THE WELSH Government has voted down a second Private Members Bill in a week, leading to an angry reaction from the Welsh Conservative Party.
Welsh Conservative AM – Darren Millar – slammed the Welsh Governments ‘tribalism’ as a key contributor to its failings in Wales, and described its rigid approach to politics as ‘comparative of an authoritarian regime’.
Last week, The Herald reported on opposition AMs’ fury that the Welsh Government voted against Assembly Member Paul Davies’ private bill which aimed to ensure increased support for autistic people of all ages, by addressing issues such as health and social services, educational outcomes, access to housing, and employment and providing rights of statutory redress when services fail.
The Older People’s Rights Bill was proposed by Mr Millar, and designed to ensure that older people in Wales were protected, promoted and respected by public sector decision makers.
The Bill was backed by the Older People’s Commissioner, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, Age Cymru, Age Connects, and the Cymru Older People’s Alliance, amongst others.
Proposals for Mr Millar’s Bill had previously received cross-party support, and the Welsh Government supported a motion which was agreed by the National Assembly for Wales on 12th January 2016 to bring forward legislation to protect and promote the rights of older people.
GOVERNMENT REJECTS STATUTORY RIGHTS
Notwithstanding the Welsh Government’s previous position, it once again waved the shroud of wanting to deal with issues in a holistic way without resorting to legislation ‘at this stage’.
Fear is growing that the Welsh Government is fearful of enacting legislation that confers rights to individuals, preferring instead to listen to service providers whose services might not withstand close scrutiny and a rights-based approach to ensuring compliance with standards.
Speaking in the Assembly, Darren Millar said: “The purpose of the Bill is to build on Wales’s excellent track record to date by embedding a rights-based approach in the development, planning and delivery of public services that affect older people in Wales.
“If given permission, I will seek to consult with stakeholders to develop a Bill that will further enshrine the rights of older people within Welsh law, by placing a duty on Welsh Ministers to have regard to the United Nations Principles for Older Persons when making decisions that may impact upon older people in Wales; that will provide for the ability to extend that due-regard duty to local authorities, health boards and other Welsh public authorities; that will place a duty on Welsh Ministers to promote knowledge of and understanding of the UN Principles for Older Persons; and that will require Welsh Ministers to publish annual reports on their compliance with their older people’s rights schemes—something that doesn’t happen at the moment.”
The proposed legislation was very similar to the Rights of Children and Young Persons (Wales) Measure 2011. A Bill which passed the Assembly with little controversy.
Mr Millar continued: “We embarked upon this journey a number of years ago and we can deliver and pioneer a new rights-based approach for older people’s rights here in Wales. We’ve got an opportunity to develop legislation that will result in practical improvements in the decision making and delivery of public services, that will raise awareness of older people’s rights and give them recognition and status, and that will empower those hundreds of thousands of older people across Wales to access those rights.”
THE TIME IS NOT RIGHT
Responding on behalf of the Welsh Government, Minister for Local Government Julie James suggested that older persons’ rights are already sufficiently protected by a range of Welsh Government measures, including its totemic Wellbeing of Future Generations Act.
In any event, the Welsh Government did not regard the time had yet come for legislation – rather ignoring the point that the current First Minister supported such legislation when he was Health Minister.
Ms James concluded: “While I strongly support the sentiments behind this Bill, the time is not right for this particular bit of legislation. When we do legislate, we should do that holistically for the whole of society and in a way that identifies the needs of all disadvantaged groups.”
Supporting Darren Millar’s bill and suggesting that it should progress to the next stage so elements of it could be incorporated into future Welsh Government legislation, Plaid Cymru’s Helen Mary Jones pointed out: “Unless individuals have mechanisms they can use which don’t depend on the Government and that do not depend on an independent commissioner, but that they can use themselves to enforce those rights, those rights at their very end may not be enforced.”
David Rowlands (UKIP) said: “It is incumbent on statutory authorities to ensure that the core mainstream services are available to older residents in the same way that they are for other people… If children are protected in law, why not the other most vulnerable group, the old?”
THE PAYROLL VOTE VOTES
Concluding the debate, Darren Millar noted that an invitation extended to both himself and the older people’s commissioner to meet with the Government on February 6 to discuss its ‘holistic’ plans for the future was made only the day before the scheduled debate.
As usual, Labour AMs, including ‘independent’ government minister Dafydd Elis Thomas and Lib Dem Kirsty Williams, followed the government line. Two members abstained, Bethan Sayed and Jenny Rathbone. Apart from Ms Sayed, all other opposition parties supported the Bill.
It fell by 27 votes to 21.
