Committees Bite Size #4: May 2017

A brief break from the general election today for summaries of some of the reports that have come out of the Senedd's committees over the last couple of weeks.

Read More

FMQs: Gaffes, Circuit of Wales & Borrowing

This afternoon saw the final FMQs before the local elections on Thursday and the first since the announcement of the forthcoming UK general election.

Read More

Committees Bite Size #3: March 2017

Here's another round up of some of the committee inquiry reports that've come out of the Senedd over the last few weeks, including: ovarian cancer screening, two Stage One reports on Welsh laws, the Kancoat grant scandal and support for ethnic minority and traveller school pupils.

Read More

Committees Bite Size #1: December 2016

Like First Minister's Questions, this is an experiment in improving Oggy Bloggy Ogwr's depth of coverage. As some of you might've seen from my fifth anniversary post last March, I only cover about a third of the Assembly's committee work. This move will enable me to push closer to 80-100%.

Read More

Law replacing landfill tax introduced

(Pic : South Wales Argus)

Earlier this week, Finance & Local Government Secretary, Mark Drakeford (Lab, Cardiff West), introduced the second Bill to establishes a new Welsh tax. It followed hot on the heels from the law to replace stamp duty – which was introduced in September.

Read More

FMQs : Veterans, USA & Article 50

It's a long one this week as I've decided to tack on the Assembly's response to the Article 50 judgement. There's also a sense of deja vu from recent FMQs as you'll probably see for yourselves.

Read More

FMQs Extra : Pembrokeshire, Heathrow & Orgreave

First Minister's Questions....without the First Minister.
(Pic : Wales Online)

As promised, I'm going to return to yesterday's plenary session and cover the four urgent questions asked following FMQs.

Read More

FMQs : Autism, Teachers & Fireworks

Same stuff; different week. You know the drill.

Read More

What type of Brexit suits Wales?

Soft Brexit vs Hard Brexit - the same process but different end results.
(Pic : buzzfeed.com)

I said I wouldn't return to Brexit until something concrete happens. Now that we have a timetable for the activation of Article 50 , a recent ministerial meeting involving the devolved administrations and hints at what sort of Brexit the UK Government will pursue, it's worth coming back to it again.

Read More

FMQs : Refugees, Vetoes & Bloody Brexit

The weekly theatre of Carwyn Jones' questioning by AMs rolls into town yet again.

Read More

Law to replace stamp duty introduced

(Pic : policyexpert.co.uk)

The first piece of legislation of the Fifth Assembly was introduced on Tuesday (13^th September) by Finance & Local Government Secretary, Mark Drakeford (Lab, Cardiff West) – the snappily-titled Land Transaction Tax & Anti-avoidance of Devolved Taxes Bill.

Read More

FMQs : Taxes, Jinxes & Jobs

This is the last FMQs before the EU referendum but, as usual, there were a wide variety of topics up for discussion.

Read More

Environment Bill introduced

Carrier bags, greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity are amongst the areas
targeted by a wide-ranging Environment Bill, which was introduced this week.

Now that the election excitement is dying down, it's time to turn to more mundane matters.

Hot on the heels of the Heritage Bill, Natural Resources Minister, Carl Sargeant (Lab, Alyn & Deeside) introduced the latest Welsh law. Bill here (pdf), explanatory memorandum here (pdf).

Read More

Westminster 2015 : The Manifestos Part II

• Westminster 2015 : The Manifestos I (Conservatives, Greens, Labour)

Following yesterday's look at the party manifestos (linked above), today it's the turn of the Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru and UKIP.

Read More

Westminster 2015 : The Manifestos Part I

The following two posts are the most important of the lot this election campaign : What are we voting for in May? Or, more accurately, what might be on the table during negotiations in the event of a hung parliament?

Read More

Westminster 2015 : The BBC Challengers Debate

(Pic : The Mirror)

The second of the main TV debates of Election 2015 was held last night, this time consisting of the opposition party leaders – so no David Cameron bwark-bwark-bwark-bwaaaark or Nick Clegg, which damaged the legitimacy a little bit.

Read More

Westminster 2015 : How have the Coalition performed?

