IWA LONG READ: Rewiring government in Wales and Westminster: what, how and why?

In his first weeks in office, new Prime Minister Andy Burnham has put the need to fundamentally ‘rewire’ the British state at the centre of his policy agenda.

At the heart of this endeavour is his attempt to strengthen the centre of government. This is coupled with a comprehensive devolution agenda which adopts an ‘operating principle of devolving by default’ and the intention to create a ‘smaller and more strategic’ central government structure. To do this the Prime Minister has created an Office of the Prime Minister, a proposal incubated by both the Institute for Government and the Future Governance Forum, with Anthony Seldon describing the change as potentially ‘one of the most decisive moves in having a more coordinated government in Britain’. The details of this specific approach and how it will lead to the Prime Minister being more able to drive through his priorities remains to be seen. The outlined structural changes could be transformative, leading to a centre of government which is adequately equipped to tackle the systemic challenges the nation faces, or it could represent the latest in a series of rebranding exercises.

Fundamentally, both UK and Welsh Governments are therefore contemporaneously seeking the answer to similar questions; how do you govern better?

Whilst the structure is new, there is a feeling of déjà vu. Just over two years ago Keir Starmer entered government on the promise to lead a ‘mission-driven government’. His approach acknowledged many of the same structural failings that Burnham now inherits, namely, a government which has become poorly equipped to govern effectively and is structurally ineffective at solving our greatest challenges. Starmer thus stated, similarly to Burnham, that ‘we need to change how Britain is governed’. Whilst his mission-driven approach offered promise, it did little to fundamentally shift the machinery of government or distribute power more effectively. Ironically, the sense of mission, of long-term vision, the politics of governing, were one of the missing ingredients which contributed to the downfall of his leadership.

The new Welsh Government has likewise attempted to focus on doing ‘better government’. Their First 100 Days Plan argues that ‘people in Wales have increasingly lost faith in governments – they are seen as distant, not reflecting their priorities, telling not listening, talking not doing’. Their successful Senedd election campaign was underpinned by an argument that successive devolved governments have largely failed to deliver their aspirations, and that they, Plaid Cymru, were ready to govern.

Fundamentally, both UK and Welsh Governments are therefore contemporaneously seeking the answer to similar questions; how do you govern better? How does government deliver better outcomes? How, in a tight fiscal context (which won’t be addressed through transformative levels of revenue raising at either devolved or reserved level), do we maximise resources and prioritise effectively? And, what is the overarching narrative which ties it all together to provide a sense of purpose and direction which others can buy into? Some of these questions are political, others more practical.

With both governments navigating these structural challenges in their relative infancy, I’m going to focus on Welsh Government’s implementation of their 100 days plan, specifically when it comes to their government reform programme, considering if it sets the foundations for success, and what comes next.

100 Days – what and why?

Since I last wrote about Plaid Cymru’s government reform agenda, we have seen progress on some of their proposals. We have just reached the end of their first 100 days in government and we now have a little bit more certainty about what reform of government may mean.

Firstly, I think it’s important to consider the politics of a focus on the first 100 days. Was it necessary for Plaid Cymru to tie themselves to a 100 day plan? From a political standpoint, no. Does it help to provide a sense of urgency and momentum to a new government? Yes. Does it also set an unnecessary ticking clock to achieve immediate progress on a suite of complex, pan-government commitments (which is also a practical challenge as most of the 100 days falls during summer)? Also yes.

The idea of the first 100 days as a significant barometer for progress whatsoever is a transplant from the United States (whose system of government is also characterised by a long transition period between governments). The resonance of 100 days derives from 1933 and President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s start to government, where a sense of urgency was critical to tackle the Great Depression and kick-start the pioneering New Deal agenda. The period featured a legislative flurry, with 15 pieces of legislation signed, (although some argue that this agenda was not delivered by government alone). The 100 days, then, was characterised by taking immediate action on key issues

Plaid Cymru’s 100 day plan, building on the party’s Senedd election manifesto, sets a series of priorities; on government, healthcare, the economy, education and child poverty. Most actions, however, are aimed, according to the First Minister, at creating ‘the foundations for lasting change,’ establishing ‘new delivery structures, partnerships, reviews and programmes that will enable government to work more effectively, make better use of evidence and data, and focus resources on what matters most’. Unlike FDR then, the first 100 days is focussing on getting government prepared to make the changes they promise, rather than necessarily doing it.

