a positive impact on our ability to achieve our—

No, I think it's a negative one, you see, because my view is—and we're straying into policy here, and we've got to be careful—that if we have a player that has greater resource and greater power than the player that exists already, you don't need to have a degree in economics to know what the result of that is going to be, and my concern is that we don't have the coherence of policy in Wales. You do have in England and you do have in Scotland, but you don't have that same coherence in Wales, and in Wales, we're having a substandard sort of structure, if you like, which can never lead to good results, because we don't have the coherence of policy that you have in England or Scotland, and Wales stands out like that, and that's what worries me about this LCM.

I'm sure you're not going to agree with all of that, but over to you, Minister.

No. So, I think in terms of what the Bill does in terms of setting up Great British Energy, I think the kinds of questions that Alun has just been posing are the kinds of things that we need to be discussing in terms of the way in which the two Governments work together, the way in which Great British Energy works with Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru and so on. But we're not in the position at the moment to provide those answers, because the discussions are at such an early stage.

Okay, thank you.

Luke, you indicated earlier.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. I did indicate, but I was going to go along the same points as Alun, because I share those concerns. I mean, we're looking at this particular LCM now, where it establishes Great British Energy as an operating body, and I do find it deeply concerning that we're potentially going to be consenting to it being established, but then not actually understanding how it interacts. And what happens when we go to that conversation around how it interacts with some of our own organisations and we don't like what's on the table, well, are we in a position then when it's too late? So, I feel like these sorts of discussions have to happen at the same time as we have the conversations around establishing Great British Energy, otherwise we run the risk of UK Government overriding some of the decisions that Welsh Government are making or duplicating some of the work that Welsh Government is already doing, which would be then to the benefit of nobody.

And just to reassure you that one of the things we've talked about in the meeting with Lord Leong [correction: the meeting with Minister Shanks] was that those discussions should happen in parallel. So, whilst we're talking about the LCM and whilst we're trying to work with the UK Government to get it to a point at which we're able to recommend consent, then at the same time, those discussions about how we work together should be happening at the same time.

It doesn't address the issue for me of what happens if we're not happy with the discussions around how it operates. Again, I think there is a risk that we go into the policy discussion here, but I think it is important that we understand these things when we're looking at establishing Great British Energy as an organisation.

So, would it be helpful then if we commit to providing this committee and the other committees represented today with an update on the discussions as they move forward, and as they take place in a particular—

I think everybody likes that idea. Thank you.

Could I also ask for an update on the conversations that you're having with the UK Government on the devolution of the Crown Estate?

Yes, okay.

Thank you.

Over to you, Natasha.

Thank you so much, Chair. You took the words out of my mouth, and I think we're all quite satisfied with that response, there, Cabinet Secretary. The LCM states that the Bill, and I quote

'would not constrain the Welsh Ministers' ability to continue to support'

—I apologise for my abuse of the Welsh language—

'Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru using the existing powers available to them.'

Have you had such assurances from the Secretary of State for Wales and will the Bill be amended to ensure that this is actually going to be the case?

We established Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru using the executive powers of Welsh Ministers, so there's nothing in the Bill that would affect that, so, in that sense, we don't see the need to see any specific amendments in that context. But the area of the Bill where we do want to see those discussions around change is in relation to strengthening the Bill regarding the strategic priorities. So, that's the particular area of the Bill where we're having conversations about what the role would be for Welsh Ministers and the Senedd. So, if those strategic priorities are in areas where we have devolved responsibility, for example, Warm Homes, then, obviously, there needs to be a role for the Welsh Government and for the Senedd in those discussions, and that's where we're having the particular discussions at the moment.

So, just for my knowledge, then, say, for example, there's a particular point, as you mentioned, on Warm Homes, where you and, potentially, the Secretary of State are at loggerheads over it, who will have the final say?

Our concern would be that the strategic priorities might allow the UK Government to invest in areas that are devolved competence, so we would need to have safeguards in place so that the decisions are made here. I don't know, Scott, if you wanted to add on that particular point.

I think that the principle, from our perspective, is that from a legal perspective in the legislation—I'm not talking as a lawyer here—there's nothing that constrains the powers of the Welsh Ministers in this Bill, but the points that Members have made today and that reflect the conversations that we're having with UK Government are that, clearly, there is an interaction between the devolved policies as regards the implementation of the various bodies. So, I suppose, in that respect, it goes back to the strategic priorities point that the Cabinet Secretary has made there. With further clarity and assurances, at the very least, you would have a better understanding of how those two areas exist together, whether that's done in legislation or not. But from that kind of amendment perspective, I don't think it constrains powers, is what we would conclude.

So, we want to see a stronger role for Welsh Ministers and the Senedd in terms of setting the strategic priorities. That's our key area of concern with the Bill.

Carolyn.

Also, the Senedd's climate change committee were concerned that clause 5 requires the Secretary of State to prepare a statement of strategic priorities and just consult with the Welsh Ministers as well. They're really concerned about not being involved with the detail.

I'd like to give examples, going forward, of Great British Energy and schemes, so I'm just going to touch on the HyNet proposal—I know I've spoken about it before—on carbon capture and storage. So, already, issues have come up regarding what community benefits any of these schemes would have for people living in Wales, that aren't being captured, the environmental impact. With that particular scheme, I know the Health and Safety Executive says the behaviour of carbon dioxide is still relatively unknown, so the monitoring of pipes going forward is a concern and also monitoring offshore as well is a concern, that it's only going to happen for 20 years. So, for me, representing Wales, any decisions made by UK Government like that one, you'd want to know the detail of who's going to manage it, the community impact, et cetera.

Also, on the transition from fossil fuels, in Wales, we are a member of the Beyond Oil & Gas Alliance, and we've also got the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. Going forward, Great British Energy says it will own, manage and operate clean power projects, and there's so often a disagreement about what is actually clean power as well. So, I know that the climate change department might say that blue hydrogen isn't clean energy and that it produces more carbon dioxide, and, in Wales, we've got the well-being of future generations Act, so we should not be storing it offshore and only monitoring it for 20 years, when we don't know how it behaves, carbon dioxide.

So, I'm just concerned that these things are being passed without us having a say on them, or a debate, or anything like that, going forward, which is my concern, really—that detail. So, just really, your comment on that. 

In terms of this Bill, all that's happening is the setting up of Great British Energy and that point, really, about the strategic priorities being our area of concern. But any energy project that comes forward will be subject to all of the normal processes—the planning processes, the monitoring and all of that. So, that sits outside of this specific Bill, which, again, is only about setting up the company itself.

I mentioned earlier—and Jennifer did—about community projects, which are really important, projects that are community owned, where they get that benefit, but none of these will happen unless we sort out the national grid. You know, proper renewable energy projects, like wind, to connect to the grid—. I know there's one solar farm that has got planning, but they've been told that 2038 will be the earliest that they can connect to the grid. So, what discussions are you having regarding that? I know it's probably going into the detail of it, sorry, rather than the legislation, but it's just about that concern, because you can't do one without the other.

So, we are having discussions with the UK Government and they definitely understand the importance of the grid. I know that the First Minister has been raising it in her discussions with counterparts in UK Government as well.

Just one more. So, in north Wales, I know that just standing charges are £336 and I'm told that it's because of the grid and connectivity. So, it's just that impact, again. Renewable energy: great and all this, but people want cheaper bills, so we need the grid and we need cheaper bills and they want to see the benefit of all this, especially when there's public investment going into these things and fossil fuel companies aren't paying; they're leading and not paying for the infrastructure. We just need to make sure that we're all on track for that, you know?