As of Monday, every MP will be unemployed and scrounging for votes. So it's fitting
to kick them when they're down, as the Cameron administration know all about that.
(Pic : millenniumhotels.co.uk)

With the formal dissolution of the UK parliament coming on Monday, the time's come to kick-start my coverage of the 2015 House of Commons election.

Read More

Marching out of lockstep

On Tuesday, the National Assembly debated the draft Wales Bill - I outline what the Bill itself proposes here.

Although many parts of the draft Wales Bill should proceed without a hitch, senior figures in Welsh politics have been critical of aspects surrounding the potential partial devolution of income tax, which has - subsequently - had knock-on political consequences.

What the Assembly Said

The Assembly debate was dry, but became interesting for events
outside the Siambr.
(Pic : indymedia.co.uk)

It's grey stuff, but if you want to follow it you can here.

The First Minister started by saying the Silk I recommendations should've been enacted in full, expressing regret at the absence of powers over air passenger duty. He also criticised the "lockstep" on income tax powers -  tax rises/falls have to be set in all income tax bands at the same time. He described it as a "significant restraint" that "ties the hands of the Welsh Government".

He ended by saying the Leader of the Opposition Andrew Davies's (Con, South Wales Central) view - who's spoken out against the lockstep - was closer to his own than that of the Welsh Secretary, David Jones (who supports the lockstep and who introduced the draft Bill).

Leanne Wood (Plaid, South Wales Central) argued that the lockstep prevents Wales from becoming competitive with the rest of the UK. She said the Silk Commission members, Welsh Government and all opposition parties opposed the "lockstep", but the UK Government are pursuing it anyway.

David Melding AM (Con, South Wales Central) broadly supported the draft Bill's provisions, but called for the Assembly to decide its own electoral arrangements and for a name change to Welsh Parliament. He also called for the Assembly to have powers to amend its budgetary procedures, which be believes will be essential should there be fiscal devolution.

Lib Dem Leader, Kirsty Williams (Lib Dem, Brecon & Radnor), welcomed the non-fiscal measures in the draft Bill, supporting a shared income tax arrangement between the Welsh and UK Governments....though saying the lockstep was unnecessary.

As you can tell, there's a running theme developing here.

Shadow Finance Minister, Paul Davies (Con, Preseli Pembrokeshire), said he was "proud" of the UK Government's record on devolution, citing the 2011 referendum, saying these proposed powers would "provide more financial accountability" to the Welsh Government. He said although he supports a referendum on income tax powers he - surprise,surprise - opposes the "lockstep".

Then things started to get "interesting".

Antoinette Sandbach AM (Con, North Wales) argued with Mick Antoniw AM (Lab, Pontypridd) that the Treasury said there could be no devolved income tax powers without the lockstep. Mick continued by saying the income tax powers (as they are currently) were "worthless", and also outlined his opposition to the removal of a ban on dual candidacy.

Nick Ramsay AM (Con, Monmouth) then described the lockstep argument as "one rather minor aspect". Antoinette Sandbach asked if Nick agreed it were better there were some fiscal devolution – even with the lockstep – than none at all? Nick said yes, saying he "had no issue with the lockstep". Uh oh.

Carwyn Jones was presented with an open goal - considering his own party has been split on the issue -  finishing by saying he "did not think Nick Ramsay would so publicly disagree with his own leader", cheekily suggesting that what Nick said was a leadership speech. Andrew Davies tried to drag Owen Smith's own embarrassing contributions into it, but it was too late.

Although both the debate motion, and Plaid Cymru amendment criticising the "lockstep", were passed with no votes against or abstentions, four Conservative AMs refused to join their party colleagues in voting on the amendment at all.

Bull Lets Whip

After being undermined publicly on party policy, Andrew Davies was
left with no option but to sack four of his Shadow Cabinet.
(Pic : Click on Wales)

The party you would expect to benefit most from fiscal devolution would be the Welsh Conservatives. When the powers were first announced, it was clear their (Welsh) policy would be to cut the top rate of income tax to encourage wealthy people from the rest of the UK to move here.

The lockstep (UK Government policy) prevents them from doing that because cuts to the top rate have to be matched by cuts to the basic rate – making tax cuts (or, indeed, tax rises) more expensive. This has led to a very public spat between Andrew Davies and David Jones over who speaks for the Welsh party and membership, and who decides policy in Wales.

