The short debate is next. I will allow some time for those Members who are leaving the Chamber if they choose to do so, and please do so quietly. Today's debate is to be moved by Rhys ab Owen.

Would you like me to begin now? Thank you very much, Llywydd. I have agreed to give a minute to my colleague Mabon ap Gwynfor. 

The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 was passed in this Chamber six years ago. Its aim was to embed in our law, our public bodies and our culture, seven well-being goals and five sustainable development principles. These five principles were to be put at the heart of every decision by a public body in Wales—every goal and every activity as well. The principles of long-term thinking, integration, preventing harm, collaboration and participation were there to help us as a nation to achieve sustainable goals.

It's no wonder that this ambitious and wide-reaching Act was credited as the envy of the world by the Government and many others at the time and subsequently. That's why our future generations commissioner, Sophie Howe, was called by the United Nations to help them in their planning for a similar commissioner role modelled on Wales. That's why, when Lord John Bird, the co-founder of The Big Issue, brought forth a Bill in the House of Lords, he praised the Welsh model for leading the way. That's why, when the Irish foreign Minister visited us last month, he said that the Act was inspirational. It's evident, Llywydd, that Wales isn't just making ripples, it's making waves in the world.

The Act coincides with a real need for long-term thinking, which has, rightly and about time, come to the forefront recently. The COVID pandemic and the climate emergency have highlighted the need for long-term thinking to mitigate our destructive short-termism—the need to forward plan our environmental strategy to fit future needs, to forward plan on housing policies to protect our communities and to support our young people and to forward plan to make sure that we here in Wales have a democracy that is strong, robust and reflective of Welsh society. All of these and more are things that the future generations of Wales should inherit from us—a prosperous Wales, a resilient Wales, a Wales of cohesive communities and of vibrant cultures.

This is what the future generations Act was supposed to accomplish. But, after six years, and many court cases later, we see that the Act does not have the necessary powers to achieve its laudable objectives. I will concede that the Act, to an extent, has changed the way that we think. Some Welsh councils have declared a nature emergency and some other public bodies have taken some positive steps to be greener. But, this doesn't go far enough. It is meaningless to have declarations and the best intentions if specific actions do not follow. It is meaningless to acknowledge objectives if they can be avoided when they are inconvenient. It is meaningless to have even the most ambitious Act if it cannot be used to hold public bodies to account when they breach that Act.

In the auditor general's study into the future generations Act, he concluded that public bodies overwhelmingly focus on improving economic and social well-being over environmental and cultural objectives. We shouldn't need reminding, Llywydd, that COP26 again stressed the importance of enshrining environmental sustainability into everyday thinking and everyday planning. There is little point to plan and to strategise about anything else unless we tackle the climate emergency, and I'm so pleased that the co-operation agreement between the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru is looking to the possibility of reaching net zero by 2035. Yet, for that to happen, environmental sustainability needs to be at the very heart of every aspect of our lives, from Government to civil society, and seeing where we can do better. 

These principles were the roots of the Act, but the Act is yet to blossom, and that is because the Act has not had the opportunity to deliver its true potential.

I fear the Act has become some sort of a tick-box exercise. Local government and public bodies will say that they've considered it, that they've considered the future, and then move on regardless with their present plans. If asked, they will be able to show that they considered the Act whilst making decisions, but I'm unconvinced that they would be able to show that the Act influenced their decision. There seems to be no clear understanding by public bodies of what the Act requires them to do. Plainly, there hasn't been a real cultural shift, a shift of thinking, a shift of doing. I was happy to hear in a recent Welsh Government statement that they were redoubling their efforts to correct this and to accelerate the change needed to help refocus public bodies. However, this shift into real change within our communities needs to strengthen communities. One way to do that would be to give enforceability powers to the Act. What's the point of an Act if we cannot penalise anyone for breaching it? Public bodies can have wanton disregard to this Act and yet face no real consequences. Acts of Parliament ought to be enforceable and not merely aspirational.

Unlike the Welsh Language Commissioner, the future generations commissioner has no powers to punish public bodies that have breached their duties. The future generations commissioner has no powers to stop things from happening or to make them happen. On many occasions, and I'm sure this is true for other Members, local campaigners have approached me and have been very critical of the commissioner—for not doing enough, and that she hasn't supported them—but the truth is that the commissioner is blameless, she doesn't have the power to make the difference that's needed.