Yes. So, I think one of the things that we have in our favour now is Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru. You know, it's Welsh Government-owned and it does give us the opportunity, when we bring forward these projects, to take a different view of community benefits and to try and set the bar, really, for community benefits. So, that's something that we're exploring at the moment, because, as you say, people want to see reliable energy, cheaper energy, and they want to see community benefits that probably stretch beyond refurbishing community halls—important though that is, you know, you can only do that so many times.

Yes. Reduced energy bills.

So, all of that is in our minds when we're thinking about what the community benefits might be through our own particular projects. The point about the grid is really well made, but at the same time, when you look at the kinds of projects that we're able to fund through Ynni Cymru, lots of them are small scale, which don't need access to the grid, and provide that local ability to have reliable renewable energy, as well, which is important.

Can I just say something on that? An area we know well, because it straddles our border at the moment, is Morriston Hospital and the energy farm attached to it. You've got an energy farm there using solar energy, which has one major customer, which is the hospital. I mean, that doesn't need a big entry to the grid, it just needs to get it across the road—literally across the road. Are there opportunities to do that kind of thing?

Yes. We've got £10 million in our Ynni Cymru fund, which is available for projects.

That's right, Cabinet Secretary. And, of course, for a long time, we've supported the Welsh Government energy service, which is bringing forward projects like that across the public estate, where you can generate and have direct wires to sources of demand and meet them directly. That is generally one of the really effective ways of addressing both costs and the emissions of those projects. So, we've been supporting that for a long time. I think the discussions around Great British Energy are around how the local power plan can then amplify, potentially, and work alongside that in Wales. And I think some of the assurances have been actually that it is that local value and ownership; that local value staying locally, where we are assured that our aims are very much in parallel around that.

There's a limited amount of information on the face of the Bill on the operation of Great British Energy. Can you confirm if further information will be provided to the Senedd by the Welsh Government before the Senedd has the consent vote?

We don't expect further information from the UK Government in respect of specifically the Bill, because, as we've talked about, it is narrow. But in terms of the wider role of Great British Energy, as soon as we have further information, we'll obviously share that with you.

Thank you. Alun.

I was content with the response from the Minister on my earlier questions, but I do believe we probably need a conversation with the First Minister or the Counsel General about some of the structural issues we've debated and discussed around these LCMs this morning, rather than specifically on these particular issues.

Thank you, Alun. Natasha.

Thank you, Chair. I know we've touched upon it before, and I think many of my colleagues have already gone down this road already, but clause 6 provides wide-ranging powers of direction to the Secretary of State for GB Energy. These directions could have a direct impact on devolved areas, and I think many of my colleagues have mentioned that already. Are you genuinely satisfied with this approach going forward? And do you think that Welsh Ministers should be listed as a statutory consultee, or should their consent be obtained? What do you think?

At the moment, we do have those reassurances from the UK Government that we will be consulted, but actually we want to see more than just being statutory consultees in this space. Again, it comes back to the heart of the discussion about the way in which Welsh Government Ministers, and also the Senedd, will be involved. So, again, this is one of those spaces where we could look to consent, rather than consult. That's the kind of space that we've having those discussions in, although, as the team has said, there might be other solutions as well. But it really is about respecting and understanding the role of the Welsh Government and the Senedd.

Thank you.

Thank you. Have you had any discussions with the UK Government as to whether the powers of direction contained in clause 6 could be exercised jointly or concurrently if they relate to devolved matters?

Again, this is the area that we want to see strengthened in relation to the role of Welsh Ministers and the Senedd, and those discussions about how we might do that are ongoing. As I mentioned earlier, I'd love to be in a position to give more detail today about what the solutions might look like, but as soon as we're able to do that, we will.

And finally from me, the grid was a late nineteenth century, early twentieth century invention, which was based around power stations in one place, and it going down, with the power being reduced and reduced into 240 or 220 AC volts coming into people's houses. It's different now, isn't it? It's bidirectional. Has that been taken into account by the actions of Great British Energy? Everything doesn't have to go into the grid. I talked about Morriston Hospital, but there are lots of other opportunities for things not to have to go into the grid. Port Talbot is an example. I'm not very happy with the bringing in of steel recycling, rather than steel manufacturing. There's going to be huge energy use—rather than having it coming from the grid, but having local provision. 

I'm sure that will be part of the wider thinking of Great British Energy, although it doesn't relate specifically to the Bill that we have in front of us today. But I'm sure that's part of the wider discussion.

Thank you. If there are no other questions, can I thank the Minister and her colleagues for coming along to talk to us?

Can I ask a question?

Sorry, Carolyn, I didn't see that.

Because energy is such a big topic, it would be great if we could have a—I suppose this is for the Business Committee—debate on this in the Chamber going forward, to have a strategic view on it as Members of the Senedd. There's a lot happening. But perhaps I need to take that to the business department, do I? Thank you.

Thank you. I thank the Minister and her colleagues. Can I thank Luke and Carolyn from the other committee for coming along and joining us? I sometimes forget Luke isn't really a full member of this committee the number of times he attends. But we're very grateful to both of you for coming along. As everybody in here knows, but I have to tell you, there'll be a transcript of this produced, and you're urged to check it for any inaccuracies. As I tell most people, my inaccuracies normally come about because I turn around like this, and the microphone doesn't pick up the last bit of what I'm saying. So, I urge you not to turn around when you're talking, but also, more importantly, that you do check it. Again, thank you, all, very much. I think I found it informative, and I'm sure other people have.

Thank you.

Can I move a motion, under Standing Order 17.42, to resolve to exclude the public from the meeting for the following items: 5, 6, 12, 13, 14 and 15? 

I welcome Julie James, the Counsel General and Minister for Delivery, to this session. Would you like to introduce your officials?

They can introduce themselves, Chair.

Good afternoon. Claire Fife, for the purposes of this Bill I'm the Bill manager. 

Thank you very much. If you're ready, I'll start off with the first question. What is the overall purpose of the Bill and how will it achieve its stated aims?

Thank you very much for the question. This is a technical and administrative Bill and it helps develop the elements that underpin Welsh law and help make it more accessible. The purpose is to amend the Legislation (Wales) Act 2019, which is about making and publishing Welsh legislation, and it brings forward a series of repeals to provisions that are no longer needed. The law on this is currently spread over a few enactments, some of which are around 80 years old, even, and there are gaps in the legislation, and they don't fully reflect the arrangements that we've all become used to working in. Also, none of the legislation is currently bilingual. So this is a general tidying up and codification of the law, which would really help to make it more accessible. And then there are some minor amendments to the provisions in the 2019 Act that deal with interpretation and operation of legislation, and that just reflects our experience of using that Act in the intervening years.

Thank you very much. Alun.

I've just started eating a biscuit. 

My fault. 

What's your vision for this Bill, Minister?

It's just exactly that: it's a tidying up provision, if you like. It's about accessibility, it's about allowing things to happen in Welsh law that I think some of us might be quite surprised don't happen. I have to say that I was quite surprised to find that there was no such thing in law as a Welsh statutory instrument, for example. I think quite a few of us would find that surprising. So it allows us to tidy it up, to have a series of Welsh statutory instruments that are numbered as such, and to allow accessibility more generally.

It also allows us to access the King's Printer as a King's Printer for Wales for the first time, and again, I think I can't be alone in having been quite surprised that that wasn't something we already had. So effectively I think it's putting the law into the state that many of us might have guessed it was already in.

