Joe Rossiter discusses the different visions for Wales’ future.
Over recent years net zero as a policy goal across the UK has been a broadly shared political ambition. The establishment of the Climate Change Committee was a recognition of the cross-party commitment to net zero and utilising independent data and evidence to instruct how we get there. Whilst a UK body, they also support and critique Welsh Government’s carbon budgets which lay out our pathway to net zero. Progress has been built by both Labour and Conservative UK Governments.
In this Senedd election, parties’ climate and environmental policies now form a key point of distinction.Parties have pledged to either stay committed to the (UK) legal goal of reaching net zero by 2050 or to abandon it.
Despite these, in places, drastically different visions, the manifesto promises on which they are built has received relatively little public scrutiny to date, as we close in on election day. Understandably, the focus has been on the performance of public services in Wales. Yet, climate and environmental policy reflect issues that the electorate care deeply about (especially younger voters) and they are a key point of difference between parties. They also cut across numerous areas of government. The extent to which we prioritise reaching net zero or protecting the environment shapes how we deliver transport investment, for example. The degree to which we invest in and accelerate renewable energy projects also has a direct impact on future energy bills.
As with other policy areas there are clear dividing lines, which broadly cut across two electoral blocks, a left-of-centre or progressive block and a right-of-centre block of parties. Part of this policy convergence could be seen to be a consequence of the new Senedd electoral system, which almost necessitates some form of coalition government. With this comes the notion of policy ‘red lines,’ with shared policy goals forming the potential basis for a shared governing agenda after May 7th. In this article I will refer to these blocks rather than focussing on the individual parties they comprise of.
I’ll briefly discuss some of the key policy areas at the heart of this distinction and what the different visions for Wales’ future mean. Of course, net zero and environmental protection encompass many areas of government policy, so we’ll look at a few of these in turn.
Syniadau uchelgeisiol, awdurdodol a mentrus.
Ymunwch â ni i gyfrannu at wneud Cymru gwell.
Energy and the role of renewables
Chief among the different visions for Wales is focused on the nation’s energy future. The biggest distinction here is the degree to which parties think accelerating the delivery of renewable energy projects should be at the core of our energy future.
Indeed, parties have variously pledged to stay committed to delivering 100% of Wales’ electricity needs by the existing Welsh Government target of 2035, to push back that aspiration to 2040, or to eradicate it as a goal altogether.
The broadly left-of-centre block of parties all call for expanding and accelerating the deployment of renewable energy to some degree, with an added focus on increasing the role of locally and community owned projects in the energy mix.
The right-of-centre block call for a cessation of large (or ‘industrial-scale’) onshore energy projects and a more balanced approach between renewables and other forms of energy – removing net zero as a key factor influencing energy decisions.
Energy issues are also front of mind given their contribution to the long-standing cost of living crisis, which disproportionately affects households in Wales. A quarter of households in Wales are in fuel poverty, with the cost of energy contributing to wider standards of living and squeezing of household budgets. This is further exacerbated by the rise in global conflict over the past five years. This is primarily due to our costs of energy being pegged against the cost of oil.
The IWA has been at the forefront of recognising the economic opportunity Wales could grasp through accelerated renewable energy deployment.
Added to the energy debate is a discussion around the hosting of grid infrastructure. A number of parties are calling for the cables required for grid infrastructure, essential to delivering renewable energy to communities across Wales, should be undergrounded, that is, buried. This is being offered as a seemingly easy solution to the complex problem of gaining communities consent for housing infrastructure in their area. These arguments do not meaningfully engage in the material challenge undergrounding as an approach means – it is around 4.5 – 5.1 times more expensive. This approach essentially makes projects uneconomic and far more challenging to deliver, something which understandably puts off private sector investment required to deliver them.
This is also linked to the need for communities in Wales to feel tangible benefit from the transition to renewable energy. Whether it’s through jobs, investment, ownership or cheaper bills. Parties suggest a number of ways of ensuring this benefit it felt, whether through prioritising local-and-community owned projects, or through ensuring that Welsh Government retain some of the benefit of projects located in Wales.
The devolution of the Crown Estate – an area that the IWA was at the forefront of calling for – is a topic where there has, in the past, been consensus. But what parties would do with the income that would accompany devolution differ – with some proposing to ringfence this funding to enable further renewable energy deployment. Others provide less of a solid idea on where that money would be directed.
