Wales backs Scottish bid to stop ‘grab’ of powers
THE Welsh Government will this week back the Scottish Government in its bid to stop Westminster grabbing powers it believes should be devolved to coincide with Brexit.
The move comes despite a compromise reached between the UK and Welsh governments, under which Westminster will retain powers that would normally come to Wales for seven years.
For two days from tomorrow the Supreme Court in London will listen to legal arguments about whether the Scottish Parliament is able to pass a law stopping the “power grab”.
At first, both the Scottish and Welsh governments objected to the UK Government’s decision to grab a range of powers that would normally pass from the EU to the devolved administrations at the time of Brexit. Among the powers were regulations relating to farm payments and environmental issues.
The UK Government says there should be common regulations covering the whole of the UK relating to some issues, but the Scottish and Welsh governments argued that, while it may be desirable to have common frameworks, they should be negotiated between equal partners rather than imposed by Westminster.
As in Scotland, the Senedd passed a Bill aimed at ensuring that the powers came to Wales. However, following negotiations between the UK and Welsh governments, the latter agreed to an arrangement under which powers could be retained at Westminster for up to seven years. Now, however, the Welsh Government has made a written submission to the Supreme Court backing a similar deal for Scotland to the one it pulled back from for Wales.
In a written statement to AMs, Counsel General Jeremy Miles said: “This case raises issues of constitutional importance across the United Kingdom and the different devolution frameworks.
“The Welsh Government’s participation is not about our own [Continuity Act]. Through the changes to the EU (Withdrawal) Act and an Intergovernmental Agreement, we have secured protections of devolution in Wales and made sure laws and policy areas which are currently devolved remain devolved.”
Mr Miles makes four points in support of the Scottish Government’s case: “Firstly I strongly contend that leaving the EU will see all those powers in devolved areas which currently sit with the EU, for example in relation to agricultural support, no longer being constrained by EU law. It is for the Assembly to determine where, if at all, it wishes to ‘pool’ any of those powers through common UK wide frameworks.
“The second issue relates to the legislative practicalities of withdrawal. My case states that legislating for the domestic consequences of withdrawal from the EU, where those consequences relate to matters which are not reserved, falls squarely within the legislative competence of the Assembly and not within the international relations reservation [as argued by the UK Government].
“Thirdly, I contend that it is perfectly within the Assembly’s competence to legislate in advance of exit in order to make the changes which need to be in place from day one after the UK leaves the EU.
“The fourth point in my case deals with the scope of the courts’ common law power to review Assembly legislation.
“The Supreme Court made it clear that where the democratically elected devolved legislatures act within the scope of the devolution frameworks laid down by Parliament, their acts are reviewable by the courts only on very limited grounds... The Scottish Continuity Bill is not, in my submission, legislation of that extreme kind.”
Plaid Cymru parliamentary leader Liz Saville Roberts said: “We are now in the bizarre situation where the Welsh Government are fighting a case which would undermine the deal they did with the Tories on powers, before it has even come into force.
“Labour’s shortsighted and chaotic approach to Brexit is being shown up on a daily basis – in Westminster they are voting with the Tories to deliver a hard Brexit and now they will be fighting a court case against an agreement they signed up to.”