And that, of course, is an important purpose, I fully accept that. But you know, when I hear Ministers saying this is purely an administrative Bill, two things go through my mind. First of all, what are they trying to hide? And two, why don't you do more, then, with this legislation? And do you know, we've had conversations—I'll put it on the public record—about how we legislate here, from both sides of the desk, in terms of Government and in terms of the Senedd. I think we both feel that we could improve how we legislate, and provide more flexibility for Government and perhaps more opportunities for scrutiny from a Senedd point of view, and I think that's quite a useful conversation to pursue. This Bill probably wouldn't be a place to look at that. But I'm interested as to what you believe this Bill can achieve in terms of making Welsh law more accessible. Because you will know, Counsel General, one of the conversations we've had in this committee over the years has been the confusion of the statute book—using Westminster legislation and Welsh legislation to achieve Government's objectives. You can provide as much opportunity within this legislation as you wish, but if the Government continues to do that, the statute book will continue to be confused and accessibility will be reduced. 

Yes, that's true. It's one of the stages of things that I think we need to do. There is a real capacity issue and it's one of the things that—. You and I are both on the Future Senedd Committee as well. It's one of the things that I know that committee is going to look at, and this is part of it. So, this Bill is a really good example. This is a Bill that's been worked on I think it's fair to say, and without wanting to be pejorative, around the edges of the rest of the programme, because it's a Bill that's technically needed but it's not politically needed. So, it's a Bill that people have worked on, if you like, because they think it's technically needed but it hasn't been prioritised by the Government. We've now got an opportunity to bring it forward as part of the legislative programme, but it could quite easily have dropped away if we'd had a Bill with more political priority ready at the right point in time. 

And that's one of the things that the Future Senedd Committee will be looking at, Alun, because it is about how do we mesh together proper scrutiny and the capability of the Government to bring forward legislation. For example, using UK legislation is an interesting one. So, I think there are certain circumstances in which using UK legislation makes sense because, for example, you might have a market that isn't sufficiently developed in Wales that is developed in England that we can take advantage of. I can think of several examples over the course of my ministerial career where I've thought, 'Well, it's not beneficial to have a different system in Wales than it is England because, actually, it's really hard to recruit particular professions, or whatever'.

There are also occasions in which something is brought forward by a UK Government of any colour where we think, f'Well, we haven't got that in our priority list but it would be a shame for the people of Wales not to be able to take advantage of it', so we'll piggyback on it at that point. You could at that point, if you had the capability, do a Welsh version of it, but we don't have that capability and it's one of the things I think the Future Senedd Committee wants to have a look at. One of the things I've brought forward in that committee, for example—and forgive me, for my colleagues sitting here on this side of the table—is we have a very strange way of thinking about our parliamentary counsel, because we think of them at the moment as the Government's, and they should be, in my view, the Parliament's. So, there are other things that we could do to make resource available more widely that would help us bring forward that kind of legislation. 

But this Bill is not about any of those things. This Bill is about making what we currently do more accessible and more obvious, and we'll come on to the bits where we're changing slightly the terminology around statutory instruments, for example. You and I know that we've had many a conversation in these kinds of committees about what is an affirmative procedure, what's a superaffirmative procedure, what on earth do we mean, what is the Senedd doing when it agrees that, and so on. Well, this makes it a much more upfront process and it makes it more accessible to people who are now lawyers or policy wonks, because the language is pretty straightforward, it seems to me. 

So, this Bill is about doing that and it's one of a series of things that we would like to do to take that forward, and I hope that coming out of that Future Senedd Committee we would be making a series of recommendations of that sort as well. 

I find myself in complete agreement with the Counsel General, so I'll leave it at that for now. 

We've sought consent. Sorry, I can't listen to myself feed back. We've sought consent. We haven't got it yet, but we've had lots of consultations. We're not expecting any kind of problem. I've yet to engage with the new Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, just because of the age of the incoming Government, but we're not anticipating any difficulty with that, because we've been in correspondence with the various organisations, via the officials, for some time. Dylan, I don't know if you want to say about—.

Yes. We've been speaking to the National Archives.

So, we have a version that we put the seal on here. That's actually—. One of the big perks of taking a Bill through the Senedd is you get to go to the seal affixing ceremony and watch the First Minister do a ratchety thing with the seal that imprints it.

To the national library, yes.

Right, right, right.

I think I'm going to let the officials come in here as well, Adam, but I think broadly because my predecessor went through quite a big deal with the committee about that post-legislative review, and we did all of the things that would allow that legislative review, but actually we've never received any feedback or questions from it, other than the review we undertook ourselves, and this is much more straightforward, so we just don't think it's a necessary thing to do. I think that's broadly it, isn't it?

I don't think we do, and I think we'll update the explanatory memorandum to reflect the Bill.

Diolch. Natasha.

Thank you so much, Chair. Can you please outline, for the benefit of the committee, why the date of 1 January 2026 was chosen for Parts 1 and 2 of the Bill to come into force, and whether indeed the Welsh Government has consulted with the Business Committee and any other affected stakeholders about this date?

So, the date is just so the sequence of numbering starts for a calendar year, so you'll be able to say that for the year 2026, that's the first year in which there's a Welsh statutory instrument with that number, so it's just a really straightforward begin-at-the-beginning provision. We haven't yet, as I understand it, consulted with the Business Committee, but we're in the process of doing so. Obviously, this committee will do its own consultation. We've consulted with a range of other people that I'm sure Dylan or Claire can talk us through. I've only, obviously, recently come into the post, so I haven't been part of that.

That's okay.

We've particularly consulted with the National Archives who, as Dylan said earlier, deal with the registration of legislation, and they were very clear that part way through commencement would be difficult because of the series, so as the Counsel General said, that's the main reason that the National Archives were quite clear that they wanted a 1 January start.

It might be helpful if I explain. When we talk about a series, what happens is that each SI is given a number for a particular year, so you'll start off with SI 2025/1, and then that goes through the year, and our Welsh SIs at the moment form part of the UK series, for reasons we're not totally clear about, if we're totally honest, and again this is something that should have probably changed in 2007 and arguably should have changed in 1999, from the very beginning, really. So, the simple point is that we don't want to break that up in the middle of a year, so in future, the new Welsh series will be WSI or OSC in Welsh, with the new numbering, which is exactly the same position in relation to Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Okay, fantastic. And is there any date that you have in mind when you'll be getting in contact with the Business Committee and affected stakeholders in order to make them aware of what's going on?

It's part of the ongoing consultation arrangements.

Fine, okay. Can you please outline the consultation undertaken by the Welsh Government when developing this particular Bill?

Do you want to do that? Which one of you wants to do that?

In relation to part 2, which is the—. Sorry, in part 2 of the explanatory memorandum, which deals with the consultation element, we've set out that we undertook a consultation in late 2022 into early 2023 on the repeals element, so most of the repeals that you see in that Schedule we dealt with as a draft statute law (repeals) (Wales) Bill. There are a few other relevant consultations that have informed those repeals. So, Part 11 of Schedule 1, for example, reflects the Law Commission's own consultation in 2015 on their last statute law repeals Bill. So, you've got repeals in relation to the Industry Act 1979 and the Industry Act 1980, and the Welsh Development Agency Act 1997. So, we've drawn on other consultations. So, that's the main consultation that we undertook in relation to the Bill itself that you see before you.

Okay. From my understanding, Parts 1, 2 and 4 of the Bill did not have any consultation taken place in relation to them. Can you elaborate why?

Are you happy for me to—? 

Yes.

We didn't have any public consultation on Parts 1, 2 and 4. Part 4, as the Counsel General alluded to earlier, comes from the review of the 2019 Act. It's very much a Government-operation part of that 2019 Act; it's about how the legislation can be interpreted and operates. So, we did work internally with lawyers who draft legislation to check what we were proposing would meet some of those tiny modifications that they were looking for. In relation to Parts 1 and 2, obviously, Part 1 particularly is of most interest to the Senedd and the Government, and obviously this committee's going to consider that, and in relation to Part 2, we've engaged very closely with the team in the National Archives, who I think Dylan would say have been very helpful in informing some of the fine detail of the printing and publishing elements.