This can be seen by what has been announced thus far. We’ve had a number of commissions, reviews and processes commenced, to name but a few; a new Towncentre Taskforce, a Climate and Nature Action Plan, a National Food Strategy for Wales, started plans to establish a shadow broadcasting and communications authority for Wales, committed to produce a National Cancer Strategy, launched a national conversation about the long-term future of Wales, created a new review into local government financing, established an Expert Group to design a pilot of the Cynnal child payment, and appointed a Chair of an expert panel to support the creation of a new Wales Development Agency. This is not a criticism of any of these pieces of work, indeed, the IWA is supportive of a number of them. But thus far this agenda has kicked off processes rather than made radical changes. 

What has been announced is instead the commencement of a series of sensible, if quite uncontentious, policy discussions, with the consequential policy decisions to be made at some point in the future.

This approach has some echoes with the initial blitz of activity from Andy Burnham’s UK Government. Whilst some announcements are immediate changes (such as funding to tackle rough sleeping, specific business rates cuts on venues and a VAT cut on energy bills), many of his announcements are also longer term changes and will similarly require extensive consultation to achieve. A distinction, however, is that his government has set clear expectations of what he wants to achieve from some of these longer-term changes. On technical education, governance reform, social care, devolution and welfare reform, he has set a clear momentum and expectation of the civil service on what he specifically wants to achieve and (to an extent) how. With both levels of government acknowledge the need to ‘rewire’ the state, the signals that are sent internally (within government and the civils service), as much as externally, are vitally important at the outset. It’s also apparent that some of Burnham’s reforms are more visible than those thus far proposed in Wales, a Number 10 North, for example, is a tangible signal that reform to how government is performed is happening. There is no Welsh equivalent at this stage.

In Wales this focus on creating new processes kicked off debate in the Senedd Siambr around whether this initial phase of government has been impactful enough. Welsh Labour’s Huw Thomas argued that the Plaid Cymru government has been ‘very effective… at commissioning reviews and plans and organising meetings’ whilst we’ve seen less ‘decision making, action, real and meaningful changes, and that, in our view, is the measure of an effective government’. This perspective was shared by all opposition parties as they reflected on the culmination of the first 100 days.

The WCPP’s Dan Bristow, however, defended the general ‘a plan to have plans’ approach on the welsh agenda. He argues, rather effectively in my opinion, that ‘effective government requires both ambition and discipline: the ambition to pursue meaningful change and the discipline to understand how that change can be delivered’.

Whatever your view on this approach, what it isn’t is a set of radical reforms or policy announcements. This is an agenda where the Welsh Government will consider options before acting, rather than necessarily knowing the answers at the outset. They have therefore probably missed the political window of opportunity to do something truly radical on governance reform, for instance, or introducing new revenue raising activity, undertaking local government reorganisation, equalising the increasing number of overlapping governance maps in Wales or breaking up the perennially struggling Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. It will likely only get more difficult to make radical changes, especially given the fact that Plaid are running a minority government. There isn’t, at this stage, a foreshadowing of what trade-offs the new government may be willing to have, or things they may cancel, scrap, or row back on in order to demonstrate their seriousness in investing in the things they have identified as priorities and which will take significant resources to achieve, on childcare and the Cynnal payment, for example. What has been announced is instead the commencement of a series of sensible, if quite uncontentious, policy discussions, with the consequential policy decisions to be made at some point in the future.

Innovative. Informed. Independent.
Your support can help us make Wales better.

Key principles in rewiring the devolved state

Further to Plaid Cymru’s pre-election 100 Day’s Plan, Welsh Government have published a briefly expanded version, while new Cabinet Minister for Government Effectiveness Dafydd Trystan Davies gave a statement to the Senedd on this agenda before the summer recess. Each gives us slightly more information on what is happening when it comes to government reform.

The new Welsh Government have established the following priorities for creating better government, these are: to create a new ‘digitally-enabled Welsh Cabinet Office to drive our priorities forward – including policy, delivery and data specialists’, ‘agree a set of measurable outcomes and progress milestones… where we can measure the success of our initiatives in changing people’s lives for the better’, ‘adopt a test and learn approach to delivering on our key priorities’, ‘begin the work of introducing enhanced training and development programme across the Welsh public sector to develop skills and foster a unity of purpose and vision while developing a National School of Government’; and appointing a new Cabinet Minister for Government Effectiveness to oversee it all, in Dafydd Trystan Davies.

