Senedd hears future generations law ‘lacks teeth'
The Senedd's equality committee took evidence as part of follow-up scrutiny a decade on from the Welsh parliament passing the Well-being of Future Generations Act in 2015.
Labour's Mick Antoniw warned the Act, which aims to put sustainable development at the heart of decision making, lacks impetus and risks being a "bureaucratic tick-box exercise'.
Mr Antoniw, who was involved in early stages of scrutiny of the then-bill, said: 'It started off… as a sustainability bill until no one could actually define what they meant by sustainability… came up with the term future generations and… that might be seen to be equally nebulous.'
As well as describing the Act as vague, the former minister suggested Wales' future generations commissioner has few – if any – powers to hold public bodies to account.
He said: 'I always thought that was a mistake right from the beginning, [you] don't give it proper teeth to actually have the impact that shifts decision making.'
Calvin Jones, an environmental economist, said the commissioner and his predecessor told him their only 'big stick' is to 'name and shame' which they are reluctant to do. 'As soon as you get the stick out, people take their eyes off the carrot,' he said.
'There's this constant tension between wanting to chivvy the laggards along but realising once you get a reputation as somebody who's an auditor effectively then games start being played and boxes start being ticked.
'That tension has always stymied the way in which the commissioners have been prepared to name and shame which was, I think, the only serious bit of teeth in the Act.'
Prof Jones, who left Cardiff University in May, suggested Audit Wales should have more of a role in holding public bodies to account in a similar way to their bookkeeping duties.
He warned of a major lack of funding for the commissioner's office, describing the money allocated by the Welsh Government as akin to using a sticking plaster on the Titanic.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
44 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Baby boomers to open up even bigger wealth gap over working families
Baby boomer pensioners are set to get even wealthier under Labour as working families struggle, new analysis shows. Pensioners will be £1,500 better off on average over this parliament, research by the Resolution Foundation shows. The boost to pensioners' disposable incomes after inflation and housing costs means they will fare significantly better than other groups. Families with children will see no improvement to their incomes by 2030, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer's promise to raise living standards across the country. Sir Keir has made delivering higher living standards a key 'milestone' for this parliament, promising in December to raise 'living standards in every part of the United Kingdom so working people have more money in their pocket'. When looking across all households, the Resolution Foundation said disposable income will only rise marginally by 1pc over five years, a cash boost of £300 that the think tank described as 'bleak'. Adam Corlett, from the Resolution Foundation, said: 'There are winners and losers within this weak outlook. Pensioner incomes [are] set to grow by a healthy 5pc over the rest of the decade, while the poorest half of the population are set to see their incomes fall.' The growing disparity between mainly retired baby boomers and younger families will further inflame a tense political debate about generational inequality. Boomers are the wealthiest generation, with the prospects for millennials and Gen-Zs underwhelming by comparison. It follows a period described by the Resolution Foundation as 'bust and boom' for living standards, with years of no pay growth followed by a sudden spurt last year. Mr Corlett said: 'The living standards story of the decade so far has been bust and boom, with Covid-19 and a cost of living crisis followed by a much-needed recovery last year. But the rest of the decade looks bleak.' He added: 'A stronger economy and the right policy interventions can brighten this outlook. Maintaining strong wage growth and returning to pre-pandemic employment levels would make middle-income Britain far better off, while ending the two-child [benefit] limit can lift living standards for poorer families.' The research found people who own their home outright – typically babyboomers – will be far better off in coming years than those still paying down their mortgage. Their incomes are on average set to rise by 3pc by the end of the decade. Mortgaged homeowners will meanwhile see their disposable incomes fall by 1pc, as they feel the slow burn of much higher interest rates than in the recent past. Improving fortunes for pensioners come after the Prime Minister was forced into a humiliating about-turn on winter fuel payment cuts for the elderly. The Resolution Foundation said Sir Keir could improve living standards for more people by ending the two-child benefit cap, a move that would raise average incomes for the poorest half of the country by £200. The number of children in relative poverty is set to hit a record 4.8m on Sir Keir's watch despite pledges to reduce it, the Resolution Foundation said. The think tank called for Sir Keir to fund the axing of the two-child cap by mounting a stealth raid on workers by extending the freeze on tax brackets. A Treasury spokesman said: 'Since July, real wages have grown more than in the entire first decade of the last government, our commitment to economic stability has helped interest rates to fall four times, we have protected working people's payslips from higher taxes, froze fuel duty, increased the national living and minimum wage and in the latest data, and real household disposable income per person is growing at its fastest pace in two years.'
