Elections and the aphrodisiac of hope

Greens gaining ground

Zack Polanski’s brand of eco-populism resulted in the Green Party of England and Wales receiving the second largest share of the vote in England’s local elections and returning their first representatives in the Senedd. All the while, the Scottish Green Party returned their largest number of MSPs ever

In recent comments, Mr Polanski outlined his support for measuring the wellbeing of the people as a better guide to government decision-making. This was welcomed by Carnegie UK as our central philosophy revolves around such a shift.

The ‘eco’ element of the Greens’ agenda is familiar and welcome to all that are rightly concerned about climate change and environmental degradation. But the populist elements of their agenda might ring some alarm bells for people like me that believe that politics is about choices and trade-offs. This thinking was exemplified by the Scottish Greens’ choice to release a deliberately uncosted manifesto.

Rampaging Reform UK

The evidence is clear that lots of people like what Reform UK are selling. They polled more than any other party in the local elections in England and had breakthroughs in the Scottish Parliament and the Senedd.

But it remains to be seen what the party will do with their electoral success. In Scotland, Reform UK argued it was ‘childish’ for other parties to refuse to work with them, while in Wales they say they want to break up the ‘cosy consensus’. The party’s larger challenge might be that at least some of their experience in power locally in England has revealed that governing well is hard.

However, with UK-wide Ipsos polling showing that Reform UK are trusted more than any other party on issues such as crime, immigration and the cost living, their rivals have their work cut out.

While Reform UK might be effectively presenting themselves as a party alive to the concerns of large parts of the UK electorate, the credibility of their policy platform has been questioned by sober and serious commentators. On the other hand, returning Reform UK MSP Graham Simpson’s contribution to Carnegie UK’s essay series about the future of Scotland talked about the importance of prevention in the country’s public policy approach.

What next in Scotland?

The SNP winning a fifth Scottish Parliament election is an unprecedented achievement.

But their long-term electoral success poses the question: “Can a party continuing in power effectively critique the decisions of its own previous administrations?” Helpfully with 64 new MSPs elected to the parliament, First Minister John Swinney will find plenty of fresh eyes to scrutinise his policy choices.

The SNP manifesto says that they will deliver “a reformed National Performance Framework, with a clear set of long-term, strategic national outcomes.” And that “these strategic outcomes will then shape government, our spending decisions and policy priorities. “

At Carnegie UK, we’ve been a supportive but sometimes critical friend of the National Performance Framework in Scotland. Supportive of the concept of a decision-making tool to bring government and partners together around shared goals for the country and its people, but critical of its overall impact on Scottish public policy and practice.

With former Deputy FM Kate Forbes outlining plans for reforms to the framework shortly before parliament was dissolved, we’ll be following how these plans are received by both the old hands and wide-eyed newbies at Holyrood.

For those with their eyes on the horizon, the news that the Scottish Futures Forum will soon become a new Parliamentary ‘futures thinking service’ will intrigue many. Does this satisfy the motivation behind the former Finance and Public Administration’s Committee’s recommendation that Holyrood should create a Committee for the Future?

What next in Wales?

“By 2046, I hope Wales will have been able to cast off its current fixation with sticking-plaster solutions and embed longer-term thinking into its governance by making prevention and sustainability central to its ethos.” said now First Minister of Wales Rhun ap Iorwerth in our essay series about the future of Wales.

Plaid Cymru ended 100 years of Labour dominance in Wales by becoming the largest party in the Senedd at these elections. And the party’s manifesto stated: “We are rightly proud of Wales’s world leading Well-being of Future Generations Act. However, too often its implementation has resulted in repetitive and overlapping plans and strategies, rather than tangible outcomes that improve people’s lives. Plaid Cymru will review the Act and work with the Future Generations Commissioner to ensure it delivers meaningful, measurable change and makes a real difference to the lives of people in Wales.”

Last term, a Senedd committee warned that the Act was “falling short of its ambitions”. Carnegie UK – mindful of the view that meaningful change will take time – has also offered constructive thoughts about changes that might be required.

A change in the party of power will be a crucial test for this important legislation, and international and domestic observers will be interested to see whether an ambitious new government will continue to use the spirit of the legislation to shape decision-making, or will be tempted to sideline it to advance another agenda.

Furthermore, Wales’s Future Generation Commissioner has made a timely intervention with a call for a new Senedd Committee for the Future, arguing that “The direction of travel is not towards less long-term thinking in parliaments, but more — and towards embedding it more directly into democratic institutions.”

What next at Westminster?

At time of writing, the Prime Minister is facing a leadership challenge, thanks to Labour’s poor showing at the elections. John Major would not approve.

Sir John said: “The fate of individual politicians doesn’t really matter as much as the development of the right policy. I mean, it isn’t a good idea to keep changing prime ministers.”

But stabilising our political leadership looks easier said than done. So how else might we inject long-term thinking into our UK-wide politics?

Well, Carnegie UK is supportive of this campaign to create a Westminster Parliamentary Committee for the Future. As the proposal outlines, a 2024 report by the Liaison Committee – the “super committee” which oversees the select committee system in the House of Commons – concluded bluntly that the government’s inability to think long-term has harmed public confidence in our democracy.

A move to create a new Westminster Committee of the Future – conceivably integrating a standing citizens’ jury or panel – might help to hold the government accountable for long-term decisions, whatever the political noise of the that day.

There is a hill to climb though; our recent polling of elected members shows that Westminster politicians are especially cynical about involving the public in their decision-making. However, as we have argued elsewhere, participative approaches might offer government and parliamentarians a means to makes progress on important but contentious issues.

Where are we now?

The outcomes of these elections do not point clearly towards a stronger commitment to long-term thinking, but nor do they rule it out. What they show instead is that progress towards a better future depends less on who wins a given contest and more on whether political and governmental systems provide the incentives and means to tackle difficult choices.

Across the UK, there are emerging opportunities to embed longer-term perspectives in policy and parliamentary practice, but they will require sustained effort and political champions to make them stick.