Taken together, this is the toolbox that the new government hopes will enable them to tackle the gaping delivery gap between policy and outcomes. Or, to paraphrase Dafydd Trystan Davies, speaking in the Senedd, ‘promising rather than doing’.

So, what progress has been made to date on these priorities and where are there still important questions to seek answers to? Whilst for some areas there have been no public updates, there are some early indications to consider.

Priorities

A strength of the early days of the Plaid Cymru government has been a sense of prioritisation. They’ve been explicit about where they want to focus their energy, the issues that Rhun wants to define his government. These are reflected in a set of pan-government objectives, but also in departmental goals (some of which are more explicit than others at this stage). 

Each of these portray a government which is not ready to make these decisions – it’s trying to ride two horses at once, to often different destinations.

In the election manifesto, the party acknowledges that prioritisation of this nature will require trade-offs to where resources are allocated. It’s too early to tell how and where these trade offs are being negotiated. Certainly, aligned with the accusation of there being a ‘plan to have plans’, there seems to be an intention to appoint commissions and bodies to help negotiate these policy trade offs. Yet, decisions on key policy trade offs will need to be made. 

Decisions this government make will create winners and losers and these decisions are usually best negotiated at the outset rather than being left to linger. If you are looking to make rapid change to life in Wales, then leaving difficult decisions until years 3 and 4 of a Senedd is not ideal.

We are yet to see where the new government stands on numerous difficult trade-offs. For example, how does an overarching economic mission based on productivity correspond with aspirations to build Welsh ownership of the economy and spread economic opportunity across all parts of Wales? The policy levers here often point in different directions. Or how does the aim to bring forward Wales’ net zero commitment forward to 2040 (ahead of the legally mandated goal of 2050) work alongside decisions on renewable energy infrastructure which present severe challenges to accelerating renewable energy deployment  and refusing to engage in the significant changes to land use required (as outlined by the UK Climate Change Committee). Each of these portray a government which is not ready to make these decisions – it’s trying to ride two horses at once, to often different destinations.

Metrics

Aligned to prioritisation, we’ve also seen some encouraging signs of priority metrics which underpin strategic priorities. Again, this is promising. As is the proposal to create a real-time dashboard to publicly and internally communicate progress, or lack thereof, against key metrics. The first iteration of an interactive digital dashboard, which collates key metrics has also now been published. 

One challenge here, however, is that this approach doesn’t correspond with the relatively long-term outlook of their goals.

Whilst this approach may work for a target like tackling NHS waiting lists, where progress can be monitored relatively swiftly – it is less good at measuring some of the trickier outcomes sought, like child poverty or productivity performance as two notable examples. These are admirable outcomes to focus on, yet to achieve any success, they require long-term and complex policy fixes, a high proportion of which are the responsibility of UK Government (or at least would require investment and funding at a scale only achievable through UK Government spending uplifts).

Robust debate and agenda-setting research.
Support Wales’ leading independent think tank.

The overarching economic mission of Wales to ‘halve the productivity gap with the rest of the UK’ within ten years is an interesting one to examine with this in mind. Challenges with this, if your approach is to meaningfully shift this metric during this Senedd, are numerous. One, it will be incredibly difficult to measure the distinct impact of Welsh Government policy on this figure. Two, any policy intervention will likely take a long time to impact statistics (and those statistics take a long-time to publish in and of themselves – with the current figures being used dating back to 2023). Three, the goal is tied to the performance of the UK productivity level – an issue devolved government has no opportunity to influence. Four, it is a goal which requires high capital investment to tangibly influence – over things like infrastructure spending, investment in transport and R&D, for instance – and these align poorly with Welsh Government’s lack of fiscal firepower. Five, it doesn’t necessarily sit well with other economic policy targets, like growing SME’s contribution to the economy or tackling regional economic inequalities within Wales. In this way, some of Welsh Government’s other economic policy goals are potentially more straightforward to focus on, such as the goal of achieving 70% of Welsh public procurement spending staying in Wales, for instance.

There is also a wider issue around the data which can drive forward Plaid’s calls for ‘fairer funding’ from UK Government. If Welsh data on all manner of topics is better managed, it could be used strategically to pressure UK Government, on areas like R&D funding for example (which Wales gets proportionately less than its population share).