Speaking after the vote, Darren Millar said: “This is not the way politics should be handled in this country, and it’s not the footing that the First Minister should start on with his new Government. It’s a tribal attitude and it is holding Wales back.
“The Welsh Government does not have a monopoly on good ideas. Both this Bill – and last week’s Autism Bill – are non-contentious proposals which had widespread cross-party and stakeholder support.
“We are supposed to be a democracy where the ideas of all elected representatives, regardless of their party politics, can be treated with respect, but in Wales, under this regime, that clearly isn’t the case.”
Public feel ‘disengaged’ from Parliament
RESEARCH by The Hansard Society suggests that the public is increasingly disenchanted with the UK’s system of government.
Founded in 1944, the Hansard Society is dedicated to expounding the principles and practice of parliamentary democracy and its challenges. It is widely recognised as the Westminster Parliament’s ‘critical friend’.
Contrary to a belief peddled by some commentators, the research, published in the 16th Audit of Public Engagement, finds that the public care about political issues. However, the research also shows that many are unhappy and frustrated about the way in which Parliament works. As a result, a significant proportion of voters are ready to consider a radical change to our system of government.
Over one-half of the Audit’s respondents think that what the country needs is a ‘strong’ leader, prepared to break the rules. Around 40% think that the government could better deal with the country’s problems if it was not tied to parliamentary votes.
72% say the system of governing needs ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a great deal’ of improvement. That figure is a significant increase on the previous year, itself at a worrying level of 67%. The number of people who say the system needs ‘a great deal’ of improvement has risen eight points in a year, to 37%.
Asked whether the problem is the system or the people, the largest group (38%) say ‘both’.
When asked which institutions are most likely to act in the public interest, UK citizens have more confidence in the military and judges than in politicians. Politicians will be pleased to see that they still rank ahead of political parties, big business and newspapers as more likely to act in the public interest.
Strikingly, only 25% of the public have confidence in MPs’ handling of Brexit. People were asked whether key groups’ and institutions’ handling of Brexit had given them more or less confidence in these groups and institutions to act in the public’s best interest. 60% said they had less confidence in political parties, 60% in the government and 57% in MPs as a result of their handling of Brexit. Confidence had been driven down the least in civil servants (41%) and judges (35%) as a result of their handling of Brexit.
75% say the main political parties are so divided within themselves that they cannot serve the best interests of the country. 50% say the main parties and politicians don’t care about people like them.
Well over half the public are downbeat about the state of Britain – 56% think Britain is in decline, 63% think Britain’s system of government is rigged to advantage the rich and powerful, and 66% think most big issues facing the country today don’t have clear solutions.
The public is evenly split between those who prefer politicians who make compromises with people they disagree with (48%) and those who prefer politicians who stick to their positions (45%). 66% think politicians should be able to say what’s on their mind regardless of what anyone else thinks about their views.
Despite the legislative chaos following the last Brexit referendum, 55% still think that big questions should be put to the public in referendums more often than today.
The Audit suggests a dissolution of the ties between the governed and their representatives. Although core indicators of political engagement remain stable, beneath the surface the strongest feelings of powerlessness and disengagement are intensifying. The number who ‘strongly disagree’ that political involvement can change the way the UK is run (18%) has hit a 15-year high. 47% feel they have no influence at all over national decision-making – a new high for the Audit series.
At the national and local levels, the numbers of those feeling they have no influence at all have jumped by seven and nine points in a year, respectively. This intensification of the strongest feelings of powerlessness has occurred even as the overall measures of people’s sense of influence, which include those who feel less strongly, have declined only slightly since last year.
Generation gap spells trouble for Tories
ON MONDAY, the Conservative think-tank Onward published a report into generational voting patterns, policy priorities and political values.
The report considers why age has become the key dividing line in British politics, what has happened since the last general election, and what can be done to win over millions of younger people deserting the centre-right in considerable numbers.
The report follows a detailed 10,000 sample poll, conducted by Hanbury Strategy. It is the largest study of the generation gap since age became the key political dividing line in British politics.
Younger and older voters have always been politically different, but never by this much
In 2017, the gap between younger and older voters was 50 points larger than the post-war average since 1945 and five times higher than in 2010. It started, in 2015 before Brexit and Jeremy Corbyn became the leader of the Labour Party. This gap has grown, not narrowed, since the last General Election.
In 2017, “the tipping point age” – the median age at which a voter is more likely to vote Conservative than Labour – was 47 years old. The report establishes that, since the election, “the tipping point” has risen by 4 years to 51 years old.
The Conservative age curve is getting steeper. Among 18–24-year-olds, 14% said they would vote Conservative if there was an election today. 62% said they would vote Labour. 9% of this group said they would vote for the Liberal Democrats.