Many people, both inside this Chamber and outside it, have criticised this Act for its lack of enforceability. When a Labour backbencher, our own Counsel General, argued that the Act was far too loose and too woolly when he was debating it in its first reading, can we really tell ourselves here now, can we really tell the people of Wales, that it has become less woolly since? We simply can't. It was true then and subsequent court hearings have shown it to be true now. It was hoped that the Act could be used by local communities within judicial review hearings, yet that has not been the case.

Can we tell the students of Cymer Afan Comprehensive that the future generations Act is watertight and protects their cohesive community? When parents of students at the school tried to implement the Act against the closure of their school back in March 2019, it failed; it failed at the first hurdle. The High Court judge Mrs Justice Lambert argued that the Act could not trigger a judicial review. She went further, and said in her decision that the Act was

'deliberately vague, general and aspirational and which applies to a class rather than individuals.'

As such, she said:

'judicial review is not the appropriate means of enforcing such duties.'

Now, I’m not commenting whether these cases would have succeeded in the judicial review applications, but they should have had the opportunity to put that argument forward, to use the Act to put their argument further. But they couldn’t—it was thrown out at the first hurdle on each and every occasion. This Act has more bark than bite, more rhetoric than reality, and is more aspirational than enforceable.

How then can we sit here—and I've heard this in the six months that I've been in the Chamber—how can we sit here and praise the Act for being radical and saying that it's the envy of the world, when it doesn't even give our citizens the rights to protect their local assets and to hold their public bodies and local government to account? The fact that people use phrases such as 'the envy of the world' routinely does not mean that it's true, and it doesn't mean that the law is perfect. We should, as a Senedd, be mature enough to recognise when a law is not good enough, and then be prepared to change it.

When the former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, said of the Act that it wasn’t specific and it wasn't tight enough; when one of Wales’s leading silks, Rhodri Williams Queen's Counsel, described it as 'virtually useless'; when the eminent public law academic, Dr Sarah Nason from Bangor University, said it didn’t endow individuals with legal, enforceable rights, they were all highlighting the same problem—the Act’s inability to properly hold public bodies to account, and the Act’s inability to properly empower local people and communities.

How can we hope to change the way that we think in Wales and embed sustainable development into our lives when citizens can't even rely on the Act to do what the Act was intended to do? It's only when the people of Wales can use this Act to protect their local assets and to hold public bodies to account that this Act will fulfil its true potential.

If the intention of this Act was to be a series of weak principles, let's be honest about that. And if that's true, then I will say that we have over-sold this Act in this Chamber. Without having the necessary powers, this Act is powerless and, more importantly, on the whole, it is useless.

That’s why this Chamber needs post-legislative scrutiny of this Act. We need to reform it. We need to give it some teeth. We need to give it some enforceability. Give it a chance to make a real change for the people of Wales, so that we can use this Act to better ourselves, to better our communities, and to better our environment.

This must become the focal point of how to fix the future generations Act and make it worthy of the lavish praise it has received. This is a chance, a real chance for us here in Wales to influence our future, and the future of our world. We can lead the way. We can show other nations how to protect our communities, our environment, and how to make sustainable development the cornerstone of our governance. And I hope that there is appetite to do this, to give the Act some teeth, to enable it to flower to its full potential.

When I questioned the Counsel General, Mick Antoniw, recently here in Plenary on the Act, he said these words:

'I think, with all legislation, once it has been in force for a while, it does need to be reviewed.'

Well, this is certainly true about the future generations Act, and that review needs to happen sooner rather than later. It needs to empower the Act. It needs to ensure that we can not only enshrine future thinking into every decision by public bodies, but that we can also hold public bodies to account when they fail to do so. Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much, Rhys, for bringing this debate forward. This legislation is held up as being very bold, that breaks new ground, and, to a certain extent, that is quite correct. If I could start by recognising the success of the legislation. When I was a county councillor, the council did have to include an impact assessment as a result of the future generations Bill, and that in itself is a positive development; it's another issue as to how officials came to those conclusions. Some of them were very doubtful, to say the least, but at least consideration was given to future generations on paper. But my concern is that, although the ideas are good on paper, that it's not possible to implement them properly, as Rhys has explained very well.