Regardless of the specific productivity example, we are going to need a series of output and input metrics which accurately reflect Welsh Government’s areas of responsibility and ability to tangibly influence. How these come together to coalesce prioritisation across government and reflect the political picture of what the government wants to achieve is critical. 

Testing and learning

Having tangible and well-targeted metrics to guide delivery also sits upstream of another priority area for reform, that is, the intention to ‘adopt a test and learn approach to delivering on our key priorities, enabling action at pace and flexibility’.

A test and learn approach, broadly speaking, means taking a more iterative approach to policy delivery. Instead of making big choices around the design of policy programmes at the outset, this approach suggests that testing assumptions and real-world testing before wider programmes are rolled out should be the focus. 

A more evidence-informed approach to policy development and programme delivery is certainly welcome, and indeed, to some extent it is vital to overcome the ‘delivery gap’.

Yet, questions that remain to be answered include what are you testing and learning? What’s the data architecture like underpinning this? What resources are being committed to developing this approach, and indeed, is the policy expertise already within Welsh Government? Additionally, the approach requires a flexibility and agility from Welsh Government, which hasn’t been among its defining characteristics to date.

Again, the productivity mission here is a cautionary tale. If you aspire to be a test and learn government, why select a metric which is notoriously slow and hard to measure?

The limits of deliverism
An overarching question which all of these reforms present is, is delivering better enough? Is it an adequate response to 27 years of stagnation? Is it enough to rebuild floundering trust in our devolved institutions (not a unique problem to Wales, of course, but a local reflection of more global trends)?

What if delivering, fails to deliver?

These questions have been raised by the fall of Keir Starmer and Joe Biden. Both political agendas highlighted a focus on delivery, positing that if government delivers public services and budgets better, then this would bring electoral benefits and political stability. Both projects failed to drive long-term support over more than one electoral cycle.

These challenges highlight that politics is essential to governing effectively. Is this technocratic approach one that moves people? That motivates them to trust you to navigate the trade-offs required to govern effectively in the devolved sense? Is it enough to enable others to buy in and participate in long-term focused act of nation building?

We can’t, thus take the politics out of governing. The politics underpinning governance reform is vital. What is the purpose of government, where does it want us to be and how does it purpose we work together to get there?

Discussions and debates that drive Wales forward.
Join Wales’ leading independent think tank.

For the Plaid Cymru government, the answer to this is perhaps more straightforward than it would first appear. The first stage of achieving their longer-term goal of independence is nation building, making Wales work better, increasing our competence in governing, investing in the creation of robust, resilient and effective institutions which put us in a stronger position. Plaid Cymru do acknowledge this, stating pre-election that the party was ‘ready to lead, and to seize the nation-building opportunity before us,’ offering a ‘fresh start’ and delivering ‘real change’ – ‘new energy, new ideas and a renewed belief in what Wales can be’.

The above, rather technocratic discussion on governance reform must be resonant to a more political, national story of renewal. Is this national renewal story one which can provide a clarity of purpose which ties Welsh Government’s agenda together into something more coherent? Something which builds a clarity of purpose, long-term direction and a sense of what it’s all for? A direction of travel for others to buy into.

This common endeavour needs to tap into other parties priorities as well – this is a minority government in the Senedd, after all. If long-term, structural changes to how we govern are to stick, which they all too often haven’t in a Welsh context, then they need to be built on a foundation of broad consensus. This is especially the case when creating new institutions, like a new Wales Development Agency, for example.

Conclusion

There are some promising signs from the new Welsh Government. They are clearly taking the how of government seriously, as is the case at Westminster level.

There are, however, some tangible headwinds which could knock this agenda off course. One, how will it be delivered when there are no current plans to increase Welsh Government’s headcount (which is already comparatively small)? How will it also be delivered given the very real fiscal constraints they face (and no plans to increase revenue)? How can direction be driven from the centre when policy trade-offs have yet to be effectively navigated?

Fundamentally, though, to live up to the aspirations set of better government – we need these conversations to continue. The first 100 days puts in place a foundation for this to happen.

All articles published on the welsh agenda are subject to IWA’s disclaimer. If you want to support our work tackling Wales’ key challenges, consider becoming a member.