So, as a sort of distraction, the Welsh Conservatives have since switched their public attentions from income tax to cuts to stamp duty – the latter of which would come regardless of a referendum and without any conditions attached.

Following the events of the debate and vote, news broke Wednesday night that four Shadow Cabinet members – the four who refused to vote on the lockstep amendment - had been sacked.

It's a big public slap-down, though I've always questioned why every single opposition AM needs a portfolio responsibility in the first place (Lib Dems aside for obvious reasons).

The South Wales Argus reported Nick Ramsay will also lose his role as chair of the Business and Enterprise Committee as a result. That's a shame because, as regular readers will know, I believe he's done an outstanding job there. Nick described the move as an "old fashioned coup", but last time I checked coups happened against leaders.

Andrew Davies hasn't set the world alight as Leader of the Opposition, but - in my opinion - he was left with no choice after such an open rebellion and challenge to his authority.

It's been said elsewhere that there was, slightly bizarrely, a three-line whip on this vote, which is very unusual for such a technical matter, and shows Andrew wanted his party to back both himself in his tussle with David Jones and his opposition to the lockstep. So I doubt any of the four can have grounds for complaint other than the method by which they were sacked, which seemed hamfisted.

Serves them right.

Andrew's shown decisive leadership, but this will have hurt. These things rarely have happy endings, and the early signs were matters could take a turn for the worse. Since then, it appears he's been given the equivalent of a "vote of confidence". Politics isn't football, but....


Useless

The "lockstep" is a political and fiscal hazard, and another depressing
indication of Westminster's patronising views towards Welsh devolution.
(Pic : via wordpress)

When it comes to Labour party policy in Wales, the party's devolution policy or the Welsh Government's stance, only Carwyn Jones is worth listening to. When it comes to UK Government policy, only David Cameron is worth listening to.

We also have three other party leaders in Wales to flag up Welsh issues. We don't need MPs yapping like chihuahuas over them to give themselves work. At least some MPs know their place.

There are two main reasons why the income tax powers are useless. Firstly, the "lockstep".

The reason Welsh devolution doesn't work properly, and why we have all these tiresome constitutional arguments, is because powers have been incrementally transferred on a piecemeal basis. If we're going to have devolved powers, those powers should be devolved in their entirety – as happens to a great extent in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

That's one of the main reasons I've come round to supporting independence, as promising to give us "tools to do the job", then instead giving us parts of tools, is an insult.

In terms of income tax, that should include the powers :

• To set the rates in their entirety – not just 10p in the pound.
• To create, merge or scrap tax bands.
• To set income tax rates in each tax band independently of each other.

The block grant would be then adjusted accordingly. Wales gets a "grown-up responsible government", parties in Wales would have the freedom to come up with income tax policies in their entirety, and the Welsh Government would be responsible for raising a fair chunk (about a quarter) of its current income.

We're not getting any of that. Instead we could be, effectively, getting income tax powers in name only as no party would want to hike or lower taxes across the board at the same time.

Secondly, there's the referendum.

A referendum on a general principle that the National Assembly should have tax-varying powers would be a referendum worth getting out of bed and voting in. Any tax powers could then be granted after negotiation between the two governments – with or without a fair funding formula in place.

It would also make it easier to devolve other taxes (like corporation tax and air passenger duty) in future, because a referendum yes vote would've given the two governments a mandate to transfer any tax powers at their convenience.

However, a referendum on whether the National Assembly should have the specific power to vary income tax by 10p in the pound in each tax band at the same ti....

I challenge anyone to explain to me how they would campaign in favour of the income tax powers as they are on the table, and how they would explain it to the man or woman in the street?

Why stop there? Why not have a referendum on landfill tax powers? Or business rates? Should we have a referendum on every single legislative consent motion proposed by Westminster in devolved areas?

The First Minister and others are right to say the lockstep renders the powers useless. Welsh Labour have confused things by saying they don't want income tax powers at present, even though they support the implementation of Silk I in full....which would bring income tax powers, subject to a referendum.

Wanting to tax gravel and rubbish, but not incomes (in principle), and using relative underfunding that amounts to around 2% of the block grant as an excuse not to pursue income tax varying powers, verges on the ridiculous.

Whether they like it or not, it underlines an inherent lack of ambition – not necessarily anti-devolutionism - on Welsh Labour's part. You wonder if they're really up to the rigours of running a country, and if instead they should retreat to their comfort zone of local government and move aside for the big boys and girls.

