Related Pages

Developing students’ critical thinking skills through peer assessment and information literacy

Richard Owen (University of Glamorgan) looked at an attempt to develop students’ critical thinking through information literacy and the use of asynchronous methods...

Legal directions in Wales: an interview with John Griffiths AM

Richard Owen, Deputy Head of Glamorgan Law School and UKCLE’s Consultant for Wales, recently met with John Griffiths AM, Counsel General of the Welsh Assembly Gover...

Legal Wales: annual symposium 2007

In this article from the Spring 2008 issue of Directions Richard Owen (University of Glamorgan) reports on the 2007 symposium of Legal Wales, a representative body of...

Teaching business students law by virtual means

In this article from the Spring 2008 issue of Directions Odette Hutchinson (Birmingham City University) details her experience introducing video lectures to first yea...

The Government of Wales Act 2006: teaching resource note

This teaching resource note has been produced by Richard Owen (University of Glamorgan) as an introduction to the general principles behind the Government of Wales Ac...

Comments

There are no comments at this time

Tagged

legal system

Wales

Home » Resources » UKCLE nations mini site » Legal education in Wales » The Government of Wales Act 2006: the challenges for legal education

The Government of Wales Act 2006: the challenges for legal education

In his paper at Learning in Law Annual Conference 2008 Richard Owen (University of Glamorgan) examined the development of devolution in Wales, concluding with a summary of the implications for legal education providers. Richard is UKCLE’s contact person for Wales and coordinated our 2007 seminar Exploring the impact of the Government of Wales Act 2006 on legal education. A version of this paper also appeared in the Autumn 2007 issue of Directions.

The Government of Wales Act 2006 (GoWA) represents a new chapter for Legal Wales, giving the National Assembly for Wales the power to make legislation on devolved matters. Further, the May 2007 elections for the Assembly led to an historic Labour-Plaid Cymru coalition with the commitment to campaign for a positive vote in a referendum for full law making powers within the next four years. So it is possible that by 2010 there will be a Welsh Parliament in Cardiff to complement the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh.

Legal education faces a number of issues and challenges as a result:

  • Is the trend towards Wales becoming a separate jurisdiction from England fully appreciated throughout the UK, particularly outside Wales? What are the likely consequences of this trend?
  • Is devolution law covered adequately on law courses? Do curricula need to be redesigned to keep abreast of developments?
  • Are library resources adequate to meet these challenges and support legal education and practice?
  • Will law schools, particularly those in Wales, interact with the Welsh Assembly Government and the National Assembly for Wales in a fundamentally new way?
  • Do law schools need to respond to the need for more public law practitioners in Wales?
  • Does the proposal to create Parliamentary select committees for nine English regions, following devolution to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and London and membership of the European Union, mean that the UK is moving in a federalist direction? If so, what can be learned from the experience of devolution in Wales?
  • Does the increasingly separate legal jurisdiction in Wales represent the disintegration of the legal system of the United Kingdom, or does it represent an integration of the UK’s legal system on a new basis with trends towards a new federal settlement?

Background

The former Secretary of State for Wales, Ron Davies, famously described devolution as “a process not an event” (Davies 1999). This paper looks at how this process has recently been unfolding with the coming into force of the Government of Wales Act (GoWA) 2006 and the implications that arise as a result for legal education, particularly in Wales but throughout the UK, and the extent to which any wider conclusions can be drawn.

From the Act of Union of 1536 to the early 20th century Wales and England were administered as a single entity. The Act effectively incorporated Wales into England, and was therefore unlike the Acts of Union 1707 between England and Scotland, which represented a union between two states. As a result, until comparatively recently there have been few institutions that have been concerned solely with Wales. The commencement of the national Eisteddfod in the mid 19th century gave a national focal point to Welsh language cultural activities, however, the first executive form of devolution did not occur until the establishment of the Welsh Department of the Board of Education in 1907. This was followed by the establishment of the Welsh Board of Health in 1919 and later the Welsh Office of the Ministry of Housing and Local Government.

