Connect with us
Advertisement
Advertisement

Politics

Universal Income plans depend on Westminster

Avatar

Published

on

MARK DRAKEFORD’s announcement that the Welsh Government plans to trial Universal Basic Income in a few locations in Wales captured headlines in online media.

The First Minister was variously said to have ‘hinted’ at a trial or announced a trial would take place.

However, nobody should have been surprised by the First Minister’s announcement.

Not only was the policy contained in Labour’s Manifesto for May 6’s election – a bit more than ’a hint’ – but also the principle of holding a trial in Wales was enthusiastically passed by the last Welsh Parliament in September last year. It was a policy in Plaid Cymru’s election manifesto and Labour’s; so, whether Labour went it alone in Government or was in partnership with Plaid Cymru, a trial was on the cards.

WG KNOWS WESTMINSTER

HAS THE FINAL WORD

However, whether the Welsh Government can carry out a trial is beyond its immediate control.

Headlines that said the Welsh Government WILL carry out even limited Universal Basic Income trials are also jumping the gun.

When the Senedd debated a motion brought forward by Jack Sargeant MS on September 30, 2020, here is what the Finance Minister Rebecca Evans had to say about it: “The Welsh Government would be open to such a trial taking place in Wales, but we have to be realistic that such a trial would not be possible without the active cooperation of the UK Government, and this is because of the interaction of universal basic income with the tax and benefit system. 

“If such a trial were offered, we would also require that conditions were met to ensure that the Welsh Government and this Senedd were able to play a significant role in the design, governance and accountability of any scheme. 

“Were the Welsh Government to make payments to individuals without the cooperation of the UK Government, this could simply result in them being ineligible for existing benefits or paying more in tax. 

“Aside from the fact that this would not then be a proper test of the effect of an unconditional payment, it would result in the transfer of resources from the Welsh Government to the UK Government. 

“And, sadly, our recent experience of the UK Government’s approach to the taxation of our payments to social care workers doesn’t suggest that we should expect their active cooperation.”

In short, the Welsh Government needs Westminster’s ‘active cooperation’ to make a trial possible.

Without Westminster’s cooperation, those who get the Universal Basic Income could (are almost certain to) lose all of their entitlements to other benefits, tax credits, and other means-tested benefits. They could also have to pay tax on it.

WHAT IS UNIVERSAL

BASIC INCOME?

Universal Basic Income is not a new idea. Its long history stretches back to antiquity and has been a feature of both romantic and progressive political theory for centuries.

At its simplest, Universal Basic Income does away with a raft of welfare benefits. It substitutes them with a single payment of a fixed amount.

Schemes that guarantee a basic income, short of enough to live on, exist in a few US states and a handful of national economies. However, those are more of an income floor for those who are otherwise dependent on welfare benefits. They are not an actual Universal Basic Income.

A national trial in Finland ended after two years with no definitive finding of better outcomes for those who received UBI over those who did not.

The Covid pandemic increased interest in the idea of UBI in continental Europe. At the same time, the US used a series of relatively modest income replacement initiatives to stop people’s descent into poverty (or into deeper poverty). 

The UK’s furlough scheme was – essentially – a basic income guarantee but not genuinely universal in nature. 

A major multi-national academic study published in 2017 found that UBI probably improved some health outcomes and increased the likelihood of children attending school. 

However, the same report also concluded the evidence for positive outcomes from UBI-type schemes was ‘very uncertain’.

THE COST TO WALES

The main deterrent to a truly Universal Basic Income is cost.

• If a full universal basic income were paid in Wales to all working-age adults and set at the level of the official living wage, the cost would be around £35 billion a year. 

• If set at the level of the real living wage, the cost would be around £40 billion. 

• For illustration, those figures are around twice the size of the Welsh Government’s budget. As a further comparison, income tax in Wales raises in total just over £5 billion. 

• Of course, the costs could be much reduced if universal basic income were paid at a lower rate. However, payment at a lower rate would reduce its attractiveness.

Those last four points are not our own words. They are the Welsh Government’s position as set out in 2020 by its own Finance Minister.

Nothing has changed those figures since September 30, 2020.

They demonstrate the prohibitive and unsupportable cost of UBI to Wales without massive and systemic change across the whole UK.

SCOTCH MIST

As an illustrative example of the timescales and complexity of introducing even a pilot scheme, we only need to look at Scotland.

In September 2017, the Scottish Government announced it would support local authority areas to explore a Citizen’s Basic Income Scheme by establishing a fund to help regions to develop their proposals further and establish appropriate testing. 