Roger Scully and Richard Wyn Jones warned of this back in November 2012 as Silk Commission Part 1 was reporting back. Richard has since been kind enough to provide a link to the Wales Governance Centre's detailed submission on the draft Wales Bill, and argument against a referendum, here (pdf).

I warned of it too, saying the whole exercise was "pissing into the wind", but what do I know?

If even people like me could see these problems coming 14 months ago, and nobody else foresaw this outcome, then we should all be worried. Some senior personalities in Welsh politics clearly have an excessively idealistic view of how Welsh devolution works. This isn't a union of equals, everyone. Get it into your heads. It never will be.

Bring on the jam. Income tax powers are toast.

Read More

Dr. Plaid's NHS Treatment Plan

Plaid Cymru recently announced ambitious plans to recruit an
extra 1,000 doctors - across all grades - over the next two Assembly terms.
(Pic : The Guardian)

Yesterday, Plaid Cymru's Shadow Health & Wellbeing Minister, Elin Jones AM (Plaid, Ceredigion), kicked off the new Assembly session by announcing the party's policy consultation on the future of the Welsh NHS.

The headline announcement was that a Plaid Cymru government would aim to recruit 1,000 extra doctors over two Assembly terms.

The consultation document itself is available on the party website.

As you know, the Welsh NHS – and UK in general – is under increasing pressure due to changes to training of junior doctors and shortages of staff in specialist areas.

This is one of the mains reasons given for the controversial hospital reorganisations taking place in Wales. The Welsh Government and local health boards justify it by saying that concentrating specialist services on fewer sites would improve the training environment for junior doctors, and allow patients to be seen more quickly by qualified staff.

Plaid have taken a different route, focusing on the staffing issue instead of the structure and configuration of hospital services themselves.

Specific problems facing the Welsh NHS

We're all aware of one of the big issues - shortages of specialists in departments
like Accident & Emergency - prompting current hospital reorganisations and downgrades.
(Pic : Wales Online)

The document lists a number of serious issues, which I'm sure everyone's aware of:

• The aforementioned problems in recruitment of specialist staff, with pronounced problems in : A&E, paediatrics, mental health, obstetrics/gynaecology and geriatric medicine. Wales currently has the third-lowest number of doctors per head in the EU, beaten only by Romania and Poland.
• Growth of more lucrative jobs in the private sector which attract newly-qualified doctors and consultants.
• Lack of opportunities for consultants to carry out research in Wales, and lack of allied life science jobs (i.e pharmaceuticals) in Wales for those who decide not to practice.
• Rural and sparsely-populated areas aren't seen as attractive places to pursue a medical career.
• Training opportunities in Wales have been ranked lowly, and trainees are "used inappropriately", covering hospital rotas instead of being trained.

A specific "ticking time bomb", and something that wouldn't be solved by current service reorganisations, is that Welsh GPs are ageing fast, with 20% of the GP and dental service aged over 50. BMA Cymru suggested in 2012 that in the south Wales valleys, up to 40% of GPs will retire over the next decade without replacements.

When it comes to the non-medical workforce (i.e nurses) the issue's said to be not lack of interest, but lack of posts due to cutbacks to nursing positions, loss of experienced nursing staff (to provide training to newly-qualified nurses), an ageing workforce (29% of Welsh nurses are over 50 - p5) and lack of professional development opportunities.

There are said to be no real problems in recruitment of allied health staff either, like health care support workers and physiotherapists, but due to staffing pressures they might be taking on too much too soon.

What do Plaid propose?

One of the headline policy options is to gradually wipe-out the
student debts of medical students who train in certain specialities.
(Pic : via thestudentroom.co.uk)

Plaid outline four policy "themes", each including more specific policy options.

Theme 1 – Financial incentives to retain postgraduates

The headline policy is to use financial incentives to encourage postgraduates to train in specialisms where there are shortages. Plaid would do that by gradually paying off medical graduates' debt (up to £75,000) for each year they train in Wales in a specialism suffering shortages. This approach has been successfully used in New Zealand, and a similar scheme during the One Wales government resulted in an extra 200 dentists being recruited.