Okay. So, in relation to the entire Bill itself, was the Law Commission consulted on the development of the Bill, in particular in the identification of repeals?

We haven't thought it necessary to involve the Law Commission. They were invited to contribute to an earlier consultation on statute law repeals, but they didn't indicate that they wanted to contribute. They've brought forward a set of statute law repeal proposals since their last report to the UK Government in 2015, and this is partly a resourcing issue for them, we understand, so they'd got one member of the team who dealt with those matters, and they've retired, unfortunately, and not been replaced.

And then, I suppose the other issue is that we actually think it's an issue for us, that we need to get into the habit of reviewing our own legislation and making sure that it's tidied up and repealed. So, I would hope that the Senedd would see a number of these coming forward with regular monotony, where we say, 'Actually, we've got a team of people who are saying that provision x is no longer used for anything, or it's become obsolete for the following reasons.' And so we want to get into the habit, if you like, of that kind of tidying-up-type process. And this is all about—and I think I had this exchange with Rhys ab Owen in Plenary—this is all about making sure that jobbing lawyers, when they come in front of the court, can be clear that what they're looking at is the law. So, I said in Plenary, and I'll say it again here: I remember the liquid-tummy problem when you're looking at it, thinking, 'Oh, gosh, is this actually in force?' So, we really want to be sure that when you consult a lawyer in your local high street that that lawyer, in looking at the law, can be absolutely certain that what they're looking at is law that's in force and hasn't become obsolete because it's been repealed by the miscellaneous provisions Act 20,025 that you unfortunately didn't look up.

Whilst I don't have any objection to anything you've just said there—I completely appreciate what you've just said—from an alternative perspective, though, particularly when it comes to the law, sometimes it is worthwhile just getting a second opinion, and whilst I have no criticism again of the Senedd legal team, and I'm sure they all do a marvellous job, on occasion, it may be worthwhile—and this is just a suggestion, food for thought—to get other opinions on board to make sure that what's going out is (a) going to be reflective of what people, like you said, on the high street are going to be conveying, and secondly, just to keep a check that those lawyers that we do have are working properly and working adequately.

So, we have a very good working relationship with the Law Society and legal professions in Wales and I have already, in the very short amount of time I've been in this job, met with them, and we do have that interactive conversation with them, and obviously we have that conversation with our own internal lawyers as well, and indeed with the external lawyers that the Welsh Government retain, so there's a sort of interactive conversation. I would also expect Senedd committees to pick them up occasionally. So, I know from taking other Bills through that that's come up in other scrutiny. So, you'd expect the committee reports to come back as well, saying, 'Is this particular passage still necessary? Does it add to the accessibility of Welsh law?' and so on.

And then, one of the things that I—I digress, and forgive me for a moment—but one of the things that I hope that the Future Senedd Committee will look at, and I think I raised it in the first statement, was the issue of the way that the Office of the Legislative Counsel currently works. I've had an exchange with several of the Members in this room, where I've said, 'I absolutely understand what you're trying to do in amending this piece of legislation, but the way it's worded doesn't fit with the rest of the Bill, so can we bring it back at a further stage? Maybe introduce it yourself.' I've had that conversation with you, Adam, many times. It seems to me that that's not necessary. We could, actually, just use the Office of the Legislative Counsel as a parliamentary body, if you like—it's done that way in other legislatures—so that your ideas come already drafted in a way that would mean that the law was accessible and held together as a single instrument, rather than this to and fro that we currently have, which I find very frustrating and I know that you do as well. So, that's one of the things that I'd really like to do as part of the improvement. It's not part of this, but it is one of the things I think we should really seriously consider.

Okay. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Adam.

So, broadly, the answer is 'yes' to that. There is one improvement, if I could call it that—. There's a terrible echo if you keep those on and talk. So, there's a new section 37F, which provides a default so that all statutory instruments are laid before the Senedd. Again, it's one of those surprising things, isn't it, because I'm not sure that, if you'd asked me, I'd have known that some of them weren't. So, this will make sure that they all are, and every single one of them then has one of the processes that's more straightforward associated with it and you don't have to have the conversation that I know, again, you and I have been part of about what kind of affirmative procedure are you talking about and what does that even mean. You know, what is a negative procedure? What does it even mean? So, I think this is language that's more accessible and is more straightforward.

And then, obviously, the Senedd still plays all of the roles in putting forward a different opinion during the scrutiny of any legislation, so if the Government is suggesting a negative procedure, and, as you know, the committee often suggests that that's not the appropriate one, well, there's nothing stopping that happening. This isn't interference or anything of that sort. It just makes it, I think, a more accessible conversation for, frankly, more Senedd Members and also for more members of the public, because I'm not sure, myself, when you come in as a new Senedd Member, if you weren't a lawyer previously and so on, quite how accessible any of that is when you're in your first three months of office.

Well, it depends what you think the Bill is trying to do, I think. So, certainly, as part of a conversation that I've had with a number of Members and I've had myself, the issue about where statutory instruments are referred by the Business Committee—so, they tend to be referred to this committee as a technical reporting matter, and I'm on record as saying that I think sometimes it would be more appropriate for them to go to a policy committee. There is an issue that I'm going to ask Dylan to explain, using the right legal wording so I don't mess it up, about what a statutory instrument is and who is the authority that's making it that slightly complicates that, but it's not something we've included in this Bill, because this Bill, apart from that one improvement about laying all of the statutory instruments in front of the Senedd, which I think was an omission, is not seeking to change anything, it's just seeking to make it more accessible and codified, if you like. There are some changes, though, that I think we're all interested in that the Future Senedd Committee, I think, will be looking at, and one of them is a possible scrutiny of big SIs under framework legislation by a policy committee, for example. But, Dylan, I don't know if you want to explain what the legal difficulty with that is.

I think we've—. I am very interested in talking about that, but I think we've very much tried to keep this as a codification and simplification Bill, and I think that takes it out of that into what might be very interesting innovative procedures, but is definitely not just simplifying. I think there are some issues that we would want to go into in how to do that. As you say, it's been the subject of much discussion in other Parliaments, that's for sure, and we would want to think through how that would work. And if we've got these much more straightforward procedures, how would it fit? Dylan and I were actually just discussing it earlier before we came down to the committee, how would that work. So, a statutory instrument is something that's done under Executive authority, under a Bill, it's put forward, the Senedd can say 'yes' or 'no', it can't say 'maybe', or 'with this'. You might have a process where the committee—a policy committee now, not the technical committee—says, 'Well, why don't you think about including this, or excluding that from the policy?' and the Minister could agree to do that and so adopt the language, if you like. But then there'd be a process of having to re-lay the statutory instrument. So, we'd have to think through the process of how that would work, and I think this Bill isn't the place to do that, though I'm very interested in doing it. And I very much hope that the Future Senedd Committee will come up with a methodology for doing that, which we could adopt for the next Senedd.

Frankly, I don't know that the Government capacity to do that in the last year of the Senedd, given the legislative programme that I find myself being put in charge of delivering—. I don't know that we'd be able to do that as well, if I'm honest, Adam. It's very packed, the legislative programme. But I do think there's a place, in the Future Senedd Committee, to discuss that, and there's a complicated conversation to be had about how would that amendment work, and would you really want to re-lay every statutory instrument and start again, because you've—. There's a to and fro to be had, isn't there, about how that might work.

So, I'd be really interested in having a look at that—certainly not as part of this though—and there are a number of other things that I'm very interested in having a look at. I defy anyone at all to follow a Stage 3 proceeding and understand what's happening to the Bill. You can't do that as the Member in charge of the Bill. Anyone watching in the gallery will have long since lost any idea of what's going on with the various amendments falling and not falling, and the way the marshalled list works, which is baffling to absolutely everybody I've spoken to. There's a whole series of things that we need to discuss with the Commission about the way that the software that puts that all together works and so on. So, there are opportunities, I think, absolutely, Adam, to look at how the public can get involved, and, frankly, how the public can even understand what's happening would be a really good start, it seems to me.

