Politics

‘Lack of clarity’ in Wales Bill

Published

9 years ago

November 4, 2016

A REPORT on the Wales Bill, published by the House of Lords Constitution Committee, has stated that the lack of clarity over the demarcation of powers between the UK Parliament and Welsh Assembly not only risks future litigation, but the need for further legislation to clarify the settlement.

The report welcomes the move from a ‘conferred powers’ model (where the Welsh Assembly can only legislate on matters specifically devolved to it) to a ‘reserved powers’ model (where Welsh Assembly can legislate on any subject not explicitly ‘reserved’ by the UK Parliament). The reserved powers model offers a relatively clear and simple division of powers, as well as allowing the Welsh Assembly ‘constitutional space to legislate’. However, the Committee say that the way the Wales Bill implements the reserved powers model undermines these key advantages.

The complexity of the settlement set out in the Wales Bill, in which numerous legal tests interact with hundreds of matters reserved to the UK Government and Parliament, risks the courts being asked to make decisions about whether the National Assembly for Wales has the power to make laws in certain areas. The Committee contrasts this with the simpler settlement set out in the Scotland Act 1998, where the subjects reserved to Westminster are relatively limited, ensuring greater clarity about the devolution of powers.

The Committee also point out that in some areas, the list of reserved matters is so extensive, and the number of legal tests that must be met for the Assembly to use its powers are so vague, that the switch to a reserved powers model is likely to actually result in a return of power from the Welsh Assembly to Westminster.

The Committee call on the Government to explain whether the Wales Bill is actually intended to reduce the legislative competence of the Welsh Assembly in some areas and, if not, what steps they plan to take to ensure that the competence of the Assembly is not inadvertently reduced.

The Committee notes, for example, that absolute restrictions on the Assembly’s ability to modify criminal law in relation to sexual offences may affect its ability to exercise its legislative competence in relation to the protection and well-being of children and young adults.

The Committee notes that there is ‘no evidence of a clear rationale’ for the powers devolved by the Wales Bill and calls on the Government to explain the principles which underpin the devolution proposals set out in the Bill.

The Committee points out that in its recent report, The Union and Devolution, it recommended that further devolution should be managed in a coherent way based on sound principles and clarity about the purpose of the proposed devolution. It says the Government has failed to provide a clear rationale for the scope of powers devolved by the Wales Bill.

Lord Lang of Monkton, Chairman of the House of Lords Constitution Committee, said: “My Committee have taken a long and serious look at devolution within the UK in the last year and we bring that experience with us in examining the Wales Bill.

“We welcome the Wales Bill’s move from a ‘conferred powers’ to a ‘reserved powers’ model of devolution. However, the list of reservations is so extensive, and the legal tests that govern the Assembly’s powers so complex and vague, that it could be a recipe for confusion and legal uncertainty. The outcome is likely to be increased litigation as the courts are asked to decide exactly where the boundaries of the Assembly’s authority lies.

“We are disappointed that there is no clear explanation from the Government as to the rationale for the scope of the powers being devolved under the Wales Bill. As we noted in our report, The Union and Devolution, devolution must take place on the basis of appropriate principles to ensure that the devolution settlements evolve in a coherent way, rather than in a reactive, ad hoc manner.

“The Bill also risks, in some areas, actually reducing the powers of the Welsh Assembly. We have asked the Government whether that was their intention, and if not, how they intend to avoid unintentionally diminishing the Assembly’s powers.

“The Wales Bill starts Committee Stage in the House of Lords next week. This is the first stage where amendments can be made and debated and where the detail of the Bill is examined closely. I hope our report will be helpful to the House in informing that debate.”

This week, the Director of the Welsh Governance Centre, Professor Richard Wyn Jones, also raised concerns that the Wales Bill was being ‘rammed through Parliament’, and suggested that it could be blocked by the Welsh Government. Speaking to the BBC, he said: “It is genuinely hard to find people who aren’t directly involved on the UK government side with a good word to say about this legislation, certainly in terms of the detail,” he said.

“What was striking, we did have a consensus, an all-party consensus, in terms of moving to a reserved powers model.

“What’s particularly depressing is, in the enactments of that good intention, we’ve reached a stage where everybody who is looking at this in a relatively dispassionate way is pointing to some fundamental problems.

“I don’t think that anybody is going into this wanting it to fail, in terms of the critics. This is the only piece of legislation on the table, there is a sense the status quo is unsatisfactory and so people want this to work.

