Despite different job titles, they have the same powers. But in January , the two parties re-entered the devolved government after agreeing to work together again, alongside three smaller parties - the Ulster Unionists, SDLP and Alliance.
Over the past 20 years, more powers have been given to local and regional mayors in areas like transport and housing. The first was the mayor of London. The position was created, alongside the London Assembly, after a referendum in The London mayor decides how much money to spend and sets priorities in some key areas. For example, the mayor can set bus and Tube fares, and decide targets for the number of affordable homes. Mayors in other parts of the country were added following referendums held in and They have different powers depending on the areas they represent.
In Greater Manchester, for example, the mayor's powers extend to social care, children's services and housing. Johnson 'called Scottish devolution a disaster'.
Will Covid shift power in England for good? The executive powers and functions of the Assembly as created under the Government of Wales Act , including the power to make subordinate legislation, were transferred to Welsh ministers.
You can read the detailed guide on the devolution settlement and Devolution Act for Scotland. You can read the detailed guide on the devolution settlement and Devolution Act for Northern Ireland. Updated the page to reflect the new settlement which came into force on the 1 April To help us improve GOV. It will take only 2 minutes to fill in. Cookies on GOV. UK We use some essential cookies to make this website work.
Accept additional cookies Reject additional cookies View cookies. Hide this message. Home Devolution. Guidance Devolution settlement: Wales. Featured content. Free courses. All content. Course content. About this free course 8 hours study. Level 2: Intermediate. Course rewards. Free statement of participation on completion of these courses.
Create your free OpenLearn profile. Course content Course content. That puts us at a competitive disadvantage compared with other parts of the UK, and we look to the UK Government now to correct this. Wales can compete with anyone, but we need a level playing field. For its part, the UK government argued that any movement on funding would have to wait for an improvement in the public finances, in line with its austerity policies. Members of the Holtham Commission did considerable detailed work on how a new system of finance for Wales might work, and in the process they focused attention on the depth of the economic problems faced by Wales.
This was the gap between the tax revenue raised in Wales, including local government taxation, and the total amount of public spending specific to Wales. The Holtham report was welcomed by a Scottish observer, James Mitchell, as an excellent example of how devolution ought to work, and a sign of how far things had progressed in Wales.
He noted that:. In truth, Wales has travelled a greater distance than Scotland since In other words, a fairer distribution would switch major resources from one devolved part of the UK to another. He continued that:. In Wales, it is widely understood that the Barnett formula is unlikely to be changed, in view of the negative effect this would have on opinion in Scotland, especially at a very delicate point in the debate around Scottish independence.
This brought together a high-flying team including a retired University Vice-Chancellor, the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of a major Welsh financial institution one of the few the Principality Building Society, as well as the by now usual representation from the four Welsh political parties, under the chairmanship of the former Clerk to the National Assembly, Paul Silk.
The group, inevitably known as the Silk Commission, was heavy on financial expertise, and its secretary, provided by the Treasury, was an acknowledged expert on the Barnett formula. This seemed appropriate, since its terms of reference were firstly to look at the provision of tax raising powers for the National Assembly, and secondly to consider any further constitutional changes needed to improve the combined working of the UK and Welsh governments.
However, neither reform of the Barnett formula nor granting of borrowing powers were to be considered, while pursuit of the unfinished business of a larger Assembly and a different voting system was also ruled out. It appeared that some kind of deal had been done behind the scenes to remove the more contentious issues from examination, and handle them instead through bilateral negotiations.
In the process, much of the work done by Holtham had been set aside. When the Silk Commission reported in , after a process of consultation, it laid out what it felt to be the principles on which an acceptable funding system must rest: accountability; autonomy; cooperation and constructive engagement between the UK Government and the devolved administrations; economic incentivisation; efficiency; empowerment; equity; fiscal discipline; simplicity; stability, predictability and sustainability; transparency.
As well as affording greater control over its budget, this would increase public interest in the work of the Assembly, and give the Welsh Government a bigger incentive to grow the Welsh economy. In the interests of financial accountability and empowerment, responsibility for a range of additional taxes should also be transferred. The Welsh Government would need to manage any consequences that these variations in taxation might have for movements of people and business across the Welsh-English border.
