Want to keep up to date on Welsh politics? Sign up and get political news sent straight to your inbox Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

UK Government legal advisors have identified five laws passed by the National Assembly that would require the consent of a Westminster minister under the new devolution settlement put forward by the Wales Office.

Laws covering areas such as organ donation, food hygiene and the Welsh language would need the agreement of a UK minister because the legislation affected bodies for which the Assembly is not responsible.

This analysis comes as MPs and AMs scrutinise the UK Government’s draft Wales Bill .

It is designed to put the Assembly on a Scottish-style footing so that AMs are allowed to make laws in any area not “reserved” by Westminster. However, if Assembly legislation seeks to put responsibilities on individuals or organisations in such an area consent from a UK minister will be required.

The UK Government’s analysis follows one by the Welsh Government which raised concerns that 25 pieces of legislation could be affected.

The acts are

1. Food Hygiene Rating (Wales) Act 2013

The Wales Office legal advisors state: “The imposition of functions on the Food Standards Agency (FSA) would have breached the restriction on imposing functions on reserved authorities... Minister of the Crown consent would have been needed. The FSA would be a reserved authority in the new model... [Secretary of State] consent would therefore be needed... which would likely be given.”

Read more:

2. Human Transplantation (Wales) Act 2013

According to the advisors: “Although this provision would require [Secretary of State] consent [such] consent would likely have been forthcoming. This is evidenced by the fact the [Welsh Secretary] took forward the Human Transplantation (Wales) Act 2013 (Consequential Provision) Order 2015 so that tissue collected from patients in Wales could be used elsewhere in the UK, even though the consent provisions differ, and vice versa.”

Related:

3. Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011

The legislation applies to bodies such as the Bank of England, the Charity Commission and Government departments.

The advisors say: “Named authorities in the new model could not have functions imposed on them by the Assembly, and thus could not be subject to the standards if the Bill were passed under the new model. In future, an Order made by the Secretary of State under [would] be the appropriate mechanism to modify the standards regime as it applies to named authorities.

“It would now be necessary to obtain [the Secretary of State’s] consent to impose duties (standards) on reserved authorities.”

Read more:

4. Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014

According to the legal advisors: “The reservations for crime, public order and policing prevent the Assembly from creating provisions that have those matters as their purpose... As police forces are reserved authorities under the new model, [Secretary of State] consent would now be necessary for compulsory membership and contributions to the funding of boards by police forces in Wales.

Related:

5. Housing (Wales) Act 2014

The Wales Office advisors say: “[This] Act confers functions on certain bodies in England which would be reserved authorities in the new model... As such, [this section] would need [Secretary of State] consent but this would likely have been forthcoming.

In a letter to David Davies , the chairman of the Welsh Affairs select committee, Welsh Secretary Stephen Crabb writes: “Our analysis has determined that 20 of the 25 Assembly Acts the first minister has identified as being blocked by the new model could in fact have been made in exactly the same way – that is, either without any requirement for UK Government consent or with the same consents being required as now. The remaining five include the need for UK Government consent for the Assembly to modify the functions of a reserved body.

“I strongly believe that the new reserved powers model should be underpinned by the principle of a clear separation between devolved and reserved powers. It is right that the UK Government consents to any changes in the functions of reserved bodies that the Welsh Government wishes to make, just as the UK Government seeks the consent of the Assembly (through a Legislative Consent Motion) if parliament seeks to legislate in devolved areas.

Read more:

The 'English veto'

A spokesman for First Minister Carwyn Jones said: “We are very confident in our own analysis, which has received widespread support across the political spectrum in Wales. It is interesting to note however, that even by Wales Office’ own interpretation the proposed English veto on Welsh laws could have been activated five times.

“We will be presenting our own evidence to the committee and the first minister is appearing on Monday when these matters will be discussed further.”

'Blocked progress'

Plaid Cymru’s Liz Saville Roberts MP said: “I am pleased that the Wales Office has admitted that the Draft Wales Bill in its current form would have blocked progress on vital issues such as health and child protection. This includes legislation such as the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 and the Human Transplantation (Wales) Act 2013.

“In the case of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act, the Draft Wales Bill would have hampered the appointment of a chief officer of police as a partner on safeguarding boards, due to policing being a reserved matter in Westminster. It is self-evidently important that a matter such as safeguarding boards to protect children would be ineffective without a senior police officer.

“Having consulted with experts and professionals within this field, it is no wonder that the Silk Commission recommended the devolution of policing. It is deeply regrettable that this recommendation fell on deaf ears.

“This is not simply a dry constitutional debate as so often wrongly framed – it is a debate about making sure that the powers which directly impact people’s lives are housed in the institution where they will be implemented most effectively.