By Civil Service World

12 Apr 2010

Welsh devolution has brought many benefits, says Hywel Francis. But it could bring more if its mechanics were better understood in Whitehall


The coming of democratic devolution to Wales in 1999 was the biggest constitutional change in the governance of the country since the Act of Union of 1536. Since that momentous devolution settlement, responsibility for Welsh devolution strategy and policy has moved  around between different departments.

In the last year, the Welsh affairs committee (which I chair), the Scottish affairs committee and the Justice committee have all examined Whitehall’s relationship with devolved administrations. All three committees concluded that awareness of the devolution settlements is not uniform across Whitehall, and that Whitehall has not fully engaged with the complex nature of the devolution settlements. After an initial burst of concentration following the 1999 Acts, Whitehall has too often displayed a poor knowledge and understanding of the specificities of the individual settlements.

The absence of a strong centre in relation to devolution within the UK government prevents the UK from taking a co-ordinated view of devolution. A hub is needed in central government for it to manage effectively the devolution settlement, and the Welsh affairs committee concluded that this role should belong to the Cabinet Office.

Within the civil service, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the extent of the differences between the settlements for Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, and not enough understanding that the differences in constitutional arrangements have implications for policy and legislation. Too often civil servants have concentrated too much on Scotland or failed to distinguish between the Scottish and Welsh settlements in dealing with devolution. They often misunderstand the situation in Wales because they “read-across” from the Scottish settlement. The devolved administrations are not just another set of Whitehall departments, and the civil service needs to recognise this.

When looking at the relationship between Wales and Whitehall, we heard evidence that particular risks occur when civil servants fail to recognise where a subject is ostensibly non-devolved (such as social security or defence) but impacts on devolved subjects (for example health, education); make broad-brush assumptions that where substantial parts of a subject are non-devolved (e.g. energy, employment law), all of it is; assume that what goes for Scotland, goes for Wales; and fail to recognise geographical boundaries.

Not all the problems, however, can be laid at the doors of Whitehall departments. For example, the civil servants of the Welsh Assembly Government have also had to learn new ways of doing things in the last 10 years. They must strive to establish both good working relationships with Whitehall and the confidence to interact with London-based civil servants.

The three reports proposed solutions to the problems raised in the various inquiries, and recognised that there are already some signs of an increased awareness of the devolution settlements in Whitehall. The Welsh affairs committee concluded that the civil service needs more consistent training and a clear department-by-department focus on retaining knowledge and understanding. There must be increased training opportunities for all senior civil servants, with devolution awareness forming a core part of their training. We also recommended that devolution experts, or ‘senior champions’ are established in relevant departments.

Secondments are also a valuable tool to provide knowledge and experience to individuals and to the institutions where they are placed. The Welsh affairs committee recommended that a formal mechanism for secondments between Wales and Whitehall and other devolved administrations should be established.

I welcome the preliminary work of the review of departments’ awareness of devolution, commissioned by the Permanent Secretaries Management Group in 2009. Early findings confirm that the key themes to emerge are issues of resources; knowledge; internal communications and training; and the relationship with the Welsh Assembly Government. I look forward to action being taken to deal with the deficiencies identified. The cabinet secretary is key and I welcome his clear commitment to making devolution work.

On the positive side, closer working between Members of Parliament and Assembly Members, as well as ministers and civil servants at both ends of the M4, have all been welcome features in recent years. My appearance before the National Assembly’s constitutional affairs committee was a first for a Welsh MP, and I hope that it signals a growing partnership approach between the two legislatures.

The effective operation of the settlement is best ensured by mutual knowledge and understanding. Elected politicians, ministers, civil servants and officials of the government and the devolved administrations all contribute to the building of effective relationships. Devolution is working, but it could work better.

Read the most recent articles written by Civil Service World - 'What keeps you awake at night?': A guide to the government risk management profession

Share this page