Between 1951 and 1964 various members of the Cabinet were given responsibilities for Welsh affairs, and a government post below Cabinet level, the Minister of State for Welsh Affairs, was created in 1957. In 1964 a Cabinet post, the Secretary of State for Wales, was appointed, supported by a government department, and the executive responsibilities of the post were successively widened. This burgeoning executive devolution was matched by an increasing budget, and in 1997-98 the Welsh Office budget was £7 billion, leading to demands for greater democratic control. In July 1997 a white paper, A voice for Wales (Welsh Office 1997), proposed a 60 member National Assembly. This was approved in a referendum held in September 1997, and the Government of Wales Act 1998 was passed before the first Assembly elections were held in May 1999 (see the Wales Office’s History page for further information on the development of devolution).

The Government of Wales Act 2006

A problem that has dogged the Assembly’s business since its inception has been identifying the ambit of its powers. These were originally conferred by the Government of Wales Act (GoWA) 1998. Although the 1998 Act contained powers relating to the reorganisation of health and other statutory bodies in Wales and in relation to culture, sport, historic buildings and the Welsh language, the rest of the Assembly’s powers depended on further enactment, either in the form of Transfer of Functions Orders or in powers given under primary legislation passed after GoWA 1998. These powers could only be in one of the 18 ‘fields’ contained in Schedule 2 of the 1998 Act, but specific powers had to be attached to the field before the National Assembly could pass secondary legislation.

This can be contrasted with the situation in Scotland. Not only does the Scottish Parliament have general legislative competence which is co-terminus with its own devolved fields but also, unlike the National Assembly for Wales, it has primary law making powers. This has become referred to as ‘asymmetrical devolution’ (Bogdanor 2003). In Scotland “there may be boundary disputes (devolution issues) but there is a boundary” (Miers 2002). However, there is a similarity between devolution in Scotland and Wales, in that the UK Parliament retains its sovereignty and right to legislate on any matter following devolution. The establishment of a Scottish Parliament and a National Assembly for Wales under the Scotland Act 1998 and the Government of Wales Act 2006 has created “delegated bodies with the power to promote legislation with the force of Acts of the UK Parliament” (Ministry of Justice nd p3).

The amorphous nature of the powers delegated to the National Assembly under GoWA 1998 meant that the situation was inherently unstable. This led to the Assembly‘s First Minister, Rhodri Morgan, appointing a commission under the chairmanship of Lord Richard in July 2002 to review the powers of the Assembly and the adequacy of its electoral arrangements.

The Richard Commission’s report (2004) was followed by the Better governance for Wales white paper (Welsh Office 2005). This led in turn to the Government of Wales Act 2006, which came into force in May 2007 following the election of the Third Assembly. Its key changes involved a legal separation between the National Assembly and the Welsh Assembly Government, enhanced legislative powers and a change to electoral arrangements. However, this does not resolve the inherent instability in the powers of the National Assembly. The present approach was only envisaged as an interim step by the Richard Commission, which recommended a legislative Assembly for Wales with primary law making powers on all matters not reserved to Westminster, which should be in place by 2011 by the latest.

Legal separation between the National Assembly and the Welsh Assembly Government

The Government of Wales Act 2006 marks a change in the way the Assembly works, creating a formal legal separation for the first time between the Welsh Assembly Government and the National Assembly for Wales. Until its coming into force the National Assembly had been a body corporate, so there was no legal or constitutional separation, although in practice even under the previous arrangements the Assembly effectively scrutinised the Government‘s work.