The implementation of these financial changes was understood to be contingent upon the discovery of a solution to the issue of fair funding between the Welsh and UK governments. In a follow-up report in the Commission went on to consider what further aspects of devolution might be necessary, and suggested that as well as supervision of large energy projects, Wales should assume control of policing and the youth justice system.
In view of the added work this would entail for the Assembly, the report revisited the recommendation of the Richard Commission and recommended that the number of AMs should be increased from 60 to Section Talking to students at the London School of Economics in , as part of a lecture series on the Future of the Union, the Welsh First Minister Carwyn Jones summed up the current condition of devolution in Wales.
However, many loose ends remain to be tidied up. For example, Ministers in the Welsh Government ought to be able to exercise some borrowing powers, in order to finance large capital projects. The UK treasury has been very reluctant to see this happen, and exercises a tighter control over the Welsh Government than applies to lower level local authorities.
Responsibility for a number of taxes, such as stamp duty on housing, and the aggregate levy, should be handed over to Wales, as they have been to Scotland. With regard to powers to vary income tax, this has not been put as a possibility to the Welsh people, and in his opinion is probably unnecessary and possibly unworkable, given the porous nature of the boundary between Wales and England. The other taxes should provide sufficient financial leverage for the devolved government. There was however a very strong case for reviewing the general funding situation, and replacing the Barnett formula, which advantaged Scotland over Wales.
In a pointed comment, the First Minister also said it would be unacceptable if the final outcome of devolution left any one part of the UK permanently disadvantaged due to an accidental factor such as the presence or absence of offshore oil. So far as the constitutional position was concerned, the time had come for a definitive resolution.
The main requirement was to shift to a situation in which the Welsh Assembly was able to take charge of all the business of government, except those aspects explicitly reserved for Westminster.
This reserved powers settlement would put Wales on an equal footing with Scotland. Steps should also be taken to address Welsh representation in bodies like the House of Lords the upper chamber of parliament , the Supreme Court, and in Europe. In other words, the new emphasis on the territoriality of political structures in the British Isles should be properly embedded in the Constitution. This could be accomplished by a Constitutional Convention, called after the results of the Scottish referendum on independence.
As for the people of Wales, they had shown no appetite for independence. It is a message which he has repeated in numerous subsequent speeches. Return to Session Whether driven by motives of national recognition, greater self-determination, or more effective government, devolution is based on a belief in difference.
There would be little point in creating separate political and administrative arrangements if they did not help bring about some significant future divergence — in the formation of policies, delivery of services, or the structure of institutions.
In the British case, however, remarkably little thought has been given as to where this process might eventually lead. In plain terms, what will people do with devolution or independence once they have it?
The answer is likely to rest with whatever gives them a sense of direction. It is no coincidence that the period of devolution we have been considering has also seen an outpouring of discussion and debate around question of identity — what does it mean to be Welsh or Scottish, English, etc. In broad terms, one might say that a Welsh identity is an expression of the distinctive history and experiences undergone by Welsh people, a sort of repository of attitudes, assumptions, and preferences they have inherited.
This gives them a baseline from which to assess and select among possible futures, and they will do so differently from other people whose history and experience has b een different. Moving away from the machinery of devolution, is it possible to see evidence for this Welshness in the actual outcomes from devolution so far? Although not expressed directly in terms of Welsh values, the speech came close to identifying them.
Supposedly borrowing a phrase from the Guardian newspaper, although actually one which he had used himself some years earlier Moon, , p. Examples he gave were free nursery places for three-year olds, and free bus passes for the elderly and disabled. This meant that, with appropriate encouragement, such communities were capable of finding their own solutions to common problems. Whereas the first set of ideas fits well with policies to encourage free market provision, consumerism, and self-interest, the second offers a way forward which is oriented more to public services, collective participation, and consensus.
Clearly they strike a chord amongst a Welsh audience. We should therefore be able to take advantage of small scale to make big decisions. Break-up of the UK is 'inevitable' without a switch to a federal system, leading political expert warns ' Welsh people have been failed by Labour — time to consult them '.
The difference underlying social policy decisions in Wales and the rest of the UK are also referred to by Mark Drakeford in his audio contribution to The Open University course DD Making and exploring Welsh social lives.
Good afternoon, Mark, thank you very much for coming in. MD: Well, my own view would be that the first and main thing that devolution has achieved in its first decade has been to secure, in the minds of people in Wales, the fact that we are capable as a nation of taking charge of our own domestic affairs. And ten years later, it seems to me that the evidence from opinion polling and other sources is that, by and large, people now regard the Assembly as a fixed and permanent part of the democratic landscape in Wales.