Other options include:

• "Golden hellos" for hard to fill vacancies.
• Directly-salaried GPs in areas where they're of short supply.
• Free training in exchange for working in under-served areas – used in Canada and Norway - which Plaid estimate would enable the recruitment of 350 doctors over two Assembly terms.

Theme 2 – NHS Innovation

This part addresses lack of research opportunities and career development, as well as changes to aspects of NHS working practices. Options here include :

• Attracting extra research funding – All Welsh Government departments should make Wales research-friendly, UK Research Councils would be held to account for not funding Welsh research appropriately (Wales received around 2% of UK R&D funds in 2012-13) and establishing closer links between medical schools and hospitals.
• Mainstreaming clinical research within the Welsh NHS – Allow more clinical trials, especially those dubbed "real time trials", to be carried out anywhere using modern technology (i.e. specialist computer software). That means research wouldn't be confined to big university hospitals, but can be carried out at any hospital. An example's given where specialist research on respiratory conditions could be carried out at hospitals in the south Wales valleys, while rural health research can be carried out at the likes of Bronglais and Withybush hopitals.
• Merging health and social care – This "has been discussed for many years", and will be looked at separately as doctors have complained about "barriers patients face when accessing care".
• Paperless working – An example's given where paramedics fill out duplicate forms after responding to incidents, keeping them temporarily out of action. Investment in IT could enable them, and other clinicians, to work distantly across multiple sites. That means, for example, that small hospitals would have access to consultants without consultants physically being there, something trialled in Northern Ireland. It's said a reduction in paperwork could also be popular with NHS staff.
• Professional development of non-medical staff – This includes a separate "invest to save" fund for health to create specialist nursing posts, broadening the recruitment base so nursing isn't reliant on women, and investigating substitution of doctors by nurses on some rotas as part of an alternative package to service centralisations.
• Promote Wales – A no-brainer, and the Welsh Government are already doing some of this in the form of the Work for Wales scheme. This includes addressing negative stereotypes about Wales alongside promoting existing strengths, like existing centres of excellence (i.e. Morriston for burns treatment). The aim is to recruit an extra 50 doctors in one term through this method alone, and an extra 200 doctors in a second term.

Theme 3 – Doctor training and recruitment

• Expanding the number of places at medical schools in Wales, possibly making medical training free to Welsh-resident children in exchange for a minimum term of service in Wales upon graduation.
• Use of technology (as mentioned before) to allow things like distant learning at medical centres away from main teaching hospitals.
• Protected training time for trainee doctors, and requirements that health boards don't have rotas that are reliant on trainee doctors. Plaid accepts concerns from the Wales Deanery about training but believe their "hand was forced by the Welsh Government".
• Implement parts of the Greenaway Review into medical training, which could result in more "generalist" doctors being trained - who are competent across multiple disciplines - instead of specialists. Although specialists will still have a place.
• Quotas and bursaries for Welsh-speaking pupils who achieve the necessary grades to study medicine, ensuring Welsh-speaking doctors are still available in Welsh-speaking areas.
• Promotion of medicine and life sciences as career options, where talented children are encouraged to apply to study medicine. It also means promoting careers in life sciences in Wales for those studying medicine but who decide it isn't for them. Plaid estimates another 300 doctors could be recruited this way, based on a similar policy enacted in Scotland.

Theme 4 – International Recruitment

This is aimed at short-term staff shortages, and has traditionally been used to fill vacancies. Plaid believe recruits should be targeted from within the EU (taking advantage of freedom of movement), and some Welsh LHBs have already held recruitment events in Spain, Romania and Hungary. There's also the option of training doctors from the developing world on short-term contracts before they return to their home countries.

How much would it cost?

Plaid Cymru propose to - in part - pay for this via a 20p per litre levy on sugary drinks,
similar to those used in France, Denmark, Norway and Mexico.
(Pic : thejournal.ie)

Some policies could save money in the long run, like paperless working. Recruiting full-time medical staff would also reduce the current £60million bill for agency and locum doctors. The total agency bill once nurses and other staff are included is over £150million.

Obviously, the other policies would leave the Welsh NHS with a bill. However, current hospital reorganisations also cost money, as I pointed out last year, so are being done for policy reasons, not financial pressures as the result of "cuts from Westminster".