I don't want to disrespect fellow Members of the Senedd, but I'm pretty sure that most of them don't understand what's happening in Stage 3 amendments either, because it's so very difficult to follow, isn't it, where you're voting on consequential amendments five groups after the main amendment has been passed and so on. It's near impossible, even with the Bill in front of you, trying to follow what's happened. And occasionally, we've had errors, where we've passed a consequential amendment where the main amendment didn't pass. So, you know, there have been a few little blips of that sort, and so I think there is a piece of work to be done, a serious piece of work to be done, about making sure that the process itself is as accessible as possible, and that, frankly, the outcome of it is good law. Because if you're not following that process, those kinds of mistakes can sneak in. So, I do think there's a big piece of work, and I think the committee on the future Senedd is one of the places to look at that, but I think there will be others, and I'd be more than happy to take part in that, because I'm very interested in it indeed.

There are a number of other things. I don't think we have time today, but there are a number of other issues around how infrequently the Report Stage is used, for example, and what it is used for, and whether that actually works, and so on, which I think are really interesting too. But this is about—and I really do think this—if you simplify the process and make the language accessible, then that kind of conversation is easier off the back of that than it is off what is actually already quite a complicated set of quite difficult to penetrate language, really. I think people who are really interested, even ENGOs who are really interested in this kind of legislation, by the time you've talked to them about a superaffirmative procedure, they have long since lost the will to live, haven't they? You can have a better conversation once you've got a simpler set of rules that people are much more likely to understand.

It absolutely will need some changes to the Standing Orders, assuming that the Senedd adopts the Bill. At the point in time the Senedd has adopted the Bill, the Standing Orders will then need to refer to the new procedures by their new names. We'd expect that to happen from the beginning of 2026; that's the idea. When the numbering starts, the whole thing starts. So, we'd expect the Senedd Standing Orders to be amended, as they would always be, actually, to reflect legislation that the Senedd has passed. 

In terms of the UK Government Bills, Claire, do you want to talk about that? I haven't been involved in that.  

UK Government Bills will need to refer to Welsh statutory instruments, whereas today they would refer to statutory instruments, and they will need to refer to the new Senedd procedure names. But, Dylan, I think you've spoken with the First Parliamentary Counsel. 

I'll need to speak to the First Parliamentary Counsel to make sure that their office reflects what we're doing, but I don't think that will be a problem—well, it won't be a problem. 

Diolch, Adam. Can you give us a note on why we have to do the marshalled list, why we can't go through it section by section? 

I'm sure we can do a note. It's a conversation that's ongoing between us and the Llywydd, actually, about the piece of technology that's used to assemble the marshalled list. There's a complicated set of reasons why we're stuck with what we've got. Actually, the UK and Scottish Parliaments have moved to a different piece of software that is rather more user friendly, but it's an ongoing discussion between us and the Commission about how that will happen. But I'm sure we can provide the committee with a note of that ongoing discussion.   

Could you write? The marshalled list makes the legislation almost incomprehensible to those who are voting on it, which can't be good for legislation.

The other thing is: should committees be given more than 20 days—not working days—to report on statutory instruments? Anything that's done just before the Easter or summer breaks breaks through that 20 days very rapidly when we're not even meeting. 

I think that's just an ongoing discussion that we need to have about what's the most efficient way of doing it. What we count as weeks is one of the ongoing discussions. We were just having the conversation upstairs, actually. You may know, Chair, that the Business Committee discussed how much time this committee would require to scrutinise this Bill, for example, and I think the Business Committee decided that the committee needed 12 weeks. We've only recently discovered that that 12 weeks doesn't include the week between the laying of it in the Senedd last week and this week, so it's actually 13 weeks. So, if you think about the amount of elapsed time, not scrutiny time, that's left between now and the end of the Senedd term, if we're going to count weeks like that we are going to lose a fair amount of the year 5 legislation. I'm going to be invited, as I understand it, to the Business Committee very shortly, and it's something that I do plan to discuss with them. So, I'm happy to report back to the committee. 

Thank you. What will Schedules 1A, 1B and 1C achieve? 

I'm going to refer that to one of my officials. Which one of you wants to pick that up? 

We talked earlier about the new labels for the new procedures, and Schedules 1A, 1B and 1C deal with the pre-commencement and post-commencement position for those labels in relation to, for 1A, enactments that confer powers on the Welsh Ministers. For 1B, it deals with joint and composite instruments. Those are instruments made, for example, between the Welsh Ministers and the Secretary of State. And 1C deals with subordinate legislation made as an Order in Council both pre- and post-commencement. But Dylan, I don't know if you want to give more detail. 

I think you've summarised it very well, Claire. The idea is that we're just capturing everything so that the new terminology is used routinely. It's had to be done in that way from a drafting perspective, because each of those three situations that Claire outlined are a little bit different, so we decided to repeat the process in relation to each one. So, there's quite a bit of repetition there, but in the end, we felt that it was still a bit clearer to do it like that.

Put in terms that I understood, anyway, it's to make sure that we haven't left anything out and that everything that happens will then be subject to one of the three procedures that are set out in the Bill. So, it's a catch-all, isn't it?

Which takes me on to my next question. Section 2 of the Bill results in road traffic orders no longer being made by statutory instrument. What assessment has the Welsh Government made on how this might impact on the accessibility of these orders?

We currently publish copies of those on a dedicated part of our website alongside all the stopping-up orders and other temporary road notices that are not made as statutory instruments, and they're also published as public notices through local newspapers. It's arguable that there's a more comprehensive set of arrangements than is provided by legislation.gov.uk or Westlaw UK, which only publish statutory instruments. So, it won't change our practices of publishing all the road traffic legislation on the gov.wales site. In fact, if anything, it strengthens it, because it says that we're going to publish them all in that way. You'll know, I know, Chair, from previous experience, how arcane some of the rules are about how road traffic orders are or are not published.

Yes. Okay. Thank you. Natasha.

Thank you so much, Chair. Just for my knowledge, can you please outline how the approach taken for the publication of Welsh legislation differs from the role of the King's Printer for Scotland and Scottish legislation, please?

I think Dylan covered that a little bit earlier, but I don't know if you want to elaborate on that.

I mentioned that the King's Printer for Scotland and so on are all the same person, so that's the starting point. There's a King's Printer for Scotland because there was a King's Printer provided for in the Scotland Act 1998, and then the Scots also have a piece of legislation from 2010 that is similar to what we have here. So, what we've sought to do in relation to Wales is, first of all, to say that the person who does this does so in the name of the King's Printer for Wales, and then it fills certain gaps that we had in relation to the King's Printer. So, there's the King's Printer of Acts of Parliament, who's the original, if you like, and some of the older legislation refers to the King's Printer and what the King's Printer has to do in relation to Wales. So, we've plugged some of those gaps—quite technical things.

Probably the most important thing is that there's a new obligation on the King's Printer to publish Welsh legislation in an up-to-date form. This is something I touched upon earlier. The main point here is that we have a relatively novel but albeit—. You might be surprised that there isn't something like this; again, as the Counsel General said, it's the kind of thing that you would expect to see. But in fact, this will be the first provision in the UK that actually requires somebody to publish legislation in an up-to-date form. So, this is something that's quite common in other jurisdictions. In Australia and New Zealand, Canada, these kinds of things have been happening for a long time. So, this is the first time that it's been done, and it's being done, at the moment, only in relation to Wales.