DM: And who do you think have been the main beneficiaries of devolution, and which groups do think have gained the least? There are groups you can see who you can point to things where direct benefits have been secured: older people with things like free bus passes, patients in the health service have much reduced waiting times, the fact that the Welsh economy outstripped the rest of the United Kingdom economy during the first eight years of devolution and has weathered the storm of the downturn in better shape as a result of devolution than maybe otherwise.
So I think you can easily enough identify groups who have done reasonably out of devolution. MD: In terms of groups that have not done so well, I suppose my own view would be that it tends to be those groups who, in any case, are the hardest to reach in any form of democracy or social policy. Just like we have a stubbornly long tail in terms of educational achievement in some of our schools.
But in some ways those are not difficulties associated directly with devolution. Do you think that the Welsh Assembly has enhanced diverse voices? MD: Yes, I think that would be, for me, one of the big claims for devolution which has been borne out over the subsequent decade. It was always one of the claims in the very beginning: that by bringing government closer to people in Wales, it would be easier for a wider range of voices to be influential in the way that government was conducted here.
It is difficult to argue against the proposition that with sixty elected politicians who you can go and see and you can go and meet, there lies a very different sort of engagement than was possible when you had three ministers based in the Welsh Office but essentially pursuing their careers in London rather than in Wales. So access is easier in itself. So I do think it is one of the claims that you can see borne out over the last ten years. DM: So you feel that the Welsh Assembly is now much more accessible to a wide range of groups?
MD: Well, I think, probably the way to put it would be that it is a good deal more accessible to a certain circle. How far those ripples go out, how far they reach people who are not in that already engaged position, I think is a slightly more open question, because I think, for those organisations who were already interested, and wanting to participate, and had geared themselves up to be effective, there is no doubt that you have a greater plurality of voices and purposes.
When you go beyond that circle, then, maybe, well no, quite certainly, there is further distance to travel. DM: Do you think the actual structure, the actual physical building, the Welsh Assembly, has an influence?
MD: Well, I think it does for people who go there. I mean, if you go there on a Tuesday or Wednesday afternoon and you sit in the public spaces, you will see Assembly members, you will see Assembly ministers walking through, back and forth, to the chambers, you can simply go up and talk to people. Do you think there are other differences in terms of social policy? In the United Kingdom, the essential contest over the years is between a party of the right and a party that regards itself as left of centre.
At the Assembly, three-quarters of the members belong to parties that describe themselves as being to the left of centre, so a contest over political ideas, of political space in Wales happens in a different sort of place on the political spectrum. And that leads to different sorts of social policy outcomes, I think. So, although all the governments to date have been Labour-led, I think some of the distinguishing features of social policy in Wales are rooted in beliefs that will be shared more widely across the greater number of parties represented at the Assembly.
DM: How do you think devolution in the Welsh Assembly will evolve? What are you looking for in the future and expecting? MD: Well, the immediate future, I guess, remains caught up in two main things. On the one hand, there is the prospect of a referendum on part four of the Government of Wales Act which would transfer a greater degree of primary law-making capacity to the Assembly, putting it closer to, but not exactly on a par with, the Scottish Parliament as far as law-making powers is concerned.
DM: Well, thank you very much for giving us an insight into devolution in Wales. It was very nice to meet you, and diolch yn fawr. DM: Thank you. Paul Chaney and Mark Drakeford have talked about the nature of a devolved social order, and the ways in which ordered lives are produced and maintained in Wales.
The example of Welsh devolution can help us think about political ordering as an ongoing process of renewal and repair. You can extend your knowledge of Wales and consider the nation ad its people from a social science perspective by referring to the course text, Making and Exploring Welsh Social Lives.
Hwyl fawr,goodbye. One way in which this perspective can be mobilised to produce real effects is to use it to exercise the power of veto — that is, to reject developments which are felt to be out of keeping with the ethos of policy making and delivery in Wales.
For example, efforts to extend private involvement in funding major capital developments the Private Finance Initiative, PFI or to privatise provision in health care Foundation Hospitals or education Academies and Free Schools have all been declared unsuitable for Welsh conditions.
