A SENEDD Member called for reform of the way the Welsh Parliament handles backbench legislation after pulling a mental health bill that received cross-party support.

James Evans announced the withdrawal of his standards of care bill, which aimed to replace outdated mental health legislation, in a statement to the Senedd on November 27.

The Conservative called for change to processes for backbench bills, which are proposed by Senedd Members who are not part of the Welsh Government.

Mr Evans, who represents Brecon and Radnorshire, won a ballot to introduce the legislation and Senedd Members unanimously backed the bill at the first stage in December 2023.

But, withdrawing the bill, he warned backbenchers face extremely difficult challenges in introducing legislation that is fit for purpose and serves people across Wales.

He said: “A guiding principle for me, since I’ve come here, is that we shouldn’t introduce legislation … that is defective and that I don’t think meets the needs of the people we serve. So, for that reason, I’ve decided to withdraw my bill.”

The Senedd has not passed a backbench bill since legislation on safe nurse staffing levels, which was introduced by the Liberal Democrats’ Kirsty Williams in 2013.

Warning the bill would take two years or more to develop, Mr Evans said: “Not many of us come into the Senedd with fully fledged law written, done, and all the regulation-making done around it – it simply doesn’t happen ….

“We’re not the government, we don’t have all the civil servants and the expertise but I do think it is something … we really do need to look at – how we improve this process.”

Mr Evans also pointed to the new UK Government bringing forward a mental health bill, saying it is important that parts of the legislation work on a Wales-and-England basis.

He urged the new “future Senedd committee”, which is examining reforms for the next term from 2026, to look into greater opportunities for backbench legislation.

Sarah Murphy, Wales’ mental health minister, was disappointed by the withdrawal of the bill but hopeful many of its aims will be achieved through the UK legislation.

Plaid Cymru’s Mabon ap Gwynfor similarly regretted withdrawal of the Welsh bill, saying it was a significant step forward in addressing serious deficiencies in mental health law.

Warning the Senedd too often falls short in living up to the promises of devolution, he added: “It shouldn’t be the height of our ambition here to simply wait for Westminster.”

Elin Jones, the speaker or Llywydd, said the Senedd’s business committee will be beginning a review of legislative processes at its meeting on December 3.

ENTREPRENEURS have been bullied and forced to hand over control of their businesses after approaching the Development Bank of Wales for financial support, the Senedd heard.

Paul Davies, who chairs the economy committee, raised “extremely worrying” evidence from Dylan Jones-Evans, an economist and academic, about the Development Bank.

Mr Davies said the committee also received emails from people who had dealings with the bank and felt they had been bullied out or had their businesses essentially stolen.

Prof Jones-Evans told the committee: “Unfortunately, I have been approached by … businesses prior to this review who feel they have not been treated fairly with valuations being too low, where decisions have taken far too long, and where terms are unacceptable.

“Worst still, there have been instances where some have been bullied by the directors imposed on them, where they have been forced out by dubious means and where founders feel they have not been supported by the bank.”

Prof Jones-Evans warned that young, inexperienced founders found themselves in this position and should have received far greater support.

Mr Davies said: “If these reports are accurate, those actions may well have extinguished that entrepreneurial spirit, which would be an absolute tragedy and exactly the opposite of what the bank was established to do.”

The former Tory group leader added that much of the testimony was supplied anonymously, which limited the committee’s ability to scrutinise the evidence.

But he cautioned: “It only takes a brief look on a news website to find situations where allegations such as bullying have been made against other public institutions where, in some cases, they have been ignored and, as we know, sometimes these cases do not end well.”

Mr Davies stressed: “I just want to be clear: I have discussed these accusations with the bank via correspondence and in a private meeting and they absolutely refute them.”

Leading a debate on November 27, he said most of the evidence received by the committee, which made 13 recommendations, was supportive of the bank and its operations.

Mr Davies also raised concerns about the Development Bank being reclassified by the Office for National Statistics as central government in 2021.

He explained this leads to “double counting”, with the Welsh Government having to keep money in reserve to cover any uninvested funds given to the bank.

Plaid Cymru’s Luke Fletcher said the transition from Finance Wales to the Development Bank marked a step change in 2017, with investment doubling to £124m by 2022/23.

Mr Fletcher advocated merging the bank with Business Wales to create a one-stop shop.

Labour’s Hefin David pointed out the bank is not covered by Wales’ Future Generations Act, raising suggestions a social value clause could be inserted into grant and loan agreements.

Samuel Kurtz, the Conservatives’ shadow economy secretary, raised warnings from the Federation of Small Businesses of “massively fragmented” business support.

He expressed concerns about troubling evidence from Prof Jones-Evans that the Development Bank did nothing to stop imposed directors bullying out founders.

The economy committee scrutinised bank executives on November 20, questioning a 3.2% cost-of-living pay rise awarded to all staff including those earning six-figure salaries.

Dr David pointed out that annual remuneration for the highest-paid director increased by 20% from £217,000 to £260,000 between 2023 and 2024.

Giles Thorley, chief executive of the bank, which wrote off £27m in 2022/23, said 3.2% was lower than the Welsh Government’s rise, attributing the 20% to performance-related pay.

Rebecca Evans, Wales’ economy secretary, said the Development Bank has invested £778m in more than 3,900 businesses since 2017, supporting 41,700 jobs.

She said: “That’s a total impact of £1.66bn on the Welsh economy – real investment, real businesses, real growth, supporting businesses in every part of Wales.”

Turning to concerns received by the committee, Ms Evans said: “Finance can be complex and I am aware there are times when customers don’t understand the role of the bank or the obligations of the bank and this can, regrettably, lead to misunderstandings and complaints.”