The Welsh Assembly Government’s relationship with the National Assembly now approximates to the British Government’s relationship with the Houses of Parliament. It governs, while the National Assembly scrutinises its policies and how it uses its budget. The Government consists of the First Minister, Welsh Ministers, the Counsel General and Deputy Welsh Ministers (s.45 Government of Wales Act 2006). The First Minister is appointed by the Queen (s. 46(1)) on the basis of a nomination by the National Assembly (s. 47(1)). The nomination must occur within 28 days (s.47(3)) of any of the events in s. 47(2) of the Act occurring. The Counsel General is appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of the First Minster (s. 49(1)). However, the First Minister cannot recommend the approval for appointment or removal of a person as Counsel General without the agreement of the National Assembly (s. 49(3)). No more than 12 people hold Welsh ministerial office at any time (s. 51(1) 15).

Enhanced legislative powers

The Government of Wales Act 2006 also gives the Assembly the power to make legislation on devolved matters. However, the National Assembly needs to obtain ‘legislative competence’ before having the power to make measures in relation to a particular area of devolved government. These laws will be known as ‘Measures of the National Assembly for Wales’, to give them their full title, or ‘Assembly Measures’ (sometimes referred to as Welsh laws) for short. In other words, the National Assembly now has quasi-primary legislative powers in that it can vary the application of Acts of the UK Parliament in Wales.

There are two ways in which the Assembly can gain legislative competence:

  • Parliamentary Acts
  • Orders in Council

Under the first method clauses are inserted into Parliamentary Bills as they pass through the Houses of Parliament, conferring legislative competence on the Assembly in relation to particular topics. Parliament has the opportunity to amend these clauses.

Tthe procedure is more complex under the second method. The scope of the legislative competence is defined by section 94 and Schedule 5 of the Government of Wales Act 2006. Schedule 5 consists of a list of 20 devolved areas known as ‘fields’. Legislative competence is gained by inserting a ‘matter’ into a ‘field’. So, for example, education and training is a ‘field’, and a ‘matter’ attached to that field is ‘provision for and in connection with securing the provision of facilities for post-16 education or training’. ‘Matters’ are conferred by a constitutional procedure known as Legislative Competence Orders (LCOs), a type of Order in Council, made only after approval has been given by the Secretary of State for Wales, the UK Parliament and the Assembly.

The current fields are:

  1. Agriculture, fisheries, forestry and rural development
  2. Ancient monuments and historic buildings
  3. Culture
  4. Economic development
  5. Education and training
  6. Environment
  7. Fire and rescue services and promotion of fire safety
  8. Food
  9. Health and health services
  10. Highways and transport
  11. Housing
  12. Local government
  13. National Assembly for Wales
  14. Public administration
  15. Social welfare
  16. Sport and recreation
  17. Tourism
  18. Town and country planning
  19. Water and flood defence
  20. Welsh language

So although the National Assembly still lacks a general legislative competence the primary laws of the UK Parliament can now be varied in their application to Wales.

Proposals for LCOs can be initiated by Welsh Assembly Government Ministers, an Assembly Committee or by individual Assembly Members (AMs) drawn from a ballot. There is a two stage process for considering an LCO:

  1. The ‘pre-legislative scrutiny’ of a proposed LCO by an Assembly committee
  2. The approval, by the Assembly, of a draft LCO

The measure will be concurrently scrutinised by the House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee or, on occasion, the Welsh Grand Committee, ie the Committee consisting of all MPs representing Welsh constituencies and by a House of Lords Committee, before being re-submitted to the Assembly for approval. Scrutiny by the Welsh Grand Committee is likely to take place “where a proposed Order raises complex legal issues, has wide implications or is politically controversial” (House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee 2007a para 4). It is possible for this pre-legislative scrutiny to be undertaken jointly by an Assembly Committee and the Parliamentary committees. The Government has asked the Welsh Affairs Committee to identify the circumstances in which it believes that it is more appropriate for the Welsh Grand Committee to undertake scrutiny, and has stated that the Welsh Affairs Select Committee should also consider inviting MPs with an interest to make representations during its scrutiny of the Order (House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee 2007b appendix).

