1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The CEW Group represents over 500
members and companies in the Social Economy in Wales,
making it the largest representative body for this sector
of the economy.
1.2 The National Assembly for Wales has
a clear and substantial role for the development of
the economy in Wales, including the social economy and
allocates many millions of pounds of public money to
achieve its policy objectives.
1.3 In addition to economic growth and
prosperity generally, CEW is particularly concerned
with and involved in the elimination of social exclusion
by the development of wealth creating, sustainable community
businesses within many of our most deprived communities.
1.4 It is therefore crucial to our objectives
that the National Assembly for Wales has both the powers
and capacity to pursue policies that enable both the
wider economy and the social economy in particular to
grow and achieve the objective of bringing greater prosperity
to the people of Wales.
1.5 It is against this background, CEW
welcomes the opportunity to present views to the Richard
Commission. In this paper we seek to express our views
on the key questions and present some possible solutions
for the Commission to consider.
2. SIZE OF THE ASSEMBLY
2.1 CEW concurs with the general view
expressed by the Commission that the size of the Assembly
should be dictated by the workload it carries out. However,
we also believe that it should be representative of
all of Wales and as a consequence its membership should
be of sufficient size and capability to ensure this.
2.2 It is difficult for us to assess
the individual workload of Assembly Members, but we
have no doubt that they are conscientious in performing
their duties. We believe that it is possible that the
level of work can be expanded to meet the resource available.
We also believe that although there may have been a
genuine increase in workload, this may be accounted
for by the transfer of some of the constituency workload
previously undertaken by Members of Parliament to Assembly
Members. This might then raise the question as to the
balance of numbers of MPs to AMs.
2.3 It also raises a question as to whether
the workload of Regional List AMs is comparable to their
colleagues with more clearly identifiable constituencies.
2.4 CEW does not favour a reduction in
the number of Members of Parliament representing Wales,
as this would reduce our voice in what is still the
major Government forum whose decisions have a profound
impact upon the people and economy of Wales. However
bearing in mind AMs have taken on a huge slice of what
MPs have traditionally done the workload of AMs is considerable.
The balance of AMs, MPs and Councillors in our tricameral
system (forgetting for the moment the changes being
considered for local and community councils) has to
be considered. We do not think we should rule
out the reduction in number of MPs (but rather any erosion
of the proportional voice of Wales (or other region)
in Westminster). We must look ahead to the development
of regional assemblies in England. Similar changes in
balance will accrue there, adding weight to the argument
to reduce the number of MPs in all regions. Provided
the balance (as far as Wales is concerned) is not eroded,
that would be a better long-term objective. The electorate
will be looking for cost savings or at least reduction
in some areas to offset expansion in others. Not just
AMs/MPs but councillors need to be examined regarding
their roles and numbers.
2.5 We see the need for better guidance
for elected members in the duties and tasks they are
engaged in and a balance between wider more generic
work and grass roots constituency work. Our AMs are
not administrators and should be engaged in policy and
delivery. Thus they require support commensurate with
those duties.
2.6 CEW believes that the scrutiny functions
of the National Assembly may be seriously impaired as
a consequence of the much higher proportion of AMs who
are on the Welsh Assembly Government "payroll". This
we recognize could be addressed by increasing the number
of backbenchers. For example, 72 cllrs in Flintshire
determine the budget and delivery on a fractional scale
of that of NAW/WAG’s budget (£150m cf £13b.
One of the problems of a small cabinet is the changing
palette with which ministers are working. It would be
difficult in many areas to trace a straight line back
through time of cabinet responsibility for many areas
other than education and health. That only confounds
accountability. Keep in mind too the outrage about shared
‘ministerial’ roles for Secretary of State
for Wales, the clearer the remit, the clearer the delivery.
2.7 Any changes in representation should
therefore be justified by reference to the work of the
National Assembly and to ensure a democratic structure
that is fully representative of all of Wales.
2.8 Whilst we applaud the fact that women
have their rightful representation within the National
Assembly, we recognize that this mainly occurred as
a consequence of affirmative action taken by the largest
party represented in the Assembly.
2.9 Regrettably there is no such adequate
representation for ethnic minorities or disabled people.
2.10 CEW believes that the mix of first
past the post and proportional representation, whilst
to be welcomed when first introduced, has not sufficiently
enabled minority interests to be accommodated.