She added: “I’ve had the opportunity to address concerns with officials. It is the case, though, that founder members of companies are sometimes removed by their boards.”

Ms Evans told the Senedd she has confidence in the leadership of the bank and its board, with an external review set to take place next year.

HENRY TUFNELL MP will vote in favour of Kim Leadbetter MP’s Private Member’s Bill on the emotive subject of legalising assisted dying.

Under the Bill, terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less could seek assistance to end their life, provided two doctors and a High Court judge confirm their eligibility and voluntary decision.

“A PROFOUNDLY COMPLEX ISSUE”

In a statement on his website, the Mid & South Pembrokeshire Labour MP said: “Assisted dying remains a profoundly complex and personal issue, and I’m grateful for the thoughtful input I receive from so many of you. Recently, Kim Leadbeater MP introduced a Private Members’ Bill on this topic, meaning a meaningful debate and potential reform could soon be on the horizon. 

“I support the idea of legalising assisted dying for mentally competent, terminally ill adults, provided strong safeguards are in place. This Bill, like all Private Members’ Bills, allows MPs to vote according to their conscience, ensuring a cross-party discussion that respects diverse views.

“For me, any change in law must prioritise protecting vulnerable individuals while addressing the autonomy of those facing terminal illness. Whatever happens, it’s vital to continue prioritising access to high-quality palliative and end-of-life care.

“In Wales, we’re fortunate to have a devolved approach to end-of-life care, with the Welsh Government allocating over £10.5 million annually. Quality care should always remain a priority, supporting dignity and choice at the end of life. 

 “Thank you again to everyone who has shared their views on assisted dying with me. This issue is both sensitive and significant, and I look forward to ensuring our community’s voice is heard in this conversation.”

We asked Mr Tufnell to expand on his stance, particularly regarding the use of scarce legal, judicial, and health resources.

A spokesperson for Mr Tufnell told The Pembrokeshire Herald: “Henry’s decision to support the Bill at this stage is informed by his belief in treating individuals facing terminal illness with dignity and compassion and upholding their right to autonomy over end-of-life decisions. However, it is important to note that this Bill is currently at the Second Reading stage, which is an opportunity to debate the principles of the proposed legislation rather than its detailed implementation.”

THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS EXPLAINED

As a Private Members’ Bill, Kim Leadbeater MP introduced this legislation rather than the Government. Such Bills often focus on issues of personal conscience or areas where public debate is necessary.

While many Private Members’ Bills do not progress to becoming law, the Second Reading allows Parliament to assess whether the issue deserves further scrutiny. If the Bill passes this stage, it will proceed to the Committee stage, where MPs will examine its details and consider amendments.

Henry Tufnell’s spokesperson told us: “Henry believes it is vital to give this Bill the opportunity for detailed consideration and public discussion, recognising the ethical complexities it addresses.”

PAYING TO DIE

The issues surrounding the cost of delivering the legislation have been lost in the ethical arguments made by both sides of the debate. However, if the ratio of deaths through assisted dying matches that in the US state of Oregon, used as a touchstone by the Bill’s backers, approximately 3,500 deaths each year will come under the Bill’s provisions.

Those 3,500 deaths would take place following a process involving two doctors who would have to certify the request’s validity and the mental capacity of the person making it. If the doctors okay the request, an application will be made to a judge in the High Court Family Division. Only after a senior and appropriately qualified judge approved the application – which is potentially little more than a hearing followed by a rubber-stamping exercise, would the individual be able to make arrangements for their life to be ended on the NHS.

There are interlocking issues about the resources needed at each step. The first is the availability of the requisite expertise among appropriately qualified doctors. Secondly, the Bill’s proposal to use the High Court Family Division faces even greater issues regarding the availability of enough senior judges to hear and decide on an application.

There is a shortage of judges in the Family Division and a reluctance by sufficiently senior and experienced specialist lawyers to apply for a judicial appointment in it. In addition, in 2022/23, the Family Division of the High Court sat for around 19,000 hours. If the Bill becomes law, the number of sitting hours would increase to around 50,000. There is simply no spare capacity in the system for that level of judicial hours. The idea that the system could somehow “fast-track” applications under the Assisted Dying Bill’s terms runs a coach and horses through the idea that proposed safeguards are adequate or adequately thought through.

Finally, the lethal drugs would be administered using NHS facilities. Those seeking to die using state resources would necessarily displace resources that could be used elsewhere in a health service under extraordinary pressure and already short of resources.

As applications under the Assisted Dying Bill would not be eligible for Legal Aid, the Bill runs the considerable risk of being inaccessible to the terminally ill poor or those unable to afford the level of legal expertise needed to engage with the process.

A QUESTION OF RESOURCES

Mr Tufnell’s spokesperson said: “Henry is aware that implementing any future legislation on assisted dying would require careful planning to ensure sufficient judicial and legal oversight. That would include addressing concerns around clear safeguards and resource allocation.

“The Bill acknowledges the NHS’s central role in supporting individuals at the end of life. If the legislation progresses, Henry will work with colleagues to ensure adequate funding and training for healthcare professionals, alongside enhanced investment in palliative and mental health services.”

LISTENING AND DECIDING

Mr Tufnell’s spokesperson concluded: “Henry’s decision to support the Bill reflects extensive engagement with constituents and medical professionals. He has listened to the perspectives of those who feel strongly both for and against the proposal and has been guided by a commitment to enabling informed choices within a safe and regulated system.

“He recognises the significant public support for giving individuals greater autonomy at the end of life, but also the importance of balancing this with strong protections. The Second Reading stage provides a vital opportunity for Parliament to debate these issues in depth.

“Should the Bill progress further, Henry will continue to engage closely with stakeholders to ensure the proposed legislation is both compassionate and workable.”