THE POWERS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR WALES

SUBMISSION – JIM O’ROURKE

1. The Assembly has made a major difference to the way the Urdd relates to its principal funders. In the past we would have approached the Secretary of State for Wales, cap in hand, and hoped for an individual’s response to meet our needs. The current arrangement is much more open, democratic, accountable and clear. The importance placed on the cultural, heritage and youth activities in Wales has been greatly enhanced, particularly through the creation of a cabinet post and department with a clear focus on issues which impinge on Urdd funding and activities.

The presence of Assembly politicians, civil servants and exhibitions, and the various funding bodies at the Urdd National Eisteddfod is a major step forward in building a the relationship between the Assembly and the people, particularly the young people of Wales. It is clear however that more needs to be done to build the Assembly’s profile.

2. There are a number of problems associated with the limited powers of the Assembly

1. I understand that Local Government is often answerable to two masters – the Assembly for some aspects and the Home Office for others – organisations like the YOTS respond in one direction while the YPP are answerable in another.
2. I write this prior to the 1^st May election but I envisage a low turnout partly because the Assembly is limited in its powers.
3. There is a perception that it does not have the same status as the Scottish Parliament and needs UK approval for much of what it wishes to do.
4. Tax raising powers already exist at Community Council and Local Authority Level; I’m not sure who decides on the local rate level for the Police service. It is a nonsense to deny the Assembly the ability to vary taxes – attitudes in Wales are different to the agenda on a UK level which are driven by the electoral concerns of the South East of England .

3. I don’t feel competent to comment on the Structure and working arrangements.

4. From my perception there are only a few examples of good co-operation e.g. establishment of Childrens Commissioner – the weaknesses are clearly evident in the structure with regard to student tuition fees – a muddle with no clear outcome after months of wrangling or planning decisions for wind power is another example, as is responsibility for investment in the railways. I can see no advantage in a process which is shared between Cardiff and Westminster – there should be clarity – these issues are Cardiff based and these issues are London based but those retained in London should be clear UK issues like defence and international affairs and not Home Office type issues which should be properly governed from Cardiff. Local Authorities should be responsible for all their functions to the Welsh Assembly Government.

The role of Welsh M.P.’s has already been reduced as has their profile at a local level. I don’t believe this to be particularly detrimental as their influence is very limited under the current nature of government in Westminster. I would not object to a reduction in numbers or an alternative arrangement for negotiations with regard to common ground between Cardiff and Westminster.

5. I don’t think that Welsh interests have been particularly well served over the last 30 years by successive Secretaries of State who have acted in some ways as Governor Generals, many of whom were interested predominately in using their role to influence at a UK level. I would be happy to scrap the role as unnecessary and dangerous should future Secretaries wish to be obstructive to the will of the Assembly.

6. A clearer separation between officials would be advantageous. The situation with regard to provision of Welsh Language Services by the C.R.B. provided yet another example of a lack of understanding in the Home Office on issues which are important in Wales.

We need to build and develop a high calibre civil service in Wales for Wales. The grey areas of the devolution settlement serve only to cloud issues, restrict progress and offer opportunities for delay and obstruction which serve no purpose.

7. I’m no expert on the Barnet formula but Wales needs a fairer settlement – I understand that the formula does not for example take any account of the downgrading of the presence of the defence industries in Wales. This seems to be an example of Welsh taxes funding government activities which spend predominately in other parts of the UK. Devolution of jobs from London and the South East makes economic and social sense and if Wales does not get a fair share of the cake on UK government expenditure then we should be compensated for this in the settlement.

Jim O’Rourke
25 April 2003