Speaking on BBC news in Rhodri Morgan repeated that a model based on competitive choice and provision through the market did not suit either the geography or the social values of Wales Moon , p. His point about the geography of Wales was that there were many small communities and few large urban centres, requiring a different approach to services from that which worked across the border in England. For this reason, a more localised model was needed, catering to particular communities, rather than an extension of individual choice, which explained the decision to replace five health authorities with 22 local health boards, one for each local authority.
In other contexts, the anti-competitive argument has been used to resist changes which might fragment and diversify Welsh provision. For example, the system of comprehensive education established earlier and more completely in Wales than in England has been defended against the various experiments aimed at weakening the power of local education authorities in England.
For example, Moon describes the decision to prioritise a public health agenda which would address the poor state of health and high levels of long-term illness in Wales, by indirect means good education, transport, housing, and employment as well as direct free primary school meals, free dental checks for the oldest and youngest age groups, and free medical prescriptions , rather than target hospital waiting lists and medical interventions.
Opposition to a target-driven culture was also apparent in the decision not to adopt school league tables and a regime of frequent testing for achievement. More recently, using its new powers to pass Welsh laws, the Government has introduced a Housing Act, which received unanimous support from the Assembly for its general principles. These include greater regulation of the private rented sector, stronger local powers to deal with homelessness, a duty to provide sites for Gypsies and Travellers, and powers to charge more council tax for empty properties.
The Government has committed itself to helping build 7, affordable homes and bring another 5, empty properties back into use over the next four years, working mainly with the social housing and cooperative sector. The thinking behind these proposals is markedly different from the values and objectives which surround housing policy made in Westminster, with its emphasis on private sector provision and restrictive penalties for private tenants living on benefits.
The benefits go way beyond the roof over our heads. It's central to good health and well-being. A good home represents the best possible start in life for children, and is the foundation for strong, safe and fair communities. It also has an important role to play in the economy.
A commitment to equality of access to education is exemplified in the retention of the educational maintenance allowance for young people abolished in England and the decision to set university tuition fees for Welsh students below the English level. In the UK context, this decision creates a number of interesting anomalies.
Students from Wales can exercise their choice to take their grant with them to study at English universities. Evidence suggests that growing numbers are doing so, while applications to Welsh universities from Wales have fallen. The Welsh government argues that Wales receives more back in money brought into Wales by students from other parts of the UK.
In Scotland, residents are also subsidised, but only if they study at Scottish universities which by tradition a much higher proportion do.
The Welsh academic who has twice reviewed HE funding for the Welsh Government makes the separate point that the main beneficiaries of the policy are children of the Welsh middle classes, whereas the money could be better spent on widening participation. A similar point could be made about the redistributive consequences between poor and rich in relation to universal free prescriptions and travel passes.
Decisions of this sort have interesting, and not always intended, consequences. There is also a rapidly expanding body of literature, conventional and digital, describing and analysing these developments. For a comment on John Osmond's contribution see Section In his speech, Rhodri Morgan expressed hopes that devolution would create laboratory-like conditions, in which innovation and experimentation in one devolved territory could provide valuable lessons for the others.
However, when administrations are marching to the beat of different political and ideological drums, this is unlikely to occur. Instead policy differences become grounds for contention. Health and education especially have become political battlegrounds caught up in UK-wide controversy. He was referring to alleged differences in waiting times between English and Welsh hospitals, and differences in the funding of cancer care.
In the same speech he also drew attention to problems in Welsh educational attainments, pointing to international comparative data OECD Programme of International Student Assessment, or PISA showing that Welsh children were slipping in the rankings, performing below average in reading, maths and science. In the ensuing slanging match each side made selective use of evidence to prove their case, reflecting different priorities and standards of judgement. In that speech, it was suggested that a very close overlap, if not identity, existed between the values of social democracy, the creation of a new sense of Welsh citizenship, and by implication at least popular identification with the Labour Party in Wales — described by Morgan as neither Old nor New Labour, but Welsh Labour.
The speech highlighted two key elements in further developing these relationships: the provision of universal benefits available to all Welsh citizens, and a process of close and open engagement with members of the public. Exposure to independent and rigorous scrutiny of the sort represented by the Nuffield Trust report on Health and the PISA statistics on education is an inescapable consequence of taking responsibility, and sometimes it can throw up uncomfortable truths.
0コメント