Having been subject to pre-legislative scrutiny and amended (if appropriate), a draft LCO is formally laid before the Assembly, along with an Explanatory Memorandum. The Assembly then vote to approve or reject the draft Order, which cannot be amended.

After Assembly approval the Secretary of State for Wales can either refuse to lay the measure before Parliament (providing reasons) or lay the measure before Parliament. In cases of refusal the First Minster must be notified, and then the Assembly. If the Secretary of State decides to lay before Parliament it must be laid before the House of Commons and the House of Lords before being agreed as an Order in Council. In short, the Cabinet and the UK Parliament have the power to veto the extension of the National Assembly’s powers. If approved by both Houses, the measure is formally approved by the Queen and it becomes law, amending Schedule 5 to the 2006 Act and providing the Assembly with more powers to make measures.

The Government of Wales Act 2006 provides the power to call a referendum on whether the National Assembly should have primary law making powers (Government of Wales Act 2006 s. 103(1)). A referendum will be called if a resolution is passed by a two thirds majority of the National Assembly (s. 104). The First Minister must notify the Secretary of State for Wales in writing of the resolution (s.104(2)), and the latter then has 120 days to lay a draft statutory instrument containing an Order in Council before both Houses of Parliament or give notice in writing to the First Minister of his refusal to do so (s.104(3)). If the majority of voters voting in such a referendum vote in favour of primary law making powers (s.103(2)) this will trigger the coming into force of ss. 107-116 of GoWA 2006, which lays down the legislative competence and the legislative procedures for passing these primary laws, known as Assembly Acts.

In the meantime the National Assembly is restricted to passing Assembly Measures when it has the legislative competence so to do. These must be laid in English and in Welsh. The draft Assembly Measure is then scrutinised by the National Assembly through a four step process – consideration of the general principles, detailed line by line consideration by a committee, detailed line by line consideration by the Assembly and finally a vote by the Assembly on the final text of the measure (APS Legislation Office, 2007).

Electoral arrangements

The Richard Commission recommended that to exercise primary powers the National Assembly would need an increase in membership from its current 60 to 80 members (Richard Commission 2004 p10). It also recommended that the present voting system, which consists of a constituency vote on a ‘first past the post’ system and an additional member system allocated proportionately amongst the political parties on the basis of the votes the parties have received in various regions, be replaced by a single transferable vote system.

In the event GoWA 2006 has not increased the number of Assembly Members. This has caused concern as to whether the National Assembly has a big enough membership to effectively scrutinise legislation. Controversially, GoWA 2006 did not move to a single transferable vote system, and the only change made to the electoral system in the Act is to prevent candidates standing both as constituency candidates and in the additional member regional lists. The rationale provided behind the change is to prevent ‘losers’ in constituency contests then being turned into ‘winners’ under the regional list system. (The leader of the Welsh Conservative Party called this election ‘rigging’ in favour of the Labour Party.)

The application of the Act so far

The May 2007 elections did not leave any one party in overall control of the Assembly. Eventually a Labour-Plaid Cymru coalition was agreed in July, some two months after the election. One condition of the coalition deal is that both parties are committed to campaign for a positive vote in a referendum for full law making powers for the Assembly within the next four years. The legislative programme agreed by the coalition partners is contained in ‘One Wales’ (Welsh Assembly Government 2007), an ambitious programme for the period of the Third Assembly including pledges to:

  • seek competence in relation to mental health (p10)
  • bring forward legislation for vulnerable children (p10)
  • pursue legislation on improved school transport (p20)
  • consider the evidence for the devolution of the criminal justice system within the contexts of (a) devolution of funding and (b) moves towards the establishment of a single administration of justice in Wales (p29)
  • consider enshrining the concept of artistic freedom in Welsh law, subject to the Assembly’s new powers (p35)

The First Minister’s legislative programme for the 2007-08 session set out plans for six LCOs in the following areas:

  • additional learning needs
  • environmental protection and waste management
  • affordable housing
  • Welsh language
  • vulnerable children and child poverty
  • charges for homecare and other non-residential social services

The amount of LCOs being introduced corresponds approximately with the estimate given as to the quantity of LCOs given to the House of Commons Welsh Affairs Select Committee, which was “four or five” LCOs annually (House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee 2007a para 11).

