Growing objectives and dwindling resources appear poised to clash during the next Senedd session.

This emerges from a comprehensive assessment of party commitments on capital expenditure in Wales, released by Cardiff University as part of its 2026 Senedd manifesto analysis initiative, which uncovers considerable divergences between political parties and cautions that constrained capital funding will necessitate tough decisions regardless of which administration takes power.

The examination draws attention to a broad spectrum of undertakings on major infrastructure development, encompassing new medical facilities, social accommodation, road network enhancements, and railway improvements.

It notes, however, that these objectives may prove unattainable within a capital budget anticipated to contract by approximately 9 per cent in real terms across the forthcoming parliamentary session.

The document, forming part of the 2026 Scottish and Welsh Elections Project directed by Cardiff University in conjunction with the Fraser of Allander Institute and funded by the Nuffield Foundation, evaluates capital spending proposals against a backdrop of demanding financial circumstances confronting the next Welsh administration.

Mark Drakeford, the finance minister, has adopted a neutral stance towards the 2026-27 Draft Budget.

This approach means expenditure has been raised solely to correspond with projected inflation, leaving merely £118 million in uncommitted capital resources for 2026-27.

This restricted flexibility will render prioritising fresh infrastructure schemes difficult, the assessment indicates.

The capital block grant is projected to stay unchanged at roughly £3.3 billion annually until 2029-30.

With the UK Government’s focus shifting toward defence expenditure, which does not generate devolved allocations for Wales, the situation is especially demanding.

The Welsh administration can borrow up to £165 million for capital projects in 2026-27, with this amount increasing each year in step with inflation.

Supplementary UK Government capital support beyond the principal block grant – projected at £152 million in 2026-27 – is anticipated to drop sharply to just £44 million by 2029-30.

When combined, the assessment determines that the Welsh Government’s fundamental capital budget (excluding financial transactions funding) could fall by 9 per cent in real terms throughout the next Senedd term.

Medical infrastructure features prominently in every party’s election programme.

Plaid Cymru, the Welsh Conservatives and Reform UK have all put forward proposals for new surgical centres to assist in reducing NHS waiting lists.

Plaid Cymru has suggested a fresh investment initiative for sustainable health and care buildings, while the Welsh Liberal Democrats are advocating for a capital investment scheme to renovate and modernise hospital premises.

Reform UK has committed to a multi-year capital programme for modernising and renewing hospital estates.

The Welsh Conservatives intend to create a 21st Century Hospitals Fund to support hospital improvements and construction. This encompasses erecting four new community hospitals equipped with minor injuries departments.

Welsh Labour has promised £4 billion for new hospitals via its Hospitals of the Future Fund. This would encompass replacing Wrexham Maelor Hospital and University Hospital Wales, alongside a major new facility in West Wales. Nevertheless, specifics regarding project expenses, funding mechanisms and yearly spending distributions remain vague.

Health capital expenditure for 2026-27 is anticipated to amount to approximately £566 million.

After accounting for allocations for upkeep, digital improvements, diagnostic equipment, vehicles, community centres and smaller initiatives, only £250 million remains for other sanctioned and unsanctioned schemes.

Implementing the proposed £4 billion scheme across a decade would necessitate yearly spending of about £400 million – considerably exceeding current capital provisions.

Labour’s proposals depend on a blend of block grant resources, capital borrowing, and the Mutual Investment Model (MIM).

MIM postpones capital costs by employing private sector financing, though this entails future operational funding being directed toward repaying investments over time – potentially creating pressure on long-term budgets.

The New Velindre Cancer Centre, delivered via the MIM, carries a capital worth of £312 million.

Upon completion, the Welsh Government will make yearly service payments of £34 million for 25 years, with a proportion linked to inflation.

Transport investment also features prominently across election platforms.

Welsh Labour, the Welsh Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and Plaid Cymru all advocate extending rail infrastructure through new stations and line improvements.

Reform UK and the Welsh Conservatives wish to broaden rail capacity more generally. Both have additionally committed to constructing the long-debated M4 relief road south of Newport, a scheme abandoned by the current administration in 2019 with an estimated expense of £1.6 billion.

Updated construction expenses would likely be substantially greater, given a 29 per cent rise in infrastructure costs since the initial proposal was shelved.

Reform UK has indicated private financing or backing from a proposed new British Sovereign Wealth Fund. As with privately financed hospital schemes, this method would transfer initial capital costs into future spending obligations.

The A465 dualling scheme was privately financed and holds a capital worth of £590 million. It now demands yearly service payments of £38 million for the subsequent 30 years.

Dan Thomas, Reform UK leader, has proposed redirecting funding designated for rail toward road projects instead.

He has suggested diverting £2.5 billion from the Transport for Wales rail investment blueprint – valued at £14 billion by the 2040s – toward immediate road enhancements.

Nevertheless, the assessment clarifies this would not be feasible.

Rail infrastructure in Wales remains a reserved matter, meaning spending determinations are made by the UK Government rather than the Senedd.

The £14 billion proposal lacks actual funding commitments, with only £350 million identified in the 2025 Spending Review.

No additional resources could be redirected from rail to road schemes during the 2026-2030 Senedd term.

Housing pledges are similarly ambitious in scope.

The social housing grant stands at £446 million for 2026-27.

Manifesto commitments encompass Welsh Labour’s pledge of 40,000 social homes across the coming decade, Plaid Cymru’s objective of 20,000 by 2030, the Green Party’s undertaking of 60,000 over 10 years, and the Welsh Liberal Democrats’ target of 30,000.

These figures largely correspond with the outgoing administration’s goal of 20,000 additional social homes during the previous term.

Nevertheless, recent figures indicate this target will narrowly fall short, and the figures encompass non-social housing and certain existing social homes.

Substantial commitments on housing decarbonisation also feature prominently.

Welsh Labour, Plaid Cymru and the Green Party have all pledged to expand retrofitting and energy efficiency programmes.

Reform UK, by contrast, has committed to ending net zero targets in devolved policy areas and terminating Welsh Government environmental grants.

Mr Thomas has contended this would release £145 million in capital resources for other priorities. The assessment cautions that such savings could not be employed to fund the party’s proposed tax reductions.

The document concludes that whilst all parties have outlined ambitious capital spending proposals, difficult decisions will prove unavoidable given the contracting budget.

It warns that dependence on private finance models does not eradicate expenses. Instead, it postpones them – occasionally at greater total cost – to future spending periods, placing extra strain on day-to-day budgets.

Greater clarity on funding proposals is required, according to the authors, who call on parties to offer increased transparency not merely for the initial year, but throughout the entire Senedd term.

Headline commitments may prove appealing, though without certainty regarding funding, schedules and trade-offs, questions persist over their feasibility.

The assessment indicates that only through enhanced detail can electors determine whether pledges will materialise – and whether they represent optimal deployment of restricted public resources.