2.11 As a consequence we believe there
should be an increase in the number of Regional List
seats, but with nomination restriction rights to allow
for guaranteed representation for minority interests.
2.12 By way of example we would suggest
an increase of Regional List AMs to twenty. Such an
increase would enable certain requirements to be placed
upon the larger political parties, so that the equalities
issues could be addressed, including the issue of ethnic
minority and disability representation. This could be
done requiring quotas to be met, dependent upon the
total number of seats won and the make up the representatives
from the first past the post elections. If the ‘list
members’ are increased, there should be a careful
look at the election mechanism. The current process
gives the electorate the impression that losers of the
first past the post ballot nevertheless become elected.
This undermines the credibility of the electoral process.
A fair and democratic solution to this would be to separate
the list candidates from the first past the post candidates,
i.e. candidates stand either as List AMs or Constituency
AMs. That is not to imply the List candidates are without
constituents and our proposals re minority interests
identify particular constituencies of kind rather than
geography.
2.13 We also feel that there should be
a capacity building programme introduced for AMs on
the cross cutting themes within the Assembly
3. POWERS OF THE ASSEMBLY
3.1 CEW believes that there are a number
of inconsistencies in the Act conferring powers to the
National Assembly for Wales and it would be appropriate
to make amendments at this point in its development.
3.2 Some of these changes relate to the
spheres of influence of the Assembly, others relate
to the financing of the Assembly and others relate to
the relationship with the UK Parliament and UK Government.
3.3 CEW believes that it is necessary
that certain public services currently out with the
responsibility of the National Assembly should be transferred
from UK Government responsibility to the Assembly.
3.4 In particular we believe that responsibility
for Higher Education in Wales (Universities), including
funding should be the responsibility of the National
Assembly. We believe that if education is for life and
the National Assembly has a responsibility for the life
long learning agenda, then all providers should become
its responsibility, thus ensuring a joined up approach
right across the sector.
3.5 Following on from this point the
growth in Quangos that are becoming less and less accountable
to their end users is an area we feel needs looking
at. Devolution needs to be followed through at all levels
and engaging in Centralist Policies through Quangos
is neither democratic nor effective. We recall that
a major plank of the Yes campaign, which enjoyed cross
party support, was the replacement of unaccountable
Quangos with an elected Assembly.
3.6 We also believe that responsibility
for the Police and Fire Services should transfer from
the Home Office. Both services have a substantial involvement
from Local Government, which is the responsibility of
the National Assembly and it seems to us sensible that
responsibility for all three should rest with the same
body. The composition and means of selection, preferably
election of Board members at least as the largest component,
needs to be re-examined as part of that process.
3.7 CEW believes that these and other
areas should be the subject of greater co-operation
and partnership working with the UK Government. Whilst
each has clearly defined responsibilities, we believe
it is unhelpful to Wales to create an artificial competition
between the two institutions. For this reason we believe
that there should be greater consultation between the
UK Government and the Assembly over proposed legislation
affecting Wales. The Assembly should be given greater
opportunity to scrutinize proposed legislation, proposing
specific amendments on those issues affecting Wales.
3.8 The Assembly must have a credible
and transparent opportunity to promote specific legislation
in respect of matters solely affecting Wales and exercise
it to the fullest extent possible. CEW believes that
this should be done in partnership with the Westminster
representatives. The Welsh Assembly Government making
such proposals in conjunction with the Secretary of
State for Wales and Assembly backbenchers in conjunction
with MPs. Consideration might be given to joint meetings
of the Welsh Grand Committee and the National Assembly
to consider issues specific to Wales.
3.9 On the issue of finance, CEW finds
it a nonsense that the National Assembly has less tax
varying power than Welsh Parish Councils and we believe
it is now time to rectify this.
3.10 CEW recognizes the importance of
the block grant to Wales and the mechanism of shifting
resources from the richer to the poorer parts of the
UK is vital to the interests of Wales whilst we continue
to lag behind the UK average GDP. There is urgent need
to revise the Barnett Formula favourably, particularly
as we cannot rely on further European assistance as
enlargement proceeds.
Angela Elniff-Larsen
Chief Executive
Community Enterprise Wales
|
.gif)