“There have been lots of constructive suggestions for change from the Welsh Government, from the National Assembly presiding office, and yet the legislation is being rammed through Parliament with, so far, only very small changes being conceded.”

However, the Leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew RT Davies, described the ‘landmark’ legislation as offering ‘greater clarity and accountability than ever before in the devolved era’.

“Labour had 13 years in power to address concerns over where power resides and made no meaningful attempt to establish a lasting settlement. Whereas Conservatives have delivered a significant breakthrough, demonstrating our party’s commitment to devolution and the place of Wales as a full partner in the UK,” he added after the MPs gave the Bill an unopposed third reading in September.

“We now have an opportunity to move on from constitutional affairs, and the Welsh Government must now make best use of the tools at its disposal and deliver for Welsh communities; creating jobs, developing the Welsh economy and improving our public services.”

Local Government

Pembrokeshire council tax set for 4.6 per cent rise in 2026

Published

33 minutes ago

February 10, 2026

Bruce Sinclair - Local Democracy Reporter

COUNCIL tax in Pembrokeshire is expected to rise by 4.6 per cent, in proposals backed by senior councillors today.

At the February 9 meeting of Pembrokeshire County Council’s Cabinet, in a report presented by Cabinet member for finance, Cllr Alistair Cameron, members considered options for setting the 2026/27 council budget; a council tax increase of 4.6 per cent, which equates to an increase of £75.99 for the council part of the overall council tax bill for the average Band D property, and 7.5 per cent, for an increase of £123.90.

Cllr Cameron, seconded by Cllr Rhys Sinnett, recommended members back the lower 4.6 per cent level.

Last year, Pembrokeshire’s council tax increased by 9.35 per cent, lower than a Cabinet recommendation of 9.85 per cent.

The overall council tax bill is made up of the county council element, the largest part, the Dyfed-Powys Police precept, and individual town or community council elements.

Speaking at the meeting, Cllr Cameron said the council’s funding gap had now increased by just over £1m for 2026-27, to £14.7m.

His report added the most significant cost pressure for the 2026-27 budget “continues to be within social care, with a projected total increase in pressure of £12m for 2026-27 representing 42 per cent of the total council service pressures for 2026-27”.

It added: “The funding gap of £14.7m, will need to be bridged through a combination of budget savings, increases in council tax, use of council tax premiums and use of reserves.

“The lower the Band D council tax increase, the higher the budget savings requirement will be, with the consequential adverse impact on the provision of council services,” with each per cent increase in council tax generating £0.908m income for the council.

Cllr Cameron said the proposed budget included funding for “front-line services” such as school improvement support, building maintenance, and highways maintenance support.

Where possible, discretionary fees and charges have been budgeted to increase by 3.8 per cent.

The lower 4.6 per cent council tax increase was supported by Leader Cllr Jon Harvey, who said: “Clearly we don’t want to put up council tax if we can clearly avoid that; the target was to keep the council tax rise at the lowest possible level we could do.”

He said the recent increase in the Welsh Government settlement for Welsh councils had “given a bit of leeway,” and the proposal would keep the council from having to make drastic ‘red-level’ budget savings, along with more funding for general services.

Members unanimously backed the 4.6 per cent increase.

Other recommendations backed by Cabinet include determining recommended future draft council tax levels, as part of the medium-term financial plan of five per cent for 2027-’28 and 7.5 per cent for 2028-’29.

The final decision on the council tax increase for the forthcoming financial year will be made by full council, the Cabinet decision taking the form of a recommendation, with the budget meeting currently listed for February 20.

Politics

Freshwater East garage as home application turned down

Published

13 hours ago

February 9, 2026

Bruce Sinclair - Local Democracy Reporter

A CALL to allow a seaside village garage used as a home without permission to continue doing so has been turned down.

In an application to Pembrokeshire coast National Park, Anthony Parfitt sought permission for a certificate of lawfulness for a former garage now domestic building at Oaklands, Portclew Road, Freshwater East, having purchased it back in 2016.

An application for a certificate of lawfulness allows an applicant to stay at a development or keep it if they can provide proof of occupancy over a prolonged period.

A supporting statement said: “The previous owner of the site lodged a planning application for a new house on the site in May 2013. With anticipation of approval of this application, and prior to placing the application, they made alterations to the existing garage, changing its use to domestic dwelling as they intended to live in the garage whilst the new house was built.

