The Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee produced a report into Welsh Labour Government’s handling of public appointments. It produced 20 evidence-based recommendations, asking for clear reforms to the Public Bodies Unit, improved transparency and stronger accountability. In response to this, the Welsh Government came back with a 35-page response but the commitments were vague and, in many cases, there was outright refusal to change.
This is yet another example of a cross-party Committee putting forward recommendations to the Welsh Labour Government, only to have their findings dismissed and no action being taken.
James Evans MS said in the Senedd Chamber on Wednesday (25/06/2025):
“The Public Accounts and Public Administration Committee has produced a damning report on the Welsh Government’s handling of public appointments—and rightly so. What it reveals is not just poor process but a culture of complacency and control, where scrutiny is side-stepped, concerns are routinely ignored, and appointments are treated as a private matter for ministers, not a public duty.
“We see ministers making appointments under so-called "exceptional provisions" with increasing frequency. That phrase, "exceptional", is starting to look like business as usual. The Committee raises this clearly: ministers push through appointments regardless of concerns raised by Members. And who are they appointing? The same faces. Again and again. Roles rotate between a small, familiar group of people, with limited competition and no public explanation.
“This system does not reward merit or open the door to new voices. It rewards proximity—people known to ministers, recycled between roles, handed serious responsibility without the scrutiny the public expects or deserves.
“A truly independent public appointments process is vital for public trust, yet the report highlights a disturbing pattern of appointments where strong political affiliations appear to go unscrutinised. This revolving door of familiar faces, sometimes with clear party ties, raises serious questions about meritocracy and whether individuals are truly independent of government influence.
“If Ministers are serious about good governance, then prove it. Start by treating scrutiny not as a formality but as a foundation. Honour transparency. Respect committees. And end the revolving door of public appointments that puts familiarity before fairness.”
