Cymru Yfory / Tomorrow’s Wales welcomes this evening’s joint statement from Rhodri Morgan and Ieuan Wyn Jones, which affirms that “all options for the timing of a referendum remain open”, and that “nothing has been ruled in or ruled out, including, if it proved practical, a referendum in the autumn”.

As the political parties reach a decision, Cymru Yfory / Tomorrow’s Wales will be redoubling its efforts during the coming months to prepare the ground for a referendum and a successful Yes campaign.

True Wales claim that “even more taxpayers’ money will have to be spent on the salaries of lawyers and civil servants” following a move from Part 3 to Part 4 of the Government of Wales Act 2006.

The Convention’s report exposes this as being inaccurate.

It says that “the likely impact on the National Assembly for Wales of a move to Part 4 would be, broadly speaking, financially neutral in terms of current budget allocations. In Whitehall, there should be a small, but unquantifiable, release of capacity if consideration of LCOs were no longer needed.”

“Should the National Assembly for Wales move to Part 4, the saving for the Welsh Assembly Government of £1.98 million from not having to go through the processes of acquiring powers through LCOs and Framework Powers in UK Bills would likely be reallocated to the formulation of policy and drafting of Assembly Bills”.

In other words, it’s clear that moving to a proper parliament for Wales won’t cost more, and that resources that are currently tied up in the inefficient and wasteful LCO process would be better spent on making laws more quickly and more clearly, and in a more joined-up way.

At a briefing in Cardiff this afternoon, Sir Emyr Jones Parry briefed assembled members of civil society and interested members of the public on the conclusions of the All Wales Convention’s report, whose authors are “convinced that Part 4 offers substantial advantage over the present arrangements in Part 3 (of the Government of Wales Act 2006). It would offer greater efficiency, permit a strategic approach to the drafting of the legislation, provide greater clarity, be more consistent with the rule of law and democratic tradition, and reflect the emerging maturity of the National Assembly for Wales”.

Despite having in front of them a document that is perhaps one of the most wide-ranging public consultations ever to have taken place in Wales and an ‘impartial examination of all the evidence received’, those present from True Wales were unable to muster the same objectivity in their own contributions. One contributor alleged that the decision on a referendum on moving to Part 4 would made undemocratically and by an undefined minority; it was left to Sir Emyr to explain that the decision on a referendum would, in the first instance, be made by elected representatives in Cardiff and Westminster, and then the question would subsequently be voted on by the Welsh electorate (‘the people of Wales’, who True Wales claim to speak for). Anyone who did not vote, Sir Emyr added, would be abdicating their civic responsibilities and as such could not complain after the event. It is difficult to imagine how such a scenario can be perceived as being undemocratic.

“The National Assembly and its Government should now commit itself to making the recommendations of the All Wales Convention a reality following the publication of the Jones-Parry report today” says Tomorrow’s Wales.

Tomorrow’s Wales chair Barry Morgan, Archbishop of Wales said: “Following exhaustive study and consultation, the All Wales Convention has found that the case for making the National Assembly into a proper parliament by granting it primary law-making powers is overwhelming. The example of the Scottish parliament since 1997 has shown the enormous advantage of a having a clear set of powers with the responsibilities at the Westminster and Scottish levels precisely defined. Granting primary law-making powers to the Assembly would strengthen Welsh democracy and give us a stable and effective system of government. We could then get on with addressing the needs of the people and communities of Wales by developing practical and  distinctively Welsh policies and deliver them effectively, free from the constraints of a complex and frustrating process of transferring powers”.

The Convention’s findings that public opinion in Wales has moved steadily towards support for law-making powers confirms what Tomorrow’s Wales has found in its work throughout Wales.

Welsh rugby legend and British Lions team manager Gerald Davies said, “It is vital for the people of Wales to grasp this opportunity to establish a clear system of governance that serves Wales effectively.”

Gerald Davies is a member of Tomorrow’s Wales’ executive committee and a signatory of its Declaration for Welsh Democracy which calls for primary law-making powers for the National Assembly. Those who have supported the Declaration include Chair of Tomorrow’s Wales, the Archbishop of Wales, Barry Morgan and the Secretary General of the Muslim Council for Wales Saleem Kidwai; Wales and British Lions international Jamie Roberts and Olympic swimmer David Davies; two of Wales’s National Poets, Gillian Clarke and Gwyneth Lewis, and actor Mathew Rhys. Musicians Gruff Rhys and Rhydian Roberts, as well as DJ Huw Stephens have also signed up.

Archbishop Barry Morgan added, “Following the Convention report, Tomorrow’s Wales will be expanding our activities to promote popular understanding of the devolution process and supporting the campaign for proper law-making powers for the National Assembly. This report gives Wales the evidence and thus the confidence to make that a reality.”  

On his Devolution Matters blog, Cymru Yfory constitutional adviser Alan Trench has argued that a ‘yes’ vote in a referendum on primary law making powers for the National Assembly would benefit those concerned with the UK level of government as well as those concerned with the current situation in Wales.

Alan Trench argues that while the present system, deeply flawed as it is, can be made to work by a Labour-led Governments in Cardiff Bay and Westminster, the logic of the situation is quite different if the Conservatives are in office in London. Devolution means that politically it would be difficult for the Conservatives to impose their will on Wales in the way that John Redwood for example sought to do, and any attempt to try would forfeit democratic legitimacy in a way that would be especially damaging now that Wales is a happy hunting ground for Tory seats for both Westminster and Cardiff Bay. Equally, political preferences of Welsh voters are different on the whole to those in England, where there is less of a desire for social-democratic policies and solutions than in Wales. On an institutional level, discussions around LCOs (where the Welsh Government, an Assembly Committee or a backbench AM asks Parliament for legislative powers in a specific field and which have been contentious enough as it is) would become even more problematic, and publicly so, if problems encountered were to be magnified by party-political differences. It’s hard to see how anyone would gain, and the only certainty is that these issues would further damage the standing of politicians and politics in general.

Giving Wales primary law-making powers in 20 distinct fields by implementing Part 4 of the Government of Wales Act fields would mitigate against this by decoupling policy in England and Wales and creating a degree of political insulation for a Conservative UK Government. It lets Wales be social-democratic, and protects central government from embarassment as Welsh choices are both clearly Welsh  and democratic. In such circumstances, a Conservative UK Government can show how tolerant of pluralism and diversity it is. Labour would benefit as well, as the chance to shape a distinctly Welsh policy agenda offers a way to protect a particular sort of social democracy that its Welsh voters clearly prize – and think they have already.

Part 4 does not offer ‘Scottish-type’ powers, Trench concludes, but it’s closer to them.  It reduces the need for constant liaison with Whitehall, and so the danger of Whitehall misunderstanding how Wales and Welsh devolution work.  It means that the UK moves closer to having a single template for devolved government, which is adjusted to reflect particular circumstances in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.  That will make devolved government easier not just for the general public to understand, but also politicians and civil servants.