The statement also proposed the following Assembly Measures:

  • National Health Service redress
  • education transport (which has become known as ‘learner travel’)
  • reform of the 14-19 curriculum

Ballots have also taken place for Assembly Members to introduce legislative proposals. The ballot for an Assembly Measure was won by Jenny Randerson (Liberal Democrat), who will be able to introduce a draft Assembly Measure for healthier school meals in Wales. The LCO ballot was won by Ann Jones (Labour), who will be able to introduce a draft LCO enabling Assembly Measures to be made for domestic fire safety (Navarro 2007).

The first reaction to the operation of the Act so far is that the legislative programme for the 2007-08 session is surprisingly modest, particularly given the reach of the legislative ambitions behind the One Wales programme.

Already jurisdictional issues have arisen between devolved and retained matters, with tensions arising between the Assembly and Whitehall. The Assembly’s Enterprise and Learning Committee felt in its report scrutinising the Draft Learner Travel (Wales) Measure that the scope of the draft was too limited, because the Assembly’s legislative competence was too limited, and welcomed the Deputy First Minister‘s undertaking to seek to broaden those powers. Reports have also emerged in the press that two draft LCOs relating to affordable housing, on the one hand, and environmental protection and waste management, on the other, were both thought to be too wide by Whitehall officials. According to the Welsh Assembly Government, the reason for the delay to the affordable housing LCO was to ensure consistency with the Housing and Regeneration Bill announced in the Queen‘s Speech.

Perhaps it was these separate legislative housing developments occurring simultaneously in Cardiff and Whitehall that identified the need to better coordinate the activities of the two. Certainly, the way the system is currently working does not correspond with the intention behind GoWA 2006 to speed up the transfer of powers to the National Assembly (previously such transfers had to compete for time with other Bills before Westminster with LCOs). These tensions are occurring when the government in London and the majority partner in coalition in Cardiff are of the same political hue – differences in the political composition of the governments in London and Cardiff would only exacerbate such tensions.

Involvement of civil society

The National Assembly for Wales has always intended to give a new more active role to civil society. The white paper which led to the 1998 Act said: “The Assembly will operate under maximum openness and public accountability. The Bill establishing will specify the principles on which the Standing Orders must be based. In particular, the Assembly will need to ensure that at all times in working arrangements comply with the principles of openness and accountability” (Welsh Office 1997).

Civil society has two phases of influence – over the Legislative Competence Order and the Assembly Measure. There are signs that civil society is engaging with the Assembly’s work. There were 14 responses to the Proposed Additional Learning Needs LCO, 10 to the Proposed Environmental Protection and Waste Management LCO, and 23 to the Proposed Vulnerable Children and Child Poverty LCO. The types of bodies submitting responses have been charities, environmental groups and public bodies, including NHS Trusts, the Welsh Local Government Association, the British Association of Social Workers, CBI Wales, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the Welsh Association of Chief Police Officers – and a legal academic.

Civil society can also engage with the National Assembly through the use of petitions. The Assembly must consider any admissible petition. Under the Assembly’s Standing Order 28.4 a petition will not be admissible if it:

  1. Contains fewer than 10 signatures
  2. Fails to comply with Standing Order 28.2 [laying down formalities as to names and addresses] or is otherwise not in proper form
  3. Contains language which is offensive
  4. Requests the Assembly to do anything which the Assembly clearly has no power to do
    1. Is the same as, or in substantially similar terms to, a petition which was:
      Presented by or on behalf of the same person, body corporate or unincorporated association during the same Assembly
    2. Closed less than a year earlier

The Assembly’s Presiding Officer takes the decision on the admissibility of petitions, and if it is regarded as admissible it is referred to the Petitions Committee. Under Standing Order 28.9 the committee may:

  1. Refer the petition to the government, any other committee of the Assembly or any other person or body for them to take such action as they consider appropriate
  2. Report to the Assembly
  3. Take any other action which the committee considers appropriate

The committee is obliged to notify the petitioner of any action taken, and it can close a petition at any time (but must notify the petitioner as to the reasons why it is doing so).

