Oh no you can't?
Remember this?
'This' was the Assembly Government's bid for power over Affordable Housing, power that would have allowed them to abolish the right to buy if they'd wanted to. They didn't as it so happens, not for now anyway but were clear enough that they did want the power to do so transferred to the Assembly.
'This' was the news that in the face of opposition from the Welsh Affairs Select Committee, the Assembly Government had climbed down and accepted that it could not abolish the right to buy without the consent of the Secretary of State.
To you and me that looked, felt, sounded like a veto. The Assembly Government dismissed any such word in press conference after lobby briefing, waved away any such accusation and called it, instead, a compromise. The Welsh Affairs Select Committee too agreed it was no more than a sensible compromise. It wasn't one the Deputy Minister for Housing Jocelyn Davies was proud of and caused some voices in Plaid to raise the prospect of a constitutional crisis.
Kirsty Williams, the Liberal Democrat leader, had a question of her own to raise: "Why give us the full powers and then dictate from London what we can and cannot do with them?"
Well someone else has joined in with the questions - the Joint Comittee on Statutory Instruments - half a dozen members from the House of Lords, half a dozen from the Commons who've been scrutinising the LCO and who've reported it "for doubtful vires."
Their verdict? That if the LCO stands "there appears to be a doubt in one respect that, if it were approved and made, it would be intra vires".
In other words it wouldn't be lawful.
In even more words the problem they've found is that there is nothing in the Government of Wales Act 2006, as far as they can see (and you would hope they can see a long, long way) that authorises this sort of veto.
The message seems to be - you can't do it.
Now what?
I'm Betsan Powys, BBC Wales' political editor. I'll be blogging the inside track on 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~04~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I think Betsan might be getting her vires in a twist here...surley she means "ultra vires" i.e. "beyond the powers"? "Intra vires" means "within the powers" in Latin. Or is it all just a bit of "panem et circenses"?
Complain about this comment
Who do we blame for the mess that is the 2006 Act? - Peter Hain, the Labour MPs from Wales (including Murphy and Touhig) and the Labour Government!
These farces are going to go on and on for years. Either we have a parliament or we don't. Labour MPs believe that the people are incompetent to make their own laws. (In fact, the MPs are acting out of purely selfish motives. A Welsh Parliament will mean the sack for a lot of them, that's why they use every trick in the book to stop the Assembly getting any legislative powers).
Its Poynings' Law all over again. Kirsty Williams hit the nail right on the head.
This Committee, although its pointing out that a veto would be unlawful under the 2006 Act as it stands, consists of wholly unelected peers, and MPs, none of the latter are even from Wales. It will continue scrutinising future LCOs. Its also an interminable and convoluted process.
Where are Plaid's three nominees for the Lords? Labour has thrown down the gauntlet to Plaid repeatedly. I think they want an end to the coalition, but IWJ would find it too damaging to exit. After all, he was its driving force within Plaid. Labour is in for the biggest thrashing its ever had at the next general election. By association, Plaid is unlikely to benefit electorally.
Time to get out of bed, Ieuan, before the bed collapses.
Complain about this comment
The report was interesting reading, but not so surprising. In essence the whole process of transferring primary lawmaking powers bit-by-bit through the LCO process is a dog's breakfast.
It is badly drafted and badly conceived, and the result is that it enables different groups to interpret it in different ways. And now, rather than address the problem and get a definitive ruling on how it should be interpreted (something the new Supreme Court should be able to do) everybody will just press on regardless, thinking that they alone have interpreted it correctly. The only beneficiaries will be lawyers.
Badly conceived legislation cannot endure for long. All this does is show that we need to move away from the current "how long is a piece of string" arrangement (Section 3 and Schedule 5 of the GoWA 2006) to a single, defined list of what the Assembly can and cannot legislate on ... a list (Schedule 7 of the GoWA 2006) that has ALREADY been agreed by Westminster.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060032_en_19#sch7
All it takes is for us to vote "Yes" in the referendum (when we're given the opportunity). It will solve this sort of disagreement at a stroke. Simples.
Complain about this comment
The response to the Assembly regarding its powers depends upon how much it can grab by any means possible rather than what is fair and just for the individual and society. For instance, they have no powers over Prisons so they pulled off a political stunt by writing to the Home Office over public concerns regarding Prescoed Prison. No doubt, the local residents had genuine concerns but grandstanding at the expense of hard working Prison Officers to make some point for political advantage is the sort of thing they would condemn others for doing when attempting to publicise a grievance.
On the other hand, they do have limited powers over Higher Education; they could have more if they wanted to act in the interests of the taxpaying public. They choose not to in order to avoid being held accountable and found to be wanting. They fob you off with the excuse we do not have jurisdiction, this leaves you wondering who runs the country as its not the Welsh Assembly, they simply do as they are told by vested interests and not by the voters who are excluded from the decision making process.
This cloudy load of waffle as Mapexx put it is the same response you get when you make a complaint about maladministration at the Welsh Assembly; you are fobbed off with a barrage of incomprehensible rules and regulations that leaves you totally confused as to what to do or go next. Only one thing is certain that they all go down a road to nowhere because you have failed to comply with something or they passed a law preventing any action being taken, they then forget about it. Problem solved!
Unfortunately, the Conservatives are as bad as the others on this issue, which leaves us with no credible opposition and a serious threat to our democracy. While they say they are against the existence of the Assembly, I am afraid they are not providing any credible opposition or clarity on these issues. Perhaps they have been in the job too long and dont want to give it up. Having said that hopefully the all party NO to full powers campaign started by Monmouth MP David Davies will take off, not surprisingly; he failed to consult Conservatives at the Assembly before he did it.
There is only one thing that is certain to come out of the confusion that is we are all going to have the wool pulled over our eyes, so the power struggle between Cardiff and London can continue at the expense of the rights of the ordinary citizen.
This is government by stealth and unless the brakes are applied then we are going to wake up one morning and realise what they have done.
Complain about this comment
message 4....
Oliver makes a good case, but we will be bamboozled, bothered and bewildered for many weeks before any election or referendum, with the sort of non specific nonsense, as is usually the case.
I noted that despite all the rhetoric from certain Welsh politicians, re Big is Bad, Small is Beautiful, the latest move is to do away with 22 health authorities, and replace them with 7 very much larger one's.
I cannot comment on all, but I know that where my wife works, since the Assembly took over in Wales, there have been about FIVE 're-organisations' in the NHS. Now we are getting another. This must have cost many millions to go through in the last ten years or so.
It was bad enough under the last Tory admin, but they only managed two or three in twenty years, mainly to do with the shake ups in forming trusts, and installing new computer, and telecoms systems.
The Ambulance service is a shining example of how NOT to reorganise.
The latest excuse is, so that larger units can be better at dealing with the large hospitals and trusts. But a what cost?
Not to worry you lot in the Bay of Pigs, it's only money. Not yours of course.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS