Sioned Williams

The UK Government had announced the end of the £20 Universal Credit uplift introduced during the pandemic. The Department for Work and Pensions admitted, in response to a Plaid Cymru question, that no assessment had been made of the impact on child poverty in Wales. Furlough was also ending, and unemployment was rising.

Williams called the UK Government's welfare policies 'callous' and warned they would 'push thousands into deeper poverty.' She directly linked the case for welfare devolution to the immediate crisis, arguing that Wales could not afford to wait for more progressive politics in England. Her question — 'Is this not reason enough for the Welsh Government to demand power over welfare so we can shield our citizens from the brunt of Tory cruelty?' — exemplified her approach of framing devolution as a social justice imperative rather than an abstract constitutional principle. This was an early statement of what would become her consistent theme: that the devolution of welfare, benefits, and social security is essential for Wales to protect its most vulnerable citizens from Westminster policies that don't reflect Welsh values.

The UK was experiencing its worst cost-of-living crisis in decades, with energy bills soaring and inflation outstripping wage growth. Plaid Cymru published a five-point plan for Wales that included both immediate relief measures and structural calls for welfare devolution.

As Plaid's Social Justice spokesperson, Williams led the public messaging around the plan, which included expanding the Winter Fuel Support scheme, accelerating free school meals, cancelling council tax arrears, capping social housing rents, and — crucially — 'pursuing the devolution of powers over welfare.' She hosted a public event bringing together politicians, activists, and experts to discuss the crisis, arguing that Welsh Government action was constrained by Westminster's control of the welfare system. Her framing was deliberately practical: she pointed to examples like a benefits hub in Llanelli where one woman's needs assessment resulted in an extra £800 per month in payments, arguing this kind of targeted Welsh approach could be scaled nationally with devolved powers. The plan positioned welfare devolution not as a nationalist aspiration but as a concrete tool for addressing poverty.

A major report on the state of human rights in Wales, co-authored by Amnesty International Cymru and Swansea University, had found that human rights protections were too often 'promises rather than protections.' The Welsh Government had ambitious stated commitments — including the anti-racist Wales plan and the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act — but the report exposed a gap between rhetoric and legal reality.

Williams, who chairs the Senedd's cross-party group on human rights, used the report to argue that disabled people, refugees, and children were being let down by a system that lacked legal teeth. She described the findings as 'sobering,' warning that vulnerable people were 'dependent on goodwill rather than legal guarantees.' Her intervention connected the human rights agenda directly to the devolution question: she argued that the Welsh Government needed to embed rights in law rather than rely on the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act alone, and that full devolution of justice would be necessary to create a truly distinct Welsh human rights framework. Former Plaid leader Adam Price supported her call, arguing that legislation would give 'teeth' to existing laws. The debate illustrated Williams's consistent strategy of using social justice issues to build the case for expanded devolved powers.