Plaid were smart enough to admit that costing an extra 1,000 doctors is imprecise because there are variable grades of doctor earning varying amounts of money and costing different sums to train. So to produce an accurate estimate, they used a median salary and – on the advice of the Assembly Research Service - added 20% to it.

The figure Plaid come up with was £65million, based on 100 extra consultants, 200 middle-grade doctors, 300 GPs and 400 juniors.

The costs of the student debt repayment plans, based off the New Zealand figures, would be £13.1million over a single term, assuming £52,500 of a medical graduate's average £75,000 debt was wiped out for 250 doctors.

Some aspects could be absorbed by the existing health budget, but – as you know – Plaid Cymru announced they're considering a 20p per litre levy on sugary drinks (~7p per 330ml can). It was originally flagged up by several medical organisations last year, and last November the British Medical Journal claimed it would be an "effective public health measure" that could reduce the number of obese adults by 180,000 across the UK (or a proportional ~9,000 share in Wales alone).

Plaid estimate this levy would raise around £60million. The more detailed figures they provided last November put the figure – based on current soft drink consumption habits – at between £61.2-72.8million. Plus there's the possible savings to the Welsh NHS and wider economy from reduced cases of diabetes, childhood dental problems and obesity in the long term.

If the numbers add up as intended (presuming Wales would have the power to introduce a sugary drink levy) then the policy verges on being cost-neutral, which – to be honest – sounds too good to be true. I'm also not sure if it includes the cost of all the other measures (some of which involve other departments, like Economy & Transport and Education), or is purely relating to recruiting the 1,000 doctors.

Conclusion : Interesting. Very interesting.

The policy proposals are credible and professional, but are unlikely to result in any u-turn
on hospital organisations. They do, however, offer an alternative to Labour's current plans.
(Pic : Wales Online)

Myself and others have been (rightly) critical of Plaid Cymru often blurting out policies without providing the underpinning evidence. Other opposition parties are just as guilty of that too, while Welsh Labour go in the opposite direction and drown you in management speak.

This is different though. It might not be perfect, but I'm impressed.

This should be the template by which Plaid announces their policies in the future. It's detailed enough without bombarding you with the unnecessary (as I might do) – 24 pages is a snip compared to the tomes that come from the Welsh Government. It's credible and professional. More importantly, the numbers seem to add up. Though any serious attempt to bring in a sugary drink levy might prove controversial.

The vitriolic response from Welsh Labour, none of which attacks the proposals themselves in any detail, proves Plaid hit a nerve. It's the reaction you would expect from a party and government under pressure on health and out of ideas. Their response can, therefore, be easily dismissed as a tantrum that adds nothing positive to the debate on NHS recruitment.

These plans really do need more detailed costings, and there are probably "hidden costs" Plaid have missed - IT projects are notoriously expensive, for one -  but the estimates are on solid ground as far as I can tell. Having said that, recruiting an extra 1,000 doctors across two terms perhaps sounds more straightforward than it would be in reality.

I don't think any of this dismisses the need for some service reconfiguration either, but it's clear Plaid have based this on evidence from those in the know and from examples elsewhere that have been proven to work.

If you were to sum up the overarching aim of this consultation it would be to reverse centralisation and downgrades of some district hospitals.

It's too late for that. It's as good as done. An announcement is expected any time soon on the final decision of the South Wales Programme, while it's highly likely at least three hospitals in mid and north Wales will be downgraded too. All that will happen before 2016.

But Plaid can at least, of the opposition parties, turn around and say in some detail, "This is what we would've done".

It's a clear alternative too.

Read More

Cold and drafty Wales Bill

The formal UK Government response to Silk I was laid in front of the UK Parliament
just before Christmas. What's proposed? And what does it  mean for Wales?
(Pic : Press Association via BBC Wales)

Back on December 18^th, the UK Government launched the draft version of the Wales Bill (pdf) – the "meat" of the UK Government's response to Part I of the Silk Commission (devolution of limited fiscal powers), but also including changes to the Assembly itself and how AMs are elected.

As it's a draft Bill, it could still significantly change between now and whenever the full Bill is introduced to the House of Commons. Pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Bill, due to be undertaken by the Welsh Affairs Select Committee, started today.

So, as you might expect me to do, it's worth looking at the draft Bill in a bit more detail.

