For the past two years, the Welsh parliament, or “Senedd”, has debated how to combat deliberate lying by politicians and restore public confidence in democracy. If passed, a new law will make Wales the first country in the world to ban political lying.
There is a broad cross-party consensus in Wales that the current system offers few real consequences for dishonesty. As a member of the Senedd said: “Lies thrive in politics because we managed to get away with her.”
That frustration has now translated into legislative action. A bill that makes it illegal to do false or misleading statementss during the Welsh election campaigns it passed its first stage in the Senedd.
But although the principle underlying the law garners support, the details, and the speed with which it is being driven, have triggered growing unrest, says Stephen Clearprofessor at Bangor University , in an article published in .
The proposed ban will not be ready in time for the next Welsh elections in May. Even though the legislation survive the remaining stageswould not come into force until the 2030 elections at the earliest. Ministers suggested that even this calendar could be optimistic.
This has led some members of the Senedd, including from the governing Labor Party, to warn that Wales risks approving in a hurry legislation that may be symbolically satisfactory but legally defective.
A member of the Senedd warned against the risks of approving “bad legislation” just to “make people feel good about themselves“Others warned that the bill could inadvertently restrict freedom of expression. If approved, the country will become the first in the world to prohibit political lying.
At the heart of the concern is this: how to ban political lies without undermining yourself democratic debate?
What does the bill actually do?
The bill follows recommendations made by the Senedd standards committee in February 2025, which called for practical reforms by 2026, along with longer-term measures to deter deliberate deception both by members of the Senedd and by election candidates.
However, and crucially, the bill does not introduce a general ban of lying by two politicians once elected. Instead, it focuses strictly on statements made during election campaigns.
The bill also gives Welsh ministers the power to create a new offense for false or misleading statements designed to influence results electoral.
There are already some safeguards: It is currently illegal to make false statements about the personal character or conduct of a candidate during an election. The new proposal goes further. It potentially covers a much wider range of political discourse, although it is not clear to what extent.
For conduct outside election periods, the commission recommended strengthening the existing system of investigation by the Senedd’s standards commissioner, rather than introducing criminal sanctions.
Freedom of expression is the blocking point
Critics of the bill do not oppose the aim of honesty in politics. Their concern is that the proposed law, as currently drafted, does not define What counts as a “false or misleading” statement.
Which clear borderssome members of the Senedd fear that politicians may simply choose not to speak – or avoid controversial issues altogether – rather than risk a lawsuit.
Political debate often involves think offhandinterpret incomplete information, or present one side of a complex argument. This is not the same as deliberate lies.
But critics argue that, no precisionthe law may have difficulty in distinguish between intentional deception and disagreement legitimate.
The Senedd standards committee – which the Welsh government asked to examine the proposal – went further. She said she was not “convinced” that creating a new crime would restore public confidencewarning rather that “the risks and unintended consequences currently outweigh the benefits“.
Among these risks are the existing pressure on the judicial system. There is also the difficulty of prove that a statement is objectively false and there are potential conflicts with freedom of expression.
Under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, people – including politicians – have the right to freedom of expression, particularly in political debate.
Although this right is not absoluteany restriction must be clearly defined, proportional and necessary. The commission warned that a vaguely worded crime targeting political speech could be vulnerable to legal challenge on these grounds.
Even those who support stricter standards in Welsh politics recognize this tension. If politicians fear that honest mistakesstrong opinions presented as facts or strategic campaign arguments may later be judged criminally false, the debate itself may be cooled, which may weaken democracy instead of strengthening it.
Advocates of legal enforcement argue that these risks can be managed, but only with much tighter definition and stronger safeguards. They emphasize that any criminal accusation must target deliberate factual deception intended to influence voters, not opinion, rhetoric or predictions policies.
Drawing this line is, however, easier said than doner. Competing interpretations of economic data would they be criminalized? What about optimistic promises based on uncertain predictions? If such speech were caught by law, it could narrow the space for open political disagreement.
For this reason, some experts and think tanks have suggested alternative models. These include systems supervised by independent bodies rather than criminal courts, or sanctions focused on correctness and transparency rather than punishment.
The challenge facing the Senedd is delicate. You must decide whether you can draft a law that is narrow enough to combat the intentional deceptionrobust enough to resist legal scrutiny and flexible enough to preserve democratic debate.
Whether that balance can be struck, and the Bill survives the next stages, will determine whether Wales becomes pioneer in political honesty — or a fable about the consequences of legislate in a hurry.