The funding offered was £250,000 over the two financial years 2018/19 and 2019/20. 

Four local authority areas: Fife Council, City of Edinburgh Council, Glasgow City Council and North Ayrshire Council, worked together to research and explore the feasibility of local pilots of Basic Income in Scotland. 

Notlaunch a basic income. Explore its feasibility.

Over three and a half years since the Scottish Government’s announcement, there is still no UBI trial in Scotland.

Putting such a scheme in place depends, yet again, on Westminster’s cooperation.

A report on the progress of the feasibility study notes’ any pilot [must] have the necessary support to influence the future of national policy and the role of Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC), HM Treasury and the NHS will be vital in the design and implementation of a Basic Income pilot.’

Three years to design and complete a feasibility study into a limited trial in four local authority areas in Scotland combined with the need to wait for Westminster approval does not suggest a quick fix.

And if it’s not a rapid process in Scotland, it will scarcely be quicker in Wales.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Drakeford says Wales is not immune to Indian coronavirus

Avatar

Published

on

MARK DRAKEFORD,  First Minister for Wales, has warned that Wales will not be immune from the Indian coronavirus variant as it becomes the dominant strain in England and Scotland.

He was speaking at the Welsh Government’s coronavirus briefing as he detailed the results of the latest three-weekly lockdown review and announced that large outdoor events are set to go ahead once again.

He also urged people to come forward to get vaccinated, even if they had missed their appointment, saying it remained the best defence against the virus – even the new variant.

He said: “It is never too late to be vaccinated in Wales – if you are not yet one of the millions of people to have had a vaccine, you can still arrange an appointment. There are details on our website about how to do that.”

Confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Wales remain at less than 10 cases per 100,000 people, which continues to be the lowest rate in the UK. This reflects the hard work of people throughout Wales to keep themselves and their families safe.

Our vaccination programme also continues to make extraordinary progress. More than85% of the adult population has now received their first dose of the vaccination and nearly half have completed the two-dose course.

However, the emergence and the spread of the more transmissible delta variant in parts of the UK – most notably in North West England – is a cause for concern. There are just under 100 cases in Wales, including a cluster in Conwy but we expect these numbers will increase.

We have the headroom to move to alert level one but we will do this in a phased way, focusing on outdoor events and activities in the first step. This phased approach will provide time for more data on the impact of this variant to become available and for more people to be vaccinated.

The changes to coronavirus regulations from the 7 June will therefore include:

  • Up to 30 people can meet outdoors, including in private gardens, outdoor hospitality and public places.
  • Larger outdoor organised gatherings and events, such as concerts, football matches and sporting activities, like organised running groups, will be able to go ahead for up to 4,000 people standing and 10,000 people seated. All organisers planning events and activities must undertake a full risk assessment and put in place measures to prevent the spread of coronavirus, including social distancing.
  • Up to three households can form an extended household.

We will consider further changes to the regulations on indoor activity later in the three-week cycle, if public health conditions allow. These will include:

  • The rule of six for meeting indoors in private homes and holiday accommodation.
  • Increasing numbers for indoor organised gatherings and restarting indoor events.
     
  • Opening ice skating rinks.

We have reviewed the Public Health (Protection from Eviction) (No.2) (Wales) (Coronavirus) Regulations 2021 and decided these will remain in place up for the time being but not exceeding June 30. We are considering further options to strengthen support for tenants. In the meantime, we would urge all tenants struggling to pay their rent to speak to their landlord and contact Citizen’s Advice Cymru or Shelter Cymru for further help and support.

Continue Reading

Politics

Voter registration opens for Welsh Youth Parliament elections

Avatar

Published

on

YOUNG people across Wales are being encouraged to get involved with their Welsh Youth Parliament by registering to vote in the 2021 Elections in November.

The registration process opened yesterday, Thursday, June 3, on the Welsh Youth Parliament website.

It takes just 5 minutes, and registration will remain open until November 12.

This is an opportunity for Wales’ young people, aged 11 – 18 years old, to use their voice in choosing the Members who will represent them and their area in the next Welsh Youth Parliament.

This will be the second Youth Parliament, made up of 60 young people in Wales to represent different areas and backgrounds.

By meeting regularly, consulting with young people and conducting inquiries, they discuss the issues that matter most to young people to bring their views to the attention of the elected politicians of the Welsh Parliament.

The online election in November will choose 40 Members to represent all regions of Wales, the other 20 Members will be put forward by partner organisations to ensure a diverse representation.

The application process for interested partner organisations is also now open.

Organisations and charities are invited to apply to work with the Youth Parliament and to have a representative among the 60 Members.

