National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon and welcome to this Plenary session. Before we begin, I want to set out a few points. This meeting will be held in a hybrid format, with some Members in the Senedd Chamber and others joining by video-conference. All Members participating in proceedings of the Senedd, wherever they may be, will be treated equally. A Plenary meeting held using video-conference, in accordance with the Standing Orders of the Welsh Parliament, constitutes Senedd proceedings for the purposes of the Government of Wales Act 2006. Some of the provisions of Standing Order 34 will apply for today's Plenary meeting, and these are set out on your agenda.

Before we begin our work today, we will spend a few moments reflecting on the sad and unexpected news that came through yesterday of the death of former Member, and friend to many, Aled Roberts, who was a Member representing north Wales here between 2011 and 2016. It's fair to say that some Members can make a huge impression in a relatively brief period, and Aled was one of those. An instinctive parliamentarian who worked across parties, just as effective in collaborating as he was in scrutinising and challenging, and doing that collaboration and scrutiny with courtesy and a smile. Aled Roberts was full of hope on the future of his nation and his language. His was an excellent appointment as Welsh Language Commissioner. His dear Rhosllannerchrugog, his language and his country are poorer today without him, but we all thank him for everything he achieved, and are thinking of his family in their cruel loss. 

I will now invite each party to contribute to the tributes to Aled Roberts. I'll start by inviting the First Minister, Mark Drakeford, to share a few comments. Mark Drakeford. 

Thank you very much, Llywydd. It was very sad to hear of the death of Aled Roberts. As you said, Llywydd, Aled, as a former Member, was a friend to many of us in the Senedd. Be it as leader of Wrexham council, a Member of the Senedd or as Welsh Language Commissioner, Aled stood strongly for the principle of social justice. Throughout his professional career, Aled strove for what was important to him, and was willing to fight for fair play and equality.

When he was appointed Welsh Language Commissioner, he brought new energy to the role. He was a people person, and he was a commissioner who was open to listening to people and to providing constructive support to them. He was a sincere, warm man who was full of humour. We are greatly indebted to him for his unstinting service and for his friendship. His passion and commitment to the Welsh language could not have been beaten, as a chapel organist or as the chair of governors at Ysgol Morgan Llwyd. His local community in Rhos was so very important to him, and, despite his busy schedule, he always supported that community. 

We sympathise greatly with his family in these very difficult circumstances as we commemorate him in the Chamber today. 

The leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies. 

Thank you, Presiding Officer. These are the types of moments that you never really wish you have to do, or if you do do them, someone's had a good, full and active life and lived to a good age. Aled lived a very good and active life, but he's been taken away from us far too soon at the age of 59 years. It is the case that Aled was a facilitator in life, whether it be the legal profession he trained to go into from Aberystwyth University or the politics he espoused. And we weren't on the same side of the aisle, but he definitely was someone who'd reach out across that aisle to reach consensus and build a better Wales. And whether that be when he was a councillor in Wrexham, a leader of the council, or indeed here as an MS for the term that was 2011 to 2016, he certainly worked across party to make sure that we could reach that consensus to build a better and stronger Wales. 

And in particular, the work that he undertook when he left this place and getting appointed as Welsh Language Commissioner reached into communities the length and breadth of Wales to increase the uptake of the language. And as I said in my opening remarks, he has been taken away from us far too young at the age of 59, but to be taken away from your family at that age is even more of a cruel blow. And I'm sure we all reflect on the trauma that has created and the grief that has created for Llinos and the children, and the wider family, and we send our kindest regards and condolences to them at this most difficult time. I hope they are able to wrap themselves in the blanket of achievements that he made when he was here, and at Wrexham, and in his business life as a lawyer, serving his constituents and serving his clients in north Wales.

And on behalf of Plaid Cymru, Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you, Llywydd. Well, the appallingly sad news of the loss of Aled came as a huge shock to many of us, of course. I was aware that he hadn't been in the best of health over the past 12 months, but when the news broke yesterday, we were all shaken by the loss of a sincere, warm, humorous, and very passionate man. But it was a gentle passion that Aled had—he was one who was always willing to work across party boundaries for the benefit of his community and his nation. And that was clear, of course, from his days as leader of Wrexham council, when his door was always open for one and all. And, of course, he gave clear leadership in terms of the Welsh language during that time, opening new Welsh-medium schools in the county and ensuring that the Welsh language was a corporate priority for the council at that time. And having the opportunity to carry that through at a national level, in his role as Welsh Language Commissioner, was something that I know Aled was extremely proud of.

I had the privilege, like many of us in this Senedd, to work very closely with him in the fourth Senedd—both of us elected on the same day in 2011, and both of us representing the North Wales region. We spent hours putting the world to rights on those lengthy train journeys from Wrexham to Cardiff and back, and the conversations varied from discussing the detail of parliamentary legislation to the performance of Wrexham football club on the weekend. Of course, he was a huge fan of his local football club, but also a huge supporter of his community more broadly. He was chair of the Stiwt in Rhos—a building that he played a central part in its reopening. He sang in local choirs, he was an organist at his chapel and a governor of local schools. He was very much the man of his people.

Therefore, the loss of Aled is a huge blow in many ways, and, of course, our thoughts are with Llinos, the boys, and his whole family at this difficult time. I and everyone in Plaid Cymru want