As at 5 December 2007 25 petitions have been received by the Petitions Committee. The Committee has drawn on the experience of the Scottish Parliament, which has had a Petitions Committee since its inception. Petitioners should generally have the right to address the Committee directly, and the Committee could look at the matter from the petitioner’s standpoint even if, ultimately, it does not support the action called for.

As is to be expected, the majority of petitions are from community and environmental groups.

The implications for legal education providers

Already there is a body of law in Wales that is substantially different from in England – there are 450 Acts of Parliament giving powers to the National Assembly, 1,600 Statutory Instruments (SIs) and 1,000 pieces of other subordinate legislation. 56% of the National Assembly’s SIs are different or unique compared to England.

With such a body of different legislation, pressure is inevitably mounting for a separate court system for Wales, with cases heard where the laws are made and where the parties often reside. Court of Appeal cases affecting Wales are already being heard in Wales.

The One Wales agreement (2007 p29) commits the Welsh Assembly Government to consider the evidence for the devolution of the criminal justice system within the contexts of devolution of funding and moves towards the establishment of a single administration of justice in Wales. A separate administration of justice is seen by the Counsel General of the Welsh Assembly Government, Carwyn Jones, as a prelude to a separate jurisdiction for Wales, if primary law making powers are achieved through a referendum.

A separate court system obviously has to be supported by a legal profession located within Wales to service the needs of the courts and clients, and there are indications that the profession in Wales will need to expand as a result of devolution, a measure that is likely to be supported by the Welsh Assembly Government for reasons of economic regeneration. The First Minster, Rhodri Morgan, has indicated that he wants some legal work repatriated to Wales, which he links specifically with creating more jobs for lawyers, stating: “Law is a major part of the economy…If there are going to be wealthy, overpaid lawyers in London, there might as well be wealthy, overpaid lawyers bringing spending power into the Welsh economy”. He then stated that an evolution of the profession is needed, which he hoped devolution would help, towards greater specialisation of the profession in Wales. The challenge to legal education providers in Wales is clear – their main paymaster, the Welsh Assembly Government, has made its intentions plain.

Linguistic skills training may also be required. Assembly Measures usually have to be produced in English and Welsh, and the two versions are of equal standing. Terms in legislation are ‘locked’ in English and Welsh, so once a term has been interpreted in one language it will mean the same in the other. Usually the term will be interpreted first in English, so the meaning of the term in the Welsh language version will be locked to the English. However, in exceptional cases the term may be interpreted first in Welsh, thereby locking the meaning of the English language version. In these rare cases, judges and legal practitioners with the requisite linguistic skills will be needed. The question therefore arises whether the legal education providers in Wales produce graduates with the necessary linguistic skills?

Despite a large increase in Welsh medium education at the primary and secondary level, this has not fully percolated upwards to the higher education level. During the Second Assembly the Welsh Assembly Government set a target of 7% of students receiving some element of their course delivered through the medium of Welsh by 2010 (Welsh Assembly Government 2002 p21). This compares with 3% of higher education students receiving some form of bilingual higher education in 1999-2000 (p15). However, research has pointed to Welsh language skills shortages amongst law lecturers that might make achieving the target in legal studies difficult (MaLEW 2003).

The involvement of civil society in law making in Wales could also have implications for legal education providers. Charities and community groups will frequently lack the resources and access to expert advice they will need to make their case forcefully to the Assembly, and could well look to relationships with academia to help them.