Talulah Thomas and Cai Thomas Phillips, former members of the Welsh Youth Parliament, hosted an online panel discussion to mark the opening of voter registration which coincided with the Urdd’s Eisteddfod T.

The panel session focused on the importance of young people’s relationship with democracy.

A month since 16- and 17-year-olds were able to vote in the Senedd 2021 Election for the first time, getting involved with the Welsh Youth Parliament is one way that young people can make sure their voices continue to be heard.

Talulah Thomas, former Member for Clwyd South, says; “Be part of a Youth Parliament which gives us a voice on the issues that matter now and in our future. Register now to be able to vote in the Election, send in your ideas for topics and I also encourage you to consider standing to be a member too. When the opportunity comes. Go for it – be part of something great!”

YOUR FUTURE –  THE ISSUES THAT MATTER

With the opening of voter registration, young people are also asked to put forward their suggestions for topics they would like to be prioritised by the next Youth Parliament. A form is available online for young people to contribute to the conversation and highlight the issues that matter most to them and their communities.

Last time, the Youth Parliament chose to prioritise three topics: Mental Health, Life Skills in the Curriculum, and Littering and Plastic Waste, holding inquiries and publishing reports to present to the Welsh Government.

Cai Thomas Phillips, former Member for West Carmarthen and South Pembrokeshire says; “Young people’s voices need to be at the heart of important decisions as we emerge from the pandemic; a better way of working, economic recovery after COVID and tackling environmental degradation. I really hope the next Youth Parliament will take their chance to look at these issues and much more. It’s an amazing opportunity for anyone to give new ideas and opinions to the decision makers.”

Llywydd of the Senedd, Elin Jones MS encouraged Wales’ young voices to get involved in their Welsh Youth Parliament; “The first Welsh Youth Parliament showed us how passionate young people are about the issues which matter to them and their communities. Their voices need to be heard now more than ever.

“I encourage young people across Wales to get involved, to register to vote and be part of the conversation about the topics that should be prioritised by the next Youth Parliament. Your voice is powerful, and your views are important to us all.”

More information about registration, topics and how to be part of the Welsh Youth Parliament are available on the website – https://youthparliament.senedd.wales/

Continue Reading

Politics

Cummings slates Government, Johnson, and Hancock

Avatar

Published

on

“THE TRUTH is that senior ministers, senior officials, senior advisers like me fell disastrously short of the standards that the public has a right to expect of its Government in a crisis like this.

“When the public needed us most, the Government failed.

“I would like to say to all the families of those who died unnecessarily how sorry I am for themistakes that were made and for my own mistakes at that.”

Dominic Cummings’ opening statement to the Covid-19: Lessons Learned Committee of the House of Commons is an attention-grabbing one.

The rest of his evidence was no less damning of Westminster’s response in the early days of the pandemic.

It revealed a government in which discussions at Cobra meetings, supposedly the most secure and confidential of briefings, were routinely leaked to the media. It showed a PM who went away on holiday as the crisis broke. The Government failed to follow the logic of the science presented to it and took weeks to understand the pandemic’s capacity to overwhelm the NHS.

And – as Mr Cummings said – ‘unbelievably’ we have a government whose response to the crisis at a critical time was put on the back burner to deal with a complaint by the PM’s fiancé about a disobliging story about her dog.

CUMMINGS HAS PAPER TRAIL

Suppose Mr Cummings, like so many others, made his assertion without a paper trail. In that case, his remarks could be interpreted as so much self-serving nonsense and a study in revenge. However, he has the paperwork, the email trail, the journal entries, the secret WhatsApp chats to back up his account.

His story got extra heft by his clear expression of regret that he had not obtained an independent view of the Government’s data earlier. When he did deliver data to those outside Downing Street, the extent of the crisis became apparent. 

He made it clear the Government could have got better insight sooner and taken steps towards lockdown six weeks before it did.

The Prime Minister maintained ‘this new swine-flu thing’ was less of a risk than economic damage from overreaction throughout February, even as infections and deaths escalated.

However, the data was wrong. According to Mr Cummings, had the models been checked against live data from Intensive Care Units concerning Covid infections, it would’ve been evident the models presented to the Government and upon which it based its decisions were totally flawed.

NO PLANNING

In a withering assessment, Dominic Cummings said the more people criticised the plan, or lack of one, the more people on the inside believed their critics lacked knowledge.

If there’d been proper scrutiny and interrogation of what Ministers were being told, “we would have figured out at least six weeks earlier that there was an alternative plan”.

