The Contradictions of Huw Lewis

As Huw Lewis has been gagged by Rhodri Morgan until the future make up of government in Wales is sorted, I thought I may as well stick the boot in. For many months Plaid's Leanne Wood and Huw have been skirmishing over Labour's claim that they can end child poverty from within the current remit of the Assembly. It was due to be the flagship Labour pledge of last months election, before they realised that everybody else knew they couldn't deliver.

Interesting therefore to see Rhodri Morgan push the fight against child poverty right up the agenda for the Third Assembly, which brought this swift response from Alan Trench. For those of you unaccustomed with Mr Trench he is a senior research fellow at University College London's Constitution Unit. He is reported today in the Western Mail as saying:

"The child poverty stuff is pretty nebulous, with most of the power to make improvements lying with non-devolved departments like Work and Pensions and the Treasury, although it is possible for the Assembly to tinker at the edges with initiatives like free school breakfasts.....The fact is, though, that in terms of really tackling child poverty Wales doesn't have the powers or the money."

which is more or less the point Leanne has been making - ie that control over the benefits system and primarily the ability to redistribute wealth is the key to tackling child poverty.

This is Huw Lewis' primary policy area of concern. I wouldn't want to question his sincerity without knowing him, but if this is his major policy area then he would have to come to the conclusion that Wales needs powers over these areas currently preserved at Westminster (which admittedly goes far further than a proper Parliament based on current devolved ideas.)Far from being the biggest unionist in the Assembly, shouldn't he be the most ardent nationalist?

Labour's Child Poverty Pledge Exposed

Congratulations to the BBC for highlighting Labour's inability to meet its main election pledge. This blog has long argued that the powers to eradicate child poverty are primarily the preserve of Westminster i.e control over taxation and benefits. With an impartial third party in Barnados vindicating that position, i wonder what the likes of Huw Lewis and Peter Black who have attacked Plaid on this issue have to say.

For our part in Plaid we will use the powers of the Assembly to make as much of a contribution as possible to the fight against child poverty. Our universal affordable childcare pledge will make a substantial contribution as will our pledge on free school meals. However until we have responsibility over fiscal policy and the benefits system to be able to redistribute wealth we are honest enough to admit that this issue can not be dealt addressed within the remit of the Assembly's powers.

Shame on Labour therefore for basing their election campaign on a promise they know full well they can't deliver.

How to Remove a Million Children from Poverty – The New Labour Way

Since achieving power, New Labour has always trumpeted the fight against child poverty. It symbolised their alleged determination to turn around the ravages of Thatcherism. But as always with New Labour, scratch under the surface of the rhetoric and not all is as it seems.

In 1999 the baseline year for which future targets were to be measured against, child poverty was measured on the basis of both BHC (before housing cost) and AHC (after housing cost).

The following table reproduces data on baseline, target and actual performance.


AHC (millions)
BHC (millions)
1998/99 (baseline)
4.1
3.1
Target 2004/05
3.1
2.3
Actual 2004/05
3.4
2.4

Credit where credit is due, progress has been made on both BHC and AHC measures, although both targets were missed – crucially by 200,000 more on the AHC measure.

In 2003 the Department for Work and Pensions proposed three new measures for calculating child poverty, which would be used for the 2011 target. All three new measures are calculated using a BHC analysis. At a stroke of a pen therefore over a million children have been removed from poverty based on the 2004/05 actual performance.

Child poverty campaigners argue that the BHC measure is far less accurate as it fails to take into account the costs of housing which significantly affects disposable income levels.

As this blog has eluded before, Gordon Brown and New Labour have a habit for changing the goalposts and cooking the books. Just goes to show that you can’t accept any New Labour pledge at face value.