Okay. Thank you for that. Have any consequences been identified in moving away from the dual-column printed format for statutory instruments and whether any engagement has been undertaken on the decision to do this?

Do you want to deal with that? I'll start. I'll just start by saying that I cannot stand the dual-column format and it causes us lots of problems. It was something that was the right thing to do 25 years ago, going back to that discussion we had about print and paper and all the rest of it. People don't read legislation like this any more; they read it on legislation.gov.uk. Claire can give us the details, but the dual-column format causes us practical problems when we're drafting legislation. So, during the pandemic, when I was drafting the rules on the restrictions, I was drafting with this document that was just half of the page. And then there are manual processes that actually cost us money to generate this thing that nobody uses. I've probably said most of the things that need to be said, Claire, but is there anything else?

The cost is an interesting point. To produce a Welsh statutory instrument costs the Welsh Government significantly more than an equivalent would cost for the Scottish Government, the Northern Ireland Executive or the UK Government. The standard cost is set out in the explanatory memorandum, but the standard cost per instrument is £320. But for a Welsh statutory instrument, we then pay on top of that £16.75 per page. So if you look at a 100-page instrument—which isn't common, but it's not so unusual—you're looking at a significant cost to produce that instrument, whereas the same instrument doesn't cost that money to the Scottish Government, for example; it would still cost them £320. It's all to do with the process that the National Archives and the publication concessionaire have to go through to combine that instrument to a print. And then if you look at the number of sales of those instruments, the cost-benefit is not there at all.

So, we do want to move away from the dual-column format. The National Archives are equally keen to make to move away from the dual-column format and we want to find a format that reflects, really, how people access legislation now. That's the engagement we're having, and the National Archives are going to do some user research, I think later this month, that considers how users access legislation in both languages, how they can be certain what they're seeing is the correct version, and that's going to inform the next steps on moving away from the dual-column format.

So, you've had engagement with the National Archives, but with the general public, nothing. 

They're doing that part. They're doing the user research. They use a company with the unusual name Bunnyfoot. Bunnyfoot undertake their user research and they work with people in Government, the general public, the Law Society, all sorts of different bodies about how they access legislation.

Fine. Great. Thank you so much for answering that. I want to ask you a little bit about repeals of Welsh legislation, if that's okay. I just wanted to ask why planning laws are repealed within the Bill, and not dealt with in the up-and-coming planning consolidation Bill, and whether this will impact on the accessibility of planning law here in Wales.

That's really straightforward. It's preparatory to the consolidation Act. We want to consolidate existing up-to-date law and not obsolete law, so this is just taking the opportunity to get rid of some of the obsolete provisions prior to the consolidation. So it's the first step towards the planning consolidation Bill.

Great. Is it possible for you to provide us with a timetable for the introduction of the planning consolidation Bill now?

Yes, it'll be next year. I can't be more definite than that at the moment, but we are working to make sure that we can bring the First Minister's legislative statement as early as possible next year. It would be our normal practice to do it at the end of the Senedd year, which doesn't make any sense to anyone outside the Senedd, so it would be in July next year, but that obviously leaves us with very little time before the Senedd elections, so I'm speaking with the First Minister's office with my hat on that's in charge of the overarching programme to see if we can bring that statement as far forward as possible so that we can have a discussion about the timetable. I think this committee will be very interested in the shortage of time we have to get what are pretty cherished Bills through the year 5 process. And the year 4 process—so that's the year up to July of next year, just for anyone in the public who's listening, because the years don't make any sense, do they—the year 4 Bills, many of those are going to go over into year 5, the way that we're currently scheduled. And therefore, there's the compression of year 5, and we have a number of Bills that people in this room are pretty keen to have go forward. That time period is squishing down as we speak, so I'm really looking forward to having that statement as early as possible, but I'm not, as we speak, in a position to be able to say exactly when.

That's fine. Thank you so much.

We're coming very close to the end. Can you drift over by five minutes?

Yes.

Okay. Over to you, Alun.

It might be useful to pursue the conversation about the legislative process that you were having with Adam, because I think this Bill is not being seen as a consolidation Bill, is it, but in many ways it has many of the features of that, reading through it, and I think it would be a useful conversation for us to have.

When I was reading it, I have to say, I turned straight to the repeals section. I wanted to see, 'Right, what are they getting rid of here?' And quite often when you look at repeals, they're not always as interesting as perhaps one would hope. But I was astonished, actually, to see that the Welsh Development Agency Act 1997 is being repealed. I thought I remembered that being abolished some years ago. [Laughter.]

Yes, it was, of course, but the Act that set it up wasn't abolished, the Act that set it up—

So, how can you abolish it without repealing the Act?

What happened was that the functions of the Welsh Development Agency, which were in the Welsh Development Agency Act—what was it?

It was 1978 or something. Or 1974. 

Yes, something like that, 1973 or 1974. So, there was an earlier piece of legislation. This Act just made a minor amendment to the Act that established the WDA. What happened, and I know this because I did it, is we drafted legislation that transferred the functions of the agency to the Assembly at the time, and then, in turn, to the Welsh Ministers. So, that legislation still exists because it conferred powers on the agency that are now exercised by the Government. This is something else. I can't remember exactly what this is, but this was an amendment made to the earlier legislation that's no longer relevant.

I could spend the whole day having this conversation. So, I assume that the Development Board for Rural Wales and the land authority are similar—

Yes.

—repeals. But I was also astonished to see the Domestic Fire Safety (Wales) Measure 2011 being repealed. I was on that committee when that was enacted, and my memory was that that was seen to be a very important piece of legislation at the time, partly because I think it was the first Measure of its sort that was passed. So, why have you chosen to repeal it? Does that mean that the legislation is repealed, it no longer exists, or have its objectives been subsumed into another piece of legislation since then?

The second one. Basically, the current building regulations completely supersede the Measure, really, and there was one last bit that was to do with sprinklers in care homes that has just gone through, so it basically now doesn't do anything. I have to pay tribute to Ann Jones, who fought tooth and nail to get this through, and it was very innovative at the time, but it's been superseded by the building regulations, which have basically caught up, if you like. So, it doesn't make any sense to have them in two separate places, and, again, if you're looking—

I absolutely agree with you—

—for enforcement and so on, you want it in one place.

Looking at those sections that go through repeals, I don't know if I was expecting a very small number or a very large number, and I actually got something in the middle. So, what was the process you followed? Because there must be other pieces of legislation that are sitting on the statute book that are, essentially, gathering dust and not performing or delivering any real purpose. You must have gone through a process of choosing or thinking, 'Is this a difficult one?' or 'This is a controversial one.' What was the process?

I think I'm right in saying that this started life when we inherited some proposals that the Law Commission had made that they hadn't provided for in their own legislation. I think we touched upon this earlier: the Law Commission used to do this fairly regularly. They would be known as statute law repeal Bills in Westminster. We inherited those initially and then we did an internal consultation asking for people to come forward with any ideas for legislation that was obsolete. The idea in future, within the Government, at least, is that we try to keep track of legislation that we come across. The difficulty with this is that the statute book is so vast, you don't just sit down one day and start reading it to look for these things, but if you come across them that we keep a record of them so that we keep doing this, as the Counsel General said earlier on.

I presume, therefore, that the Government would seek relatively non-controversial areas to repeal in this nature, because if you're repealing other areas where there's a policy issue involved, then you do it through substantive legislation.

There are a couple of examples of that where we were thinking of doing one and then it's come back out again, because—

I accept that completely. So, I assume that this is a regular sweep, if you like—not a conclusive one, I accept what Dylan said there. But this is something that, perhaps, the Senedd could expect to see through the process of consolidation, as well, whereby the Welsh Government will look through the statute book on a regular basis and then bring this sort of legislation to the Senedd to be formally repealed as part of a process of cleansing, if you like, the law.