Consider the housing crisis—there are campaigners who have sought legal advice on the housing crisis and the failure of people to access the housing market in their communities, to buy or rent. They sought legal advice, and the advice was that this legislation was aspirational but didn't have teeth, and, therefore, there was no purpose in using it in a court of law. So, although the legislation makes us feel warm inside, and it looks good, the action is letting us down. I would like to hear from the Minister, therefore, what real impact she thinks this legislation has had and how our communities can benefit from this legislation. Thank you very much.

The Minister for Social Justice to reply to the debate—Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I'd like to thank Rhys for bringing this debate today on the well-being of future generations Act, and I very much welcome the continuation of the conversation we've been having in the Senedd about the Act at the start of this term.

And I just wanted to recall, during the opening ceremony of the sixth Senedd, we had a reading of a specially commissioned poem, 'Ein Llais - Our Voice', a poem created with the help of the future generations commissioner's poet in residence. And the final words of that poem—and I know we were all very moved by it:

'We want to set an example for the rest of the world.'

So, I do think we can be proud that other countries and international organisations are looking to Wales for inspiration on how to legislate for the future, and I know you've acknowledged that, Rhys, in your contribution tonight. But we can't underestimate the fact that the well-being of future generations Act is showing a uniquely Welsh way of tackling the long-term challenges we face, with its focus on empowering and transforming how Government and public bodies work. And it does this by enabling bodies to work in that preventative, collaborative and integrated way, one which involves citizens and looks to the long term. You know, it has been recognised internationally, as you've identified. It is inspiring organisations and governments across the world. And we did take a bold decision to legislate in this way—those of us who were here at the time, taking that legislation through. It is different, and there are many views on what the Act is and what it should be in the future. It's been described as 'remarkable' in terms of its breadth, its coverage and its ambition, and, internationally, we have seen example upon example of where the Welsh approach has been adopted or has influenced thinking.

In Scotland, they are committed to future generations legislation. In the UK Parliament, as you've already mentioned, Lord John Bird and Simon Fell MP are co-sponsoring a well-being of future generations Bill, modelled on our legislation. In November, the Irish foreign Minister, Simon Coveney, told the Welsh Ministers that the Act was inspirational and that the Irish Government would be keen to replicate it. New Zealand amended their public finance Act, so that their Government has set out the well-being objectives that will guide the Government's budget decisions and support long-term well-being.

In 2019, the Government of Jersey legislated to require their Council of Ministers to take into account the sustainable well-being of current and future generations. And, earlier this year, the United Nations made substantial commitments to bring in a future-generations approach into the UN system. The WHO, the World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, recognises the value of the Act for health, stating that

'the Act truly resonates with the SDGs and with the values and principles of Health 2020, the WHO European policy framework for health and well-being.'

And next week, I'm speaking at the tenth global conference on health promotion, focusing on well-being equity and sustainable development. We as Wales are attracting international interest because our approach is distinctive.

Let's look at those key features of that Act: the establishment of an independent future generations commissioner for Wales, powerfully independent and such a strong voice, showing and demonstrating the leadership that that Act needed in our future generations commissioner to take us forward into the first years of the Act, specifically tasked with promoting the sustainable development principle and acting as a guardian of the ability of future generations to meet their needs. The commissioner and her team have led the message to spread the Welsh approach across the world, and supported and advised bodies in Wales on how to work in a sustainable way. One of the commissioner's initiatives, which they've been very pleased to engage with, is the development of the Future Generations Leadership Academy. That's supporting our diverse range of young people to develop their leadership on the well-being of future generations agenda. I know all 35 members of the new cohort met together last month. They're going to be a beacon of change, not just in terms of Government, public sector, business and the community sectors—that's where they're drawn from, and members of the Welsh Government civil service are part of that.