Among those over 65 years old, the opposite was true, 56% of respondents said they would vote Conservative, against 24% for Labour. The only groups with a net positive vote for Conservatives are 55–64s and voters over the age of 65.
Projecting the results of the survey forward to 2022 shows that the Conservatives face a wipeout in Wales.
If age continues to be a predictor of vote intention, the Conservatives are also in trouble in London. For example, Putney, which has a majority of just 3.3%, has 2.6 younger people for every older person. Other Conservative seats potentially affected by the demographic shift include the Cities of London and Westminster, Hendon, Chelsea and Fulham, and Uxbridge and South Ruislip (currently held by would-be PM Boris Johnson).
According to Onward, the dissonance between different age groups largely down to the Conservatives’ failure to win over younger voters. 28% of under-35s would consider voting Conservative, but fewer than 17% say they would do so if an election were held today. Onward says that this amounts to 3 million voters young Conservative considerers which could be won over but currently would not vote for the party.
Polling among the younger age group suggests that on some policies, the Conservatives could be knocking on an open door. 18-24s are most in favour (63%) of keeping more of their own money and paying less tax. However, they also favour making the economy fairer, not just bigger. Nearly two-thirds of people favour “reducing the gap between rich and poor” over “working to create faster economic growth”, with 18-24s most in favour (67%).
On immigration, there is net support for reducing immigration in every age bracket, within every ethnic group, and among Remain voters.
In terms of priorities, the environment is the third top issue for 18-24-year-old voters and younger voters. Notably, immigration is of far lesser importance to younger voters than older ones, a reverse of the position on welfare benefits, about which older voters are far less exercised. All age groups regard the NHS and Brexit as the top two priorities.
A disconcerting gap is rising in the Conservatives’ appeal to female voters. Only 8% of 18-24-year-old women would vote Conservative today, which correlates heavily with pessimism: 56% of women think the next generation will be worse off than their own. Meanwhile, Asian voters (42%) are nearly as likely to consider voting Conservative as White voters (44%), but only half as many would do so today.
Lib Dems slam ‘botched’ scheme
THE WELSH Liberal Democrats have slammed the Conservative Government for their “hapless treatment” of EU citizens after the Home Office released guidance on the new EU Settlement Scheme.
The Home Office has confirmed that for the duration of the trial period, until 30 March, EU citizens applying to stay in the UK must either use an Android phone or travel to one of 13 ‘document scanning’ centres instead.
For Holyhead, the closest ‘document scanning’ centre is Trafford.
According to an analysis by the Welsh Liberal Democrats, EU citizens travelling from Holyhead would face costs of £55 on the train for at least a six and a half hour round trip. The drive would be a 224-mile round trip costing around £56 in fuel.
The only document scanning centre in Wales is in Caerphilly. Travelling from Pembroke to Caerphilly and returning the same day by rail would cost £32.10 (the cheapest available fare at the time of enquiry), the cheapest off-peak fare from Aberystwyth would be £77.10 return. By car at an average of 40mpg, the cost of travel would be at least £27 to and from Pembroke, while from Aberystwyth the cost would be at least £25. Both car journeys represent round trips of over 180 miles.
Welsh Liberal Democrat Leader Jane Dodds said: “Too many people in Wales are deeply anxious about their right to stay. Many of them fill vital roles in the health service, our schools and the tourism sector. They want to register as soon as possible, but Theresa May’s hapless treatment of EU citizens could result in a new Windrush scandal.
“For anyone who doesn’t have an android phone, this botched scheme means they will have to travel. For people in Holyhead, that means facing a 224-mile round trip and paying over £50 for the privilege. This postcode lottery is simply unacceptable.”
Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesperson Ed Davey MP said: “Following significant pressure, the Prime Minister said there will be no financial barrier for any EU nationals who wish to stay. How long did that commitment last?
“It is Conservative Ministers who have made a mess of Brexit. They should either pay the cost for EU citizens or change the application system and ensure EU citizens are made to feel welcome in the UK.
“Ultimately, the best way to avoid all of this mess is by giving the people the option to remain in the EU with a final say on Brexit.”
News5 days ago
A476: Lorry fire closes LLannon to Tumble road
News5 days ago
Almost 100 jobs to go at Calsonic Llanelli
News2 weeks ago
Llanelli drugs and antisocial behaviour raids
News15 hours ago
Swansea Bay City Deal leaders are supporting Neath Port Talbot Council’s proposals for changes
News6 days ago
Tackling anti-social behaviour in Seaside
Health7 days ago
Get Mouthy About Cancer
News5 days ago
West Wales responds to Notre-Dame ‘tragedy’
Sport2 weeks ago
Wanderers too strong for Crymych