Taxation Powers

Subject to a referendum, Wales will have the power to vary income tax rates
for defined "Welsh taxpayers". However, are the powers functionally useless?
(Pic : The Telegraph)

The draft Bill proposes as follows :

Miscellaneous Taxes

• Enables the creation of completely new devolved taxes via an Order in Council.
• Removes existing stamp duty collection and management in Wales, granting the Assembly full powers to introduce its own land transaction tax.
• Ditto existing landfill tax collection and management, granting the Assembly control over landfill tax.

Welsh taxpayers

• Defines a "Welsh taxpayer" as someone who's resident in the UK, pays UK income tax, and meets one of the following criteria :
• Has a "close connection" to Wales (presumably as a permanent resident).
• Has no close connections with England, Scotland or Northern Ireland and spends most of the calendar year in Wales over other parts of the UK.
• Is an MP, AM or MEP representing a Welsh constituency.

Income tax referendum

• A referendum on income tax powers will be triggered when the Assembly passes a vote in favour of holding a referendum by a 2/3 majority.
• The Welsh Secretary will have 180 days from the moment a motion's passed by the Assembly, to present an Order calling a referendum to both Houses of Parliament for approval. The Welsh Secretary will also have the power to "veto" any referendum.
• In the event of a yes vote, an Order will be made by HM Treasury indicating when Welsh income tax powers come into force.
• In the event of a no vote, a referendum on the matter could still be called at a later date via an Order in Council.

Income tax powers

If there's a yes vote in a referendum, the draft Bill :

• Gives the National Assembly the power to set a "Welsh rate" of income tax for "Welsh taxpayers".
• Outlines that income tax powers would be similar to those coming into force in Scotland in 2016 (if they don't vote for independence), which will mean income tax rates in Wales will be lowered by 10p in the pound and the Assembly will then set a top-up Welsh rate. However, the tax is "lock stepped", meaning tax rates in different bands can't be set independently of each other. If income tax is raised or lowered by 1p, for example, it has to apply across all income tax bands.
• Outlines various mechanisms by which a Welsh rate of income tax would be collected by HM Revenue & Customs, how tax relief schemes would fit into it, and monitoring HMRC's performance in collecting a "Welsh rate" of income tax.

Borrowing Powers

Although still out for consultation, the new borrowing powers will
almost certainly be used to fund  M4 improvements in Newport.
(Pic : Sabre Roads)

The draft Bill :

• Changes the circumstances by which Welsh Ministers can borrow as set out in the Government of Wales Act 2006.
• Gives Welsh Ministers the power to borrow :
• to manage volatility in receipts and forecasts, where forecasts differ from incomes (revenue expenditure).
• to fund capital expenditure.
• Sets the borrowing limit at £500million for capital expenditure and £500million for revenue/current account expenditure. However, the borrowing limit can be changed by the Welsh Secretary up or down, subject to approval by the House of Commons.
• Repeals borrowing powers relating to the, now defunct, Welsh Development Agency (WDA) - though it doesn't affect any outstanding debts.
• Gives HM Treasury the power to set a cap on housing debt held by Welsh local housing authorities.

Changes to the Assembly

The "WAG" is dead. Long live the "WG"
- although it's already gone.
(Pic : NHS Wales)

The draft Bill :

• Increases the length of an Assembly term from four to five years.
• Will allow Assembly candidates to stand in constituencies and on regional lists at the same time.
• Bans MPs from being Assembly Members at the same time, except where there's a UK General Election within 6 months of an AM being elected an MP (which is unlikely).
• Formally changes the name of the "Welsh Assembly Government" to "Welsh Government" in the Government of Wales Act 2006.
• Places a duty on the Law Commission to provide advice to the Welsh Government directly, and also places a duty on Welsh Ministers to report any reforms in devolved areas proposed by the Law Commission to the Assembly.

Reaction and Conclusions

The proposals aren't that impressive, but one seemingly overlooked point could leave
the door open for Wales to create a completely new tax to replace stamp duty.
(Pic : The Guardian)

I'm not sure whether to call this an important law or not, as you probably know I wasn't impressed with the Silk Commission's recommendations anyway. This is an even further watered down version of that.

It's basically a transplant of some aspects of the Calman Commission's finding's. Silk I was a complete waste of time and effort by all involved, and even key findings of the Holtham and Richard Commissions have been effectively ignored.