“The application was refused in July of 2013 and then again in 2014 (amended design), however the ‘garage’s now domestic status was not abandoned, and shows evidence of its ‘continuous use’ as a domestic unit, continuing right up to present day.

“This dwelling, known as Oaklands, has and has had all the facilities for day to day living ever since it was initially refurbished/changed use in 2013 by its previous owner, and at the point of first inspection by myself in May 2016, and still continues in its domestic use to this current day.”

In support of his application, Mr Parfitt provided documentation from previous residents confirming its “continuous use” without abandonment to any other use.

An officer report recommending refusal said there were “inconsistencies in the historical use of the garage” to discharge a 2012 planning condition for the site to be used for garage purposes only.

It said: “The planning enforcement team visited the property in September 2025 and the present use of the garage for residential use and its layout was confirmed. The applicant has confirmed that tenancies were gained by word of mouth and it does not appear that active steps were taken to advertise or market the garage for occupation via advertisement, listing with estate agents etc in between lets.”

It added: “Enquiries have been made with Pembrokeshire County Council, and it does not appear that council tax has been paid in respect of the occupation of the garage at any time.”

It said the timeline of evidence from different tenants included one related to the applicant, applicants who used the space for model making, as a woodworking and carpentry workshop, and the production of cigar box guitars, with one of the tenants using it as a residential basis before moving away, using the space as a workshop on his return.

In refusing the certificate of lawfulness it said there was “an overall lack of consistent evidence to demonstrate continuous occupation as a dwellinghouse,” in breach of the 2012 condition.

“It is not doubted that there have been periods of residential occupation, but it does seem likely that these have been sporadic and interspersed with periods of alternative use (potentially within the terms of the condition) as well as periods of non-use.”

News

Starmer under fire as aides quit and Scottish Labour leader calls on him to resign

Published

16 hours ago

February 9, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Two senior Downing Street exits in 24 hours as Anas Sarwar breaks ranks, but ministers insist the Prime Minister is staying put

PRESSURE continued to mount on Keir Starmer today (Monday) after two of his closest advisers resigned within 24 hours and the leader of Scottish Labour publicly called on him to step down.

The rapid series of events has fuelled growing speculation about the Prime Minister’s authority inside his own party, with critics describing the situation in Downing Street as chaotic and poorly handled.

Labour’s Scottish leader: Anas Sarwar breaks ranks and calls for PM to go

Starmer first lost his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, who stepped aside after taking responsibility for recommending the controversial appointment of Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to Washington.

Within hours, his director of communications, Tim Allan, also quit, saying a new team should take charge of the government’s messaging.

Two departures at that level in a single day are highly unusual and immediately prompted questions in Westminster about stability at the centre of government.

The crisis deepened further when Anas Sarwar broke ranks and urged Starmer to resign, arguing that the ongoing Mandelson controversy was becoming a damaging distraction and risked harming Labour’s prospects, particularly in Scotland.

Sarwar is the most senior Labour figure so far to publicly question the Prime Minister’s position.

A row that would not go away

The Mandelson appointment was initially seen as a difficult but containable judgement call. Supporters pointed to his experience and international contacts, while critics raised concerns about his past links to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein.

However, instead of fading, the story has dragged on for days, prompting criticism of how Downing Street has handled the fallout.

Several Labour MPs privately admit the issue is no longer the appointment itself but the perception that the government has been slow and defensive in responding.

One senior backbencher said: “It’s not the decision that hurts you. It’s looking like you’re not in control.”

Who is backing Starmer

Despite the noise, Starmer still retains public support from much of the Cabinet.

Allies say he remains focused on governing and has no intention of stepping down. Downing Street sources insist he is “getting on with the job” and dismiss talk of an imminent leadership challenge.

Senior ministers have urged colleagues to rally around the Prime Minister rather than fuel instability.

There is currently no formal mechanism under way to remove him, and no obvious successor waiting in the wings.

Political risk growing

Nevertheless, the optics are uncomfortable.

Two senior resignations in quick succession, combined with a public call to quit from within Labour’s own ranks, risk creating the impression of a government losing control of its message.

That perception matters.

Prime ministers are rarely forced out over a single decision. They fall when their own MPs begin to doubt that they can win the next election.

With Reform UK continuing to dominate headlines with simple, punchy messaging and Labour struggling to explain its record, some backbenchers fear that continued communication missteps could erode confidence further.

For now, Starmer remains in office.

But after the past 24 hours, questions about his leadership are no longer confined to the opposition benches.

They are coming from inside his own party.