New Statesman
an hour ago
- New Statesman
The phantom threat of Corbyn 2.0
Photo byA More in Common poll shared with my colleague George Eaton in his Morning Call newsletter considers how a hypothetical Jeremy Corbyn-led party would perform at the polls. It suggests the 'JC Party' would receive 10 per cent of the vote in an election held today, cutting into Labour by three points, and the Greens by four. Labour is four points behind Reform right now, but with the new JC Party on the scene Labour would end up seven points behind. In 2018 to 2019 I commissioned a lot of hypothetical surveys about Brexit. I drafted scenarios and put them to the public. How would you vote if Brexit was delayed? How would you feel if Theresa May was still prime minister and delayed Brexit? How would you vote if hard Brexit were on the ballot? It was unreliable stuff because it all depended on hypothetical prompts, taking the respondents too far from material reality. The biggest flaw with More in Common's survey is simple: the Jeremy Corbyn Party isn't real; it hasn't accrued baggage; we don't know who its hypothetical candidates would be or how badly organised it might be. Respondents wouldn't approach the survey in the same manner as they would at the time when it came to cast the ballot. Prompting it as Corbyn-led too can be both a blessing and a curse. It's asking voters whether they'd vote for Corbyn were he on the ballot. It's making a genuine left alternative a personality contest. That tells you something about how popular Corbyn is. But it doesn't tell you what you want it to tell you: the real appetite for a left alternative. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe I am struggling to think of any moment in recent history where hypothetical polling bore out in reality. In 2019 the poorly named, poorly branded, poorly organised Independent Group got off the ground to pretty favourable opinion polls: even before they announced they announced the would contest elections, it was sitting at 10-15 per cent. It ended up winning 3 per cent in the Euro elections a month later. It was a dud. When the stakes were real and the party had time to reveal its colours it just wasn't so popular anymore. This 10 per cent for Corbyn tells us there's an appetite for something with a high profile name attached. But like with the Independent Group – later Change UK – its raison d'etre may be eaten up by parties already in situ. Like the Lib Dems did with Brexit in 2019, the Greens may do as The Left Flank in 2025. It's notable that most of the hypothetical damage a Corbyn party does is not to Labour, but the Greens. Which brings us to my final point. The appeal of the Greens is not the same as the appeal of a left alternative. Green success in a not insubstantial number of locales comes off not being a hyper-left force, but a hyper-localist, hyper-environmental force. There's a good argument that deprioritising that in favour of leftism will net it new support in the immediacy. But not without possible losses. It becomes muddy. [See also: These disability benefit cuts are about to bury Labour] Related
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Ministers in talks over welfare concessions as Labour rebellion grows
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said talks between backbenchers and Government were 'ongoing' on Wednesday night as Downing Street seeks to head off what would be Sir Keir Starmer's first Commons defeat. It came as six more Labour MPs added their names to an amendment that would halt the legislation in its tracks, arguing disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed. The new signatories include the Commons Environmental Audit Select Committee chairman Toby Perkins, Stoke-on-Trent Central MP Gareth Snell, Newcastle upon Tyne MP Mary Glindon and Tamworth MP Sarah Edwards. North Ayrshire and Arran MP Irene Campbell and Colchester MP Pam Cox, both of whom won their seats in the party's 2024 landslide election victory, have also added their names. The new names takes the total number of Labour backbenchers supporting the so-called 'reasoned amendment,' tabled by Treasury Select Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hiller, to 126. The Prime Minister has insisted the reforms are set for a Commons vote on Tuesday as planned, but ministers are locked in talks with backbenchers about the possibility of making changes to soften the impact of the Bill as a major revolt looms. Asked what concessions could be offered to convince rebels to back the Government, Ms Rayner sought to reassure backbenchers that they would not be expected to betray the party's traditional values. 