Energy policy thus sits at the heart of parties’ different approaches to climate policy. They represent diametrically opposed approaches between the two blocks of parties. It also underpins the party’s economic policy ambitions. The IWA has been at the forefront of recognising the economic opportunity Wales could grasp through accelerated renewable energy deployment. Indeed, we have long highlighted how moving swiftly on renewable energy deployment could provide not only cheaper energy production which is spread out across the nation, but also establish Wales as a leader in technologies which could lead to export potential.
Few of the parties in Wales recognise in their manifestos the degree to which collaboration with reserved areas of policy also have a large impact on our energy system. The ability for Welsh renewable projects to significantly cut household (and businesses) bills in Wales is constrained by the coupling of electricity pricing to oil and gas. Only UK actors can shift this.
Whilst energy underpins much of the policy disparity on net zero in this election, it isn’t the only area of difference in climate policy.
Transport – what modes are the priority?
Whilst some contentious policy debates in this space – notably with the 20mph policy –are not, on the face of it, climate policies, what parties’ views on what our transport system should look like differ greatly, and at the heart of them is the degree to which decarbonisation is a priority.
How parties make these transport policy trade offs will be significantly informed by their stance on the importance of tackling the climate emergency with urgency.
Chief among these distinctions is what types of transport investment parties propose to prioritise. The current Welsh Government budget allocated over £1.26 billion to transport, the majority in revenue funding.
Even when there are disparities in how parties propose to invest this budget, very little is framed around the climate implications of different modes of transport. Climate is not at the forefront of the debate we are currently having about the future of our transport system – despite it being inexplicably connected.
Road building is most notably the priority for investment in the right-of-centre manifestos, highlighting their intention to build an M4 relief road (an idea Plaid Cymru also appear to be considering).
The left-of-centre block of parties have a suite of proposals around investment in bus fares, rail and active travel.
Whilst there is some convergence across the board on the need for investment in our transport system broadly, inherently, there are trade-offs in where we allocate funding. Investing in a large road building means not investing in public transport to the same degree.
So, these are different visions for how we move around Wales, which have a climate argument underpinning them. Whether incentivising people to get out of their cars (or support EV take up at scale) and using active travel or public transport is the priority or whether building roads to keep the private car as the easiest mode of transport are inherently climate arguments.
The next Welsh Government will have a small budget to improve our transport networks. How they choose to allocate it will require a host of trade-offs. How parties make these transport policy trade offs will be significantly informed by their stance on the importance of tackling the climate emergency with urgency.
Gofod i drafod, dadlau, ac ymchwilio.
Cefnogwch brif felin drafod annibynnol Cymru.
The future of agriculture and the Sustainable Farming Scheme
Another issue which was contentious during the 6th Senedd, and which is an area of contention in this campaign, is the future of agricultural payments.
Over recent years, how we choose to use our land has come under increasing attention. With over 90% of land in Wales used for agriculture, what we do with agricultural land has a lot of implications for how we can tackle a key set of environmental issues, including; our pathway to net zero, river pollution and flooding, and where we build infrastructure in the future.
Furthermore, on our current pathway, agriculture is projected to be Wales’ highest-emitting sector by the time we reach 2030 (just a year on from the end of the 7th Senedd). Without change, net zero won’t be achieved without some reform in land use. There are also many competing interests for what we want our land to do for us in the future.
During the last Senedd, the delayed introduction of the Sustainable Farming Scheme (SFS) received much public attention and drew widespread protest from the agricultural sector. It’s thus become something of a third rail in Welsh politics. During a recent IWA podcast with WWF Cymru, it was noted that the current SFS will do little to incentivise farming businesses to diversify how they use their land unless they have already felt motivated to do so (which many have).
A number of parties, cutting across the left and right blocks, suggest that the SFS should be reformed, removing the burdens it puts on farming businesses. These burdens are the environmental stewardship conditions the devolved state asks for in exchange for public subsidy. If these are not the goal of the SFS, and economic stability is the key goal, then what incentives would replace them?
Ultimately all parties have a different view on the purpose of the scheme over the long term and what public subsidy should be used for for the sector will remain a long-standing challenge.
A more sustainable and healthier food system, which supports local businesses, is a benefit to us all.
With a number of parties indicating an increase in the size of payments going to farming businesses in Wales, quite what scale this would be or where the money to pay for increased investment would come from, is another question. The current programme commits to around £340m (around 1.23% of Welsh Government’s budget). Again, we see some vague promises without much detail on what the alternatives would be and how they would tackle what is quite a complex area of policy with competing interests and purposes.