Absolutely. But it's one of the things that we'll want to discuss again as part of the future Senedd thing, and also with the Business Committee. So, if you go back to my timetable for the legislative programme—and bearing in mind that's assuming that the rest of this term all goes splendidly, and so on—we go to the new reformed Senedd in the next session, so we go to a four-year term, so whoever the Government is has to get their whole programme through in four years. So, the idea that you have a last year, which is, necessarily, compressed between the September and the May, and you haven't got time to do anything because of the way the scrutiny processes work—I mean, that's not going to be a thing.

So, I think there's a real issue here and it's something for discussion. I'm not setting this out; it's something the Senedd needs to consider. What is the process for a consolidation Bill, for a technical Bill, for a repeal Bill, for a tidying Bill? Are they the same scrutiny processes as you require for everything else? It's a question. I'm not suggesting it is or it isn't, but it's a question we need to look at. We've managed to do this Bill now in this small moment of opportunity, but there are several others. There's the tribunals Bill that I'd very much like to get through—it's not controversial, but it's waiting for a slot to go, for example. It would make the landscape much better. It's not the end of the world if we don't do it, but it would make it a lot more accessible. There are a number of others. Adam has a Bill he very much wants to get through. There are a few others. So, it's to query do we need the same set of processes for all of these different types of Bills.

We've all got a Bill up our sleeve, let me tell you. [Laughter.] But I don’t disagree with you, Counsel General, I think it's an important conversation that we have. Because Standing Orders currently do allow for an expediated process and for an emergency process, as well as the process we're following at the moment. And it does feel to me that—. It's a question for you as Counsel General, possibly. Do you feel that the Government doesn't have the ability to use all of those different means and mechanisms or processes at the moment?

It doesn't feel to me as if there's an agreement between the Government and the Senedd and Business Committee about what the definition of those things is. So, if I were to suddenly say, 'This is an expedited process', there'd be a long, drawn out conversation about it as to why I said that, what's the justification, and so on. I think we'd be far better off having a set of definitive, 'This is a technical Bill, this is a repeal Bill, this is a consolidation Bill, here's the thing that says what it is, it fits into that process, away to go', rather than what we have at the moment, which—. It might not be justified to say this, but it feels to me like we'd have to justify it.

We've exceeded the five minutes in almost the same format as Alex Ferguson got injury time. Are you ready for one more question?

I have to get to Cathays by 3 o'clock, so I'm pushing it now.

Okay. We'll stop it there, then. We'll write to you on the other thing. And this is something you could perhaps write to us about: if you do away with something like the WDA, what about the WDA's borrowing? What's going to happen to that? I don't expect you to answer that now, but what's going to happen to it?

I have no idea, but I will find out and let the committee know.

Thank you.

The simple answer is that it was transferred.

It was transferred, was it?

The WDA's borrowing powers were transferred over.

The WDA had borrowed money and it was paying back money—money was being paid back under the debt from the WDA. Anyway, perhaps you'd like to write to us.

I think the borrowing powers were actually abolished, not transferred. I remember it well, but—

Let's find out.

The Welsh Government had its own borrowing powers, but that's a wider discussion.

'I don't know', Chair, is the answer, but I will find out.

Anyway, thank you very much. I'd tell you about the transcript, but I'm sure you know all about it. Thank you very much for coming to talk to us and thank you for going on for nine minutes, longer than the five minutes you promised. Thank you.

Pleasure.

Shall we have a five-minute break and come back here at 14:45?

Okay, welcome back, everybody. We'll move on to item 8, instruments that raise issues to be reported to the Senedd under Standing Orders 21.2 or 21.3. The first item is the Special Procedure Licences (Wales) Regulations 2024. These regulations make provision in relation to special procedure licences that cover acupuncture, body piercing, electrolysis and tattooing. Senedd lawyers have identified nine technical and four merits reporting points. A Welsh Government response hadn't been received—we'll discover now whether it has. Kate, from our legal team, would you like to run through the reporting points and any Welsh Government response?

Of the nine technical reporting points, two relate to potentially defective drafting and seven are matters that require further explanation from Welsh Government, particularly in relation to the guidance notes in the application form in Schedule 1 to the regulations.

The first merits point is asking the Welsh Government about the proportionality of requiring applicants to disclose all unspent convictions and conditional cautions through a criminal record check. The second merits point notes that a previous version of these regulations was considered by the committee before being withdrawn by Welsh Government. No response was received to the committee's report on that version of the regulations, which identified 18 reporting points, and a response to the committee's original report might have removed the need to raise the same points again in this report. The third merits point notes the length of time taken to implement the licensing regime and Welsh Government's response to this same point when it was raised by the committee on other regulations implementing the regime. And then the final merits point just notes the paragraphs in the explanatory memorandum that set out the consultation undertaken in respect of the regulations, and we’re still waiting for Welsh Government’s response.

Thank you. Members, anything to add? No.

Yes.

Sorry.

I don’t think we can allow legislation that is seven or eight years late in being implemented and is then defective just to pass without comment or scrutiny. We’ve written to the Welsh Government on a previous matter similar to this, I recognise that, but I really think we should write to the First Minister and say to her very clearly that, in a Government committed to delivery, we neved legislation that is enacted to be delivered in a timely way and in a way that is fit for purpose.

And she’s the fourth First Minister to be dealing with this.

Yes.

Okay, right. Are we happy to agree the reporting points? Yes.

On to item 8.2, the Land Transaction Tax (Relief for Special Tax Sites) (Wales) Regulations 2024. These regulations amend the Land Transaction Tax and Anti-avoidance of Devolved Taxes (Wales) Act 2017 to insert a new Schedule 21A, '(Relief for Special Tax Sites)', which provides for a new relief from land transaction tax for qualifying transactions of land within a special tax site. The regulations apply the new relief to one site, the Celtic Freeport special tax site, with effect from 26 November 2024. Senedd lawyers have identified three merits points. A Welsh Government response was requested for the third merits point and has been received. Kate, would you like to run us through the reporting points and Welsh Government response?

Thank you. The first merits point is just to note that land transaction tax is paid into the Welsh consolidated fund. The second merits point just draws Members’ attention to the paragraph in the explanatory memorandum that explains that applying this relief to any new special tax sites in future will require further regulations. And then the final merits point asks Welsh Government to explain why the regulations have been laid before the Senedd prior to the conclusion of the Competition and Markets Authority’s consideration of the proposed scheme. The Welsh Government was also asked to confirm to the Senedd prior to the debate on these regulations whether the CMA has raised any concerns about the scheme. In response, Welsh Government explains that it was necessary to lay the regulations at this stage in order to align with the coming into force of the UK Government’s designation of the Celtic Freeport special tax site and the availability of the reserves tax incentives. Welsh Government also confirms that the CMA published its report on 1 November and Welsh Government agrees to write to the committee in advance of the Senedd debate to advise whether the CMA has raised any concerns about the scheme.

Any Members want to raise any points? No. Are we happy to write, as laid out there by Kate? Yes. 

Item 9 is instruments that raise issues to be reported to the Senedd under Standing Orders 21.2 or 21.3. Item 9.1, the Local Government Finance (Consequential and Miscellaneous Amendments and Revocations) (Secondary Legislation) (Wales) Regulations 2024. The committee considered this instrument at its meeting on 21 October and laid its report the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government response to the report, which has since been received. Kate, do you have anything to raise?