I suppose it's a step in the right direction, but the powers – borrowing aside – are piddling. Air passenger duty (APD) has been taken off the table while, for now, there's no mention of non-domestic(business) rates – though I understand business rates will be devolved at some point.

By "lock stepping" income tax powers, any heady ideas Welsh parties had – including, ironically, the Welsh Conservatives – of creating a "dynamic low tax economy" have been blown apart.

Under these proposals, income tax cuts in Wales would be more expensive because changes will have to apply across all tax bands at the same time. The same goes for tax rises - so tax rises for top rate payers would have to be matched by tax rises for basic rate payers.

Andrew Davies (Con, South Wales Central) seems to have forgotten that, judging by his Click on Wales article today.

The income tax powers, as presented, are functionally useless as - minus an ability to set income tax rates in each band independently from one another - I suspect income tax rates would always be set in line with England to avoid scaring the flock.

Then there's the little matter of convincing Welsh Labour to support a referendum, and winning it off the back of such a mind-numbingly technical matter. As it is, I'd either abstain or vote no. A "hard nat" contemplating voting against further powers for the Assembly - that's how poor a deal this is.

Of course, Scotland wasn't bound to a referendum on Calman. They can ditch the patronisation of Westminster and get real fiscal powers by voting yes in September.

The borrowing powers are long overdue and give the Welsh Government some "grown up" responsibilities. It remains to be seen whether both governments are intent on splashing it up the wall building the Newport bypass, but presumably that's what the borrowing will be used for – at least initially.

The most interesting thing here though is that the wording appears to leave the door open for the Welsh Government to create any tax they want on property transactions – not specifically continuing with stamp duty.

Could that mean Wales could create a "Land Value Tax"? As has been mooted by several people, including Health Minister Mark Drakeford (Lab, Cardiff West)?

In terms of the timing, it might've been wiser to have waited until after Silk II, in order to create a new Government of Wales Act with any (potential) new devolved powers wrapped up in a single piece of legislation alongside these financial powers.

This could hint, firstly, that Silk II isn't going to propose anything significant in way of powers; or secondly, that any new powers will simply be devolved via Orders in Council or amendments to the GoW Act 2006. If we're going to move to a reserved powers model though - as many have called for -  I would expect it to require significant primary legislation in Westminster. Time's running out to get than on the table before the 2015 UK election.

The reaction's been muted. The Welsh Government described it as an "important step forward", though they were disappointed that APD wasn't devolved and that income tax powers aren't set out as outlined in Silk I.

As you might expect, the Conservatives and Lib Dems broadly welcomed it, though the latter less enthusiastically than the former.

Plaid Cymru's Westminster group say they'll try to amend the Wales Bill to ensure the full recommendations of Silk I are included, while Leanne Wood recently ruled out campaigning for a yes vote due to the "lock step" provisions which, as I've also said and has been mentioned on National Left, render the income tax powers useless.

The Institute of Welsh Affairs weren't impressed either. Lee Waters used relatively strong terms to – broadly speaking – dismiss the draft Bill as "hollow".

Returning to the Assembly changes, the Electoral Reform Society welcomed the reversal of the ban on candidates standing jointly on constituency and regional lists, though they called for a 12-month "window/overlap" to allow newly-elected MPs to temporarily retain their Assembly seat(s).

That will no doubt be good news for Leanne Wood (Plaid, South Wales Central) and Leighton Andrews AM (Lab, Rhondda) in particular. When Leanne announced in 2012 that she would stand for a FPTP constituency - subsequently Rhondda -  at the time I said it was a "pointless risk". Depending on selection to the South Wales Central list for 2016 and Plaid's performance, there's probably no risk to her seat now. I wouldn't be surprised if we see AMs from all parties standing in constituencies and on regional lists in 2016, as happened prior to 2006.

The "WAG" is formally no more too, though the name changed (unofficially) in 2011. There was an opportunity, I suppose, to rename the National Assembly to something different, like Welsh Parliament.

There isn't anything wrong with the name "National Assembly" anyway (apart from "for Wales" instead of "of Wales" – yes, it's important) and changing it would result in a whole host of issues like re-branding and deciding what to call elected members.

So, all in all - *grunt of apathetic acknowledgement *.

Read More