Devolution has already seen law schools in Wales respond, in terms of their research and other activities as well as curriculum development. Cardiff Law School has created the Wales Legislation Online service, originally funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Board but now fully funded by the Assembly Parliamentary Service and the Welsh Assembly Government. Representatives of law schools in Wales gave expert evidence to the National Assembly’s Committee on Standing Orders when it was preparing new Standing Orders to take into account the Government of Wales Act 2006.

Although it is very early in the process, there are signs that academics based in Wales will respond to the involvement of civil society in Assembly law making. Already one academic based in a Welsh law school has given evidence to a pre-legislative scrutiny Assembly committee (Osian Dafydd Rees of Bangor University, on the Proposed Vulnerable Children LCO).

These are examples of how devolved government may look to new ways of interacting with academia, especially when the population is small and its powers are increasing, however questions must arise as to whether devolution is adequately covered on the typical law syllabus in law schools in England and Wales.

Does the average first year law undergraduate really understand the substantial differences that now exist between the laws of England and Wales, and the complex process for transferring powers to the National Assembly, when many legal academics and practitioners are unsure of these developments? Already the system is being described as ‘quasi federal’ (Bogdanor 2003) – are law undergraduates aware of this, and the dynamic nature of devolution in Wales, which currently seems to be moving in the direction of primary law making powers and a separate legal jurisdiction in Wales?

Even locating the law as it applies in Wales is complex. Law in Wales can now be derived from a bewildering array of sources:

  • Acts of the UK Parliament (which may or may not be specific to Wales)
  • Wales-only Acts of Parliament
  • Provisions adding to Schedule 5 Government of Wales Act 2006
  • Measures made by the National Assembly under Orders in Council or UK Acts
  • Legislative Competence Orders
  • subordinate legislation made in Whitehall (which may or may not apply specifically to Wales), subordinate legislation made by Welsh Ministers under Acts of the UK Parliament
  • subordinate legislation made by Welsh Ministers under Assembly Measures
  • subordinate legislation made by the Assembly Commission, Presiding Officer under Acts or under Assembly Measures or Whitehall subordinate legislation

Unsurprisingly, there are calls for a separate Welsh Legislation Book.

As an example, to discover all the law relating to council tax rebates in Wales would require looking at 20 different pieces of legislation. This is a challenge to legal education providers, who should ensure that their students have the necessary high order legal research skills to cope with this complex and increasingly divergent approach to law making within the single jurisdiction of England and Wales. It is also a challenge for the average citizen wishing to ascertain their legal position, placing a strain on the voluntary sector which often has to advise on the law, as well participate in the law making process.

These are legal problems. To fully understand the way devolution operates in a legal sense it is necessary to have some awareness of the political context in which it operates and the impact of the tensions between Cardiff and Whitehall. It has already been shown that these tensions have the ability to slow down the passage of LCOs. Given that one of the Act’s purposes was to speed up the transfer of powers to the National Assembly, can GoWA 2006 be properly understood without some awareness of the political context of devolution? If the reports that Whitehall has been seeking to narrow the scope of LCOs emanating from the Assembly (when one of the aims of GoWA 2006 was to widen the Assembly’s powers in devolved areas) are correct, then it can only be fully understood as a political contest between central and regional government. Is the way devolution currently taught adequately conveying this political context?

Many of these challenges are not confined to legal education providers in Wales. It would be facile for a student studying in England with the intention of practising law in England to think that this was of no relevance to them. For example, when in legal practice they may have clients who are based in England but carry out operations in Wales, and are therefore affected by the differences in legislation between England and Wales.

There may be other reasons why legal education providers in England might want to follow events in Wales. The proposal to create nine Parliamentary select committees following the appointment of nine Regional Ministers on 28 June 2007 could mean that the English regions are now making the first steps to executive devolution that were started in Wales in 1907, and that they have much to learn by looking at the Welsh experience.

References

Last Modified: 9 July 2010

©UKCLE 2000-2010 UK Centre for Legal Education