A balanced approach to how our land will be used over the long-term will be difficult to achieve, with competing interests and demands on under-strain farming businesses, who form the backbone of Wales’ rural economy. Yet, the agricultural sector will remain absolutely essential in solving so many of our climate and nature goals.
More positively, it’s good to see most parties engaging with the demand-side interventions in our food environment. The need for a National Food Strategy is highlighted in multiple manifestos – indicating a degree of consensus on the need for food reform, including on areas like public sector food procurement. Our agricultural sector exists primarily as an export industry, for instance, 95% of Welsh beef and lamb products are purchased and eaten outside of Wales (35% of lamb and 15% of beef produced in Wales is exported outside the UK respectively). Ensuring that more Welsh food ends up on Welsh plates is essential, as is diversifying what we produce, with a larger role for crops and horticulture (which make up just 6% of Welsh farms are devoted to). A more sustainable and healthier food system, which supports local businesses, is a benefit to us all.
Balancing environmental stewardship with economic stability will require cooperation and political bravery. Indeed, interventions needed across the entire food system, beyond SFS, requires bravery to properly engage with a wide range of issues facing the system – such as public procurement, processing, food business resilience, supply chain development, supermarket dynamics and tenancy rights and access to name but a few.
Nature and environmental protection
There is a clear distinction between environmental protection and net zero as policy agendas. There is more convergence amongst parties on policies to protect nature and our environment than on decarbonisation. For instance, all parties pledge to catalyse the public outcry over the state of our waterways, by committing to tackle river pollution. The means for doing this differ, but there is some scope for optimism given the political consensus for action.
A number of parties in the left-of-centre block make pledges regarding nature restoration, with most suggesting they will create new legal goals for nature restoration. Notably Welsh Labour support the 30 by 30 pledge (potecting 30% of land and sea for nature by 2030) and Plaid Cymru pledge to establish an independent Office for Environmental Governance Wales to strengthen compliance. These are much needed given that Wales is one of the most nature depleted nations on earth.
Notably, both Reform UK Wales and the Welsh Conservatives pledge to axe Natural Resources Wales, which is Wales’ largest arms-length body, which has considerable responsibilities over areas including managing 7% of Wales’ land, managing 56 nature reserves and delivering projects to enhance flood defences and respond to incidents. Proposing to bring these responsibilities into the Welsh public sector directly, or to create a new body to carry out these responsibilities, sits unevenly with both parties’ commitment to cutting back civil service spending.
There are some strong commitments when it comes to nature and environmental restoration across the manifestos, particularly in the topical area of our waterways. The way forward must ensure that any targets or new legislation is underpinned by the ability of the public bodies to deliver nature based projects whilst also enforcing those that are damaging our environment.
What’s next – a more divided Senedd?
The broad political consensus in Wales on the importance of meeting net zero as a unifying purpose of government has swiftly shifted. In doing so, a new political faultline has emerged. One where different visions for Wales’ future will be hotly contested in the Senedd.
What is clear is that if you believe that climate policy should be at the heart of public policy, then you need to start winning the argument for why it will improve lives.
We now have competing visions for Wales’ future, not only in the policy detail, but also in the overall importance of progressing towards net zero as an immediate and long-term policy goal. Broadly speaking, we have heard relatively little about this policy area, despite it representing a key dividing line in this election.
This faultline is likely to further expand as the makeup of the Senedd will encompass such diverging views. These tensions and fundamental disagreements on the importance of net zero as a policy goal, how it should drive policy decisions today, and the role of enhanced environmental governance are all going to be debated on stronger terms than in the 6th Senedd.
Both of these visions for Wales’ future are politically legitimate – albeit with drastically different long-term impacts. At a time when households are struggling with the cost of essentials, and when public services are underperforming, the climate agenda can fall down public saliency, as it seems to have done at this election. Moving forward these arguments must become central to how we create thriving, sustainable local communities across the nation.
What is clear is that if you believe that climate policy should be at the heart of public policy, then you need to start winning the argument for why it will improve lives. We need to see better outcomes. We need to win an inherently political argument about what our future should look like. We need to make concrete what a just transition to net zero means for our communities – why and how will they benefit from it? We cannot stop engaging in these fundamental issues. The policy ground is moving and it’s for political actors to shape which way it moves.
The argument relies not only on winning an argument for why net zero is worthwhile, but presenting a positive vision for how we can get there.
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.