Yes. The first reporting point here identified that there was doubt as to whether the regulations are intra vires—that is, within scope of the Welsh Ministers’ powers—to the extent that the regulations were made under section 54(1) of the Local Government (Wales) Act 1994. In response, Welsh Government accepts that the power in section 54(1) has not been transferred to the Welsh Ministers and therefore cannot be exercised by them. Welsh Government says that section 54(1) was cited to make the provision in regulation 11(4) of the regulations, which would have omitted a spent provision from a 1996 Order. Welsh Government suggests that regulation 11(4) having no effect because it’s ultra vires will have no impact in practice, because the relevant article is already spent and the omission was simply a tidying-up exercise. So, Welsh Government may be correct that there’s no impact in practice, but the more significant issue is that the Welsh Ministers have sought to exercise a power that they do not have in order to make this subordinate legislation. The Welsh Government response does not explain the basis on which the Welsh Government understood the Welsh Ministers to have this power and it doesn’t set out any action that they might take to deal with regulation 11(4), which is currently sitting on the statute book, despite Welsh Government acknowledging that it’s ultra vires. So, the committee may wish to write to Welsh Government on this to ask for an explanation about why this has happened and whether Welsh Government is going to do anything about it.

The committee may also wish to ask Welsh Government to provide a fuller response to the third technical reporting point, because the Welsh Government's response doesn't actually answer the question that the committee asked.

Are we happy to do that? Natasha.

[Inaudible.] But can we also, please, clarify why they're using powers that they don't actually have—that would be something that I'd really like to know—and if anything will be done to rectify it?

Yes. Everybody happy with that? Yes.

Item 9.2, the Education (Amendments Relating to the Co-ordination of School Admission Arrangements) (Wales) Regulations 2024. The committee considered this instrument at its meeting on 21 October, and laid its report the same day. Members are invited to note the Welsh Government response to the report, which has since been received. Kate, do you have anything to add?

No further comment on that one.

Members, are you happy? Yes.

Item 9.3, the Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas (Procedure and Interest Rate) (Wales) Regulations 2024. The committee considered this instrument at its meeting on 30 September. Following that meeting, we wrote to the Minister and have now received a response. We welcome the news that a correcting instrument will be made before the end of the year. Kate, anything to add?

No, nothing.

Thank you very much.

Item 10, notifications and correspondence under the inter-institutional relations agreement—a written statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: the Sea Fisheries (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2024. The Cabinet Secretary informs us that he has given consent to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to make this subordinate legislation in relation to Wales. He states that

'Consent was granted as these Regulations apply to a shared fishery which operates within and beyond the Welsh zone. In order for them to be effective, they need to apply on a UK basis and apply to all vessels operating in UK waters.'

He also states that the regulations will come into force on 16 December 2024. Are Members content?

Item 10.2, a written statement and correspondence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging and Packaging Waste) Regulations 2024. The Cabinet Secretary informs us that he has given consent for the UK Government to make these regulations, which will apply in relation to Wales. The regulations introduce an extended producer responsibility scheme for packaging and packaging waste, which will require producers of packaging to pay the cost of managing packaging waste and the provision of public information about the disposal of packaging waste. He states that consent was given as the regulations will

'enable consistency across the UK while enabling Wales to sustain and build on its performance as second in the world for recycling.'

The regulations are set to be debated in the Houses of Parliament during the window of 7 November to 4 December 2024, and, if approved, the scheme will come into force on 1 January. Are we content? Yes.

A written statement and correspondence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: the Movement of Goods (Northern Ireland to Great Britain) (Animals, Feed and Food, Plant Health etc.) (Transitory Provision and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024. The Cabinet Secretary again informs of consent being given to the UK Government to make these regulations, which will apply in relation to Wales. The regulations are a result of the agreement of the border target operating model, and their purpose is to preserve the benefits of unfettered market access for qualifying Northern Ireland goods entering Great Britain. The Cabinet Secretary states that consent was given

‘for reasons of efficiency and expediency in future policy change and adherence to international obligations, cross-UK coordination, and consistency.’

Are we content to note?

Correspondence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: the Official Controls (Amendment) Regulations 2024. We have another notification from the Cabinet Secretary, informing us of his intention to consent to the UK Government making and laying these regulations, which will extend to Wales. He states that the regulations provide a long-term legislative basis for further aspects of the border target operating model to be delivered. He intends to give consent as this will

‘ensure a coherent and consistent sanitary and phytosanitary regime for goods imported into Great Britain’. 

Are we happy to note this? 

A written statement by the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs: independent commission and review of the water sector. This written statement informs the Senedd that the Deputy First Minister has, jointly with the UK Government Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, launched an independent commission to review the water sector and its regulation. Members will be aware that we are currently considering the Welsh Government’s legislative consent memorandum on the Water (Special Measures) Bill, which makes provision about the regulation, governance and special administration of water companies. Are Members content to note this? Yes.

Item 11.2, correspondence from the Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership with the Llywydd on the Employment Rights Bill. The Minister informs the Llywydd that a legislative consent memorandum will be laid as soon as possible in relation to this Bill, but that it will be outside the normal two-week Standing Order 29 deadline. Once laid, the committee will consider the LCM as per usual. Are Members content to note this? Yes.

Correspondence from the Local Government and Housing Committee to the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government on the Welsh Government's legislative consent memorandum on the Renters’ Rights Bill. The Local Government and Housing Committee have written to the Minister with a number of questions in relation to the Renters' Rights Bill, in particular the decision to use the UK Bill rather than a Senedd Bill. You may wish to discuss this in private session.

Item 11.4, correspondence from the Minister for Children and Social Care on the Health and Social Care (Wales) Bill. We have a letter here from the Minister to us, the Finance Committee and the Health and Social Care Committee in relation to our respective reports on this Bill. Are Members content to note these letters? Yes.

Correspondence from the First Minister on the invitation to give evidence. The First Minister has declined to give evidence to our committee on specific matters for which she has responsibility and which come within our remit. Members may wish to discuss this in private session. Or in public. [Interruption.] Go on, then.

I don't think it's acceptable, really, for the First Minister to decline our invitation, and I think that we should press the First Minister further to appear before the committee.

I think there's general agreement on that. What can we do? We spend a lot of our time in different committees pretending we've got the power to make people come and give evidence to us. But if we can't make the First Minister come and give evidence on an area she's responsible for, what powers do we actually have?

Well, I think that's something that we need to explore, what powers do we have. But it's quite clear the First Minister decides the ministerial responsibilities. If she would prefer to give those responsibilities to the Deputy First Minister, then she has the ability to do that. But Wales and Europe, international relations, which are part of our responsibility, are also her ministerial responsibility, and it's very simple then. We're the scrutiny committee for those areas and she is the only Minister, she is the responsible Minister, and therefore only she can appear on behalf of the Government. So, I think it's fairly clear cut, really, and we've had other First Ministers who have appeared before this committee. It has never been an issue, so I don't understand why it's an issue now.

Okay. Alun.

I agree with that, actually, and I don't think it's a matter—. I see the First Minister in the final paragraph, or final sentence, is confident that another committee will be well placed to answer questions that fall within the remit of the committee. I don't think it's a matter for a First Minister to determine what questions are asked by committees, either, as it happens. I think it's a matter for committees and the Senedd to take those decisions. So, I really think this is a poor response, and the First Minister should make herself accountable and available to committees in order to be scrutinised on the Government's exercise of its powers and responsibility.

So you wish to write accordingly.

We should write accordingly.

Okay. Thank you.

Item 11.6, a written statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Transport and North Wales, UK Government amendments to the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill. The Cabinet Secretary informs us the UK Government has tabled an amendment to the Bill. The amendment was only tabled in UK Parliament last week, but it is not clear from the statement why the Welsh Government has not laid a supplementary legislative consent memorandum. Members will know the legislative consent motion debate is taking place in Plenary tomorrow. There will be an opportunity to seek clarification from the Cabinet Secretary on this issue. Are Members content to note this? Yes.

As previously agreed in item 4, we now move to private session for the remainder of our meeting.