'I'm not going to get into that on your show tonight,' she said in an interview on ITV's Peston programme. 'Those discussions are ongoing around making sure that the welfare reforms that we're bringing in support people into work who need that, and we're putting a huge amount of investment into doing that, but also protecting the most vulnerable.' She acknowledged that 'a lot of people are very scared about these changes' but added: 'I haven't changed my Labour values and we're not expecting our benches to do anything that isn't in check with them. 'What we want to do is support people, and that is the crucial bit around these reforms of what Labour are trying to achieve, and we're discussing that with our MPs.' The plans restrict eligibility for personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limit the sickness-related element of universal credit. The Government hopes the changes will get more people back into work and save up to £5 billion a year. Existing claimants will be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support, a move seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes. But the fact so many Labour MPs are prepared to put their names to the 'reasoned amendment' calling for a change of course shows how entrenched the opposition remains. One backbencher preparing to vote against the Bill told the PA news agency: 'A lot of people have been saying they're upset about this for months. To leave it until a few days before the vote, it's not a very good way of running the country. 'It's not very grown up.' They said that minor concessions would not be enough, warning: 'I don't think you can tinker with this. They need to go back to the drawing board.' According to the Government's impact assessment, the welfare reforms as a whole could push an extra 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, into relative poverty. Asked whether she thought there were hundreds of thousands of people claiming disability benefits who were not disabled, Ms Rayner said: 'No, what we're saying though is that the welfare system has to be able to have longevity.' Earlier on Wednesday, Sir Keir defended his leadership against accusations he had misjudged the mood in his party, insisting he is 'comfortable with reading the room'. At a press conference at the Nato summit in The Hague, the Prime Minister said: 'Is it tough going? Are there plenty of people and noises off? Yes, of course, there always are, there always have been, there always will be. 'But the important thing is to focus on the change that we want to bring about.' Later on Wednesday, armed forces minister Luke Pollard echoed the Deputy Prime Minister, telling Sky News's Politics Hub show that 'of course' the Government was in talks about possibly making changes. 'Of course we are, and I think there's a concern that's very valid and real for lots of my colleagues. They're not doing this to cause trouble or be argumentative,' he said. 'They're doing it because they have a genuine, heartfelt concern about some of the impacts. ' He said some of the reforms would be supported across the party but 'where there is concerns… those discussions will continue until the vote and beyond.' Speaking to BBC Newsnight, Mr Pollard said the Government had 'between now and Tuesday to listen to those concerns' and 'to address them' before making the case for reform in the Commons debate next week. Asked whether the Government would listen to calls for it to change course over planned cuts to Pip, he said: 'I think that's for many colleagues where the real concern is.' The Daily Telegraph reported that the Prime Minister was prepared to back down on the welfare Bill with Number 10 considering tabling its own amendment to the legislation on Tuesday. Options being considered include a commitment to speed up payment of support to help people back into work and offering assurances that reviews of policies in this area will be published, according to the paper. Meanwhile, The Times reported some MPs opposed to the plans had blamed Sir Keir's chief of staff Morgan McSweeney and suggested the time had come for 'regime change' in Downing Street. Other senior Labour figures outside Parliament, including Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham and London Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan, have publicly expressed their opposition to the plans. Meanwhile, the Tories seem unlikely to lend the Government their support, with leader Kemi Badenoch setting out conditions for doing so including a commitment to rule out tax rises in the autumn budget and further cut the benefits bill.
