Welsh Government criticised after tabling child poverty amendment

The Welsh Government has been accused of stalling after tabling an amendment ahead of Plaid Cymru’s debate on child poverty next week.

Plaid will urge the Welsh Government to introduce a ‘child payment’ in the Senedd next Wednesday (2 April) however the Labour government has tabled an amendment to the motion deleting the call.

Instead, it has shifted the focus to a ‘commitment…to engage with the Scottish Government to better understand the Scottish Child Payment and how it operates’.

Wednesday’s debate follows the publication last week of Welsh Government statistics which show that child poverty has risen by 2% to 31% in Wales, the highest increase of all UK nations.

This comes in the same week as the UK Labour Government announcement of cuts approaching £5 billion in welfare spending, a decision that will push a further 50,000 children into poverty across England and Wales.

Direct child payment

Plaid Cymru announced a direct child payment to tackle child poverty in their Spring Conference in Llandudno last week, claiming the payment will “boost support by putting money in the pockets of those struggling”.

A similar scheme in Scotland has had a significant impact on child poverty, helping Scotland become the only nation in the UK where child poverty levels are expected to decrease.

Plaid Cymru’s spokesperson on Social Justice, Sioned Williams MS, said: “Labour are failing our children and young people as the Government’s own figures released this week show.

“Not only is child poverty growing in Wales, but it is growing at the fastest rate of all UK nations. This is the result of 25 years of Labour inaction in getting to grips with the national stain that is child poverty.

“Their choice to ‘delete’ Plaid Cymru’s calls to implement a child payment is just another example of their refusal to take direct action on tackling child poverty. How long will Labour be content to talk around the issue when the actions needed are known and proven.”

‘Firm understanding’

On Friday, First Minister Eluned Morgan declined to back the UK Government’s benefits cuts, telling members of the Senedd she will “reserve” her position.

Speaking during a scrutiny committee hearing in the Senedd, Baroness Morgan said: “I have yet to get a firm understanding of how (the changes) will impact on Wales, and until I’m clear about the impacts, I want to reserve my position.”

Baroness Morgan wrote to Liz Kendall, the Work and Pensions Secretary, on March 11, demanding an assessment of the changes on Wales.

But she told scrutiny committee members on Friday, “I still haven’t received a response from her”, and that she would be “chasing that today”.

However, the Labour MP for the Vale of Glamorgan, Kanishka Narayan, told BBC Wales’ Politics Wales programme on Sunday morning that the First Minister has now received a response from the minister.

Following those comments, Plaid Cymru leader Rhun ap Iorwerth MS has written to Eluned Morgan, urging her to publish the response she has received ‘in full’ and ‘without delay.’

He wrote: “On BBC Wales’ Politics Wales programme this morning, Labour’s Kanishka Narayan MP suggested that you have received a response from the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Liz Kendall MP, to your original letter regarding the impact of Welfare reforms on Wales.

“Given the significant consequences these reforms will have on the people of Wales I urge you to publish the response in full, without delay.

‘Clarity’

During Friday’s committee meeting, Plaid Cymru’s Llyr Gruffydd argued that the First Minister’s position seemed to differ from how Jo Stevens, the Secretary of State for Wales, had characterised it.

Ms Stevens previously told the BBC the reforms had been “welcomed” by Baroness Morgan.

The First Minister initially sat in silence before she was pushed by Mr Gruffydd.

“My position is that I want to see absolute clarity on what the impact on Wales is,” she said.

“Until I get a firm view on that, I don’t want to make a judgment.

“Until I know what the impact will be and where we then, as a government, can position ourselves in relation to how far we can go to stand with and by people.

“But I want to be clear that I don’t think it’s sustainable for us to see the kind of huge increases in the numbers of people who are going on to benefits. This is not a sustainable situation.”