Culture is also one of the distinctive characteristics to the Welsh approach. That's a strong feeling that we needed to ensure that cultural well-being became the fourth defining feature of sustainable development, alongside the economy, environment and society. Looking ahead, our co-operation agreement includes a commitment to develop a new culture strategy and ensure that each Government department works strategically towards that sixth well-being goal: a Wales of vibrant culture and thriving Welsh language.

I think the citizen engagement and involvement way of working is particularly distinctive. It does look to transform how public bodies involve people in the decisions that affect them, and the role of citizens in shaping Wales's future is essential if we're going to achieve the well-being goals. So, the Act requiring public bodies to ensure the involvement of people is at the heart of how they work. Public bodies are not all used to—. They don't all have the tradition and understanding of how that happens, but it has been making a difference—that approach.

And I just want to mention the race equality action plan for an anti-racist Wales, which was co-constructed with black, Asian and ethnic minority communities. It's grounded in that recognition of a need for fundamental change, reflects our commitment to listen to our ethnic minority people, communities and networks, and to take action to make changes in ways that are tangible to their communities, based on their lived experience, them coming into the Welsh Government, mentoring the civil servants, then funding groups in communities to influence the plan. But I do agree with the sentiment behind the Member's views about involving citizens in the decisions that affect them. It's very clear that that has to be about the diversity of Wales—a core of the sustainable development principle.

Now, we go on to the crux of your debate today about the fact that the Act doesn't—the points that you wanted to raise in this debate—confer individual rights onto citizens. It wasn't designed to do this, and we do caution against placing expectations on the Act that it's not designed to do. But we can and must have the debate about whether the Act needs to change, and I'll work with the Equality and Social Justice Committee and Members on matters relating to any post-legislative review. I'm sure that's what you wanted to hear tonight.

We do have to recognise, just in terms of those kinds of so-called individual decisions—I won't go into all of them that you've raised—that a public body's duty to act in accordance with the sustainable development principle doesn't dictate the decision they must reach in any given situation. The Act wasn't designed to provide the right answers. It doesn't remove the difficult decisions that public bodies must take, but it does set out factors that they must conscientiously consider before making a decision to which the well-being duty applies, and Mabon actually drew attention to how, as a local authority councillor, it was brought into the considerations in terms of difficult decisions that were being made.

I can give you many examples of how we feel the Act is remaining up to date, is relevant for Wales now and in the future, and I do hope that that is what you feel, because it's such a powerful tool.

Next week, I will be making a statement on the national milestones and updated national indicators—we're laying it next week—further explanation of what the well-being goals mean in practice, updating our indicators as well, and particularly looking at those issues that are crucial in terms of how the Act can keep pace with the Wales of today.

I think it's also important that we recognise that the future generations report and the evidence presented to the Public Accounts Committee showed that the Act was changing conversations and the ways in which public bodies work, and the commissioner said that the Act is bringing about some excellent innovation and she's observing a growing movement of change, with people daring to deliver differently—Public Health Wales, our health sustainability hub; Rhondda Cynon Taf, an involvement platform in terms of getting involved in information on climate change; the Co-production Network for Wales; the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service, Natural Resources Wales, looking at collaboration, integration; and Amgueddfa Cymru, looking at a well-being objective on developing skills for employing young people. I can go on, but we're out of time, I can see, Llywydd.

So, I just want to say finally that our co-operation agreement does give us opportunities, doesn't it, particularly, as you've said, in relation to the climate and nature emergencies, the greatest threats facing our world, but we can work together to tackle these twin emergencies. We are taking those bold steps towards a net-zero Wales and addressing nature loss, improving diversity and planting more trees, and our shared policy area on sustainable public services will help us understand the future needs of Welsh public services. So, these commitments build on our shared values of social solidarity, a sustainable planet and a vibrant democracy. So, where we go forward, it must be on the strength of belief in this Act, belief in it and in the way it's delivered. We're at the start of a journey—I was very conscious of the words that are in this little book, which you will, I'm sure, be aware of, 'futuregen: Lessons from a small country', which was co-authored by Jane Davidson, who helped set us off as a former Minister, about the recognition:

'What Wales is doing today, the world will do tomorrow' by the UN Assistant Secretary General. So, let's be proud of the Act, and let's make it work. Diolch yn fawr.

That brings today's proceedings to a close.

The meeting ended at 18:48.