The original plan, he said, was “complete garbage”.

More than that, the Department of Health’s ‘plan’ amounted to no more than a press release.

The Department of Health was ’a smoking ruin’, he claimed. There was no plan for shielding, support, emergency procurement. The Department of Health failed to appreciate the size of the crisis and stuck to its normal procurement channels until it was almost out of PPE. The Department of Health refused to buy ventilators because their price had risen.

He suggested a proposal – seriously advanced for consideration – that people hold the equivalent of ‘chickenpox parties’ was met with disbelief by scientists who had to point out that chickenpox was not killing hundreds of thousand people worldwide.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is hancock.jpg
Matt Hancock: Accused of lying to colleagues and the public

HANCOCK BRANDED A LIAR

Dominic Cummings turned personal fire onto Matt Hancock, who remains the Secretary of State for Health.

He accused Mr Hancock of lying and that the Health Secretary’s conduct merited his instant dismissal.

He had earlier mentioned the Health Secretary’s denial that the Government pursued a herd immunity policy that formed a vital element of the Government’s then-approach.

Dominic Cummings said Matt Hancock “for lying to everybody in multiple occasions in meeting after meeting in the cabinet room and publicly”.

Crucially, Mr Cummings said the Cabinet Secretary (Mark Sedwill, the UK’s most senior civil servant) told him and the Prime Minister that he did not trust Matt Hancock to be truthful. He had notes of the meeting in which that remark was made.

Mark Sedwill, Mr Cummings claimed, told Boris Johnson that the cabinet system was not set up to deal with a minister like Matt Hancock, who – he alleged Mr Sedwill said – repeatedly lied in meetings.

He alleged Mr Hancock deliberately delayed implementing a proper track and trace system to meet an arbitrary testing target.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is borisness.jpg
Like the Mayor in Jaws: Media-obsessed PM didn’t stop foreign travel

JOHNSON DUCKS THE QUESTIONS

As the Committee took a break, Prime Minister’s Questions opened in the House of Commons.

Asked about Dominic Cummings’ evidence, the Prime Minister failed to deny key allegations from it when asked by opposition leader Kier Starmer.

Instead, Boris Johnson deflected the questions by referring to a public inquiry. Mr Johnson refused to give a date for that inquiry’s start.

Mr Johnson seemed to decide poking the hornets’ nest would invite further disclosures from Mr Cummings, more damning than the testimony already given.

The picture Mr Cummings painted was chaos at the heart of Government, institutional complacency, lack of expertise in the key departments, and – tellingly – a Prime Minister and Cabinet with only a tenuous grasp on the urgency of the situation.

Given a chance to plan for different scenarios and allocate adequate resources, the Prime Minister and other key ministers preferred to look on the sunny side, hope for the best, and expect something to turn up.

The PM took his opportunity to have a holiday.

Nothing Mr Cummings said was more telling than his revelation that the reason the UK did not enter lockdown sooner was the Government – including the civil service – did not have a plan. The part of the civil service supposed to deal with civil emergencies couldn’t cope because it lacked expertise in the response it was supposed to handle. Planning was always based on a peak of the virus twelve weeks in the future from the date of any meeting.

The pandemic’s first wave peaked in late April. The Government, as late as March 14, planned for a peak in June.

JOHNSON LIKE THE MAYOR IN JAWS

Mr Cummings’ account of a shielding plan drawn up over two all-night brainstorming sessions after the lockdown’s announcement was hair-raising. At the eleventh hour it emerged the UK hadn’t taken account of vulnerable groups’ protection.

As the pandemic raged and demands made to put a brake on overseas travel, Dominic Cummings claimed the PM didn’t want one. He painted a picture of a media-obsessed Boris Johnson swayed by press campaigns against taking preventative action.

Mr Cummings explained Mr Johnson’s behaviour was like the Mayor’s in Jaws. He wanted to keep the beach open, even as the shark ate the swimmers.

On a broader topic, Dominic Cummings criticised a ‘crackers’ political system that allowed people like him and Boris Johnson to exercise such power during an emergency when they were unqualified to deal with one.

Mr Cummings’ tarter observations about the ability of the UK’s political parties included a stinging attack on how political parties select and support their leaders.

To summarise his view: he suggested the problem with the political system in this country is that voters had a choice between people like Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson at the last election.

He concluded from that statement that the parties need to look at themselves to find out why they put ‘that sort of person’ forward for office.

That’s an issue beyond the current inquiry’s scope. ‘Teflon Al Johnson’ will be very grateful it is after Wednesday’s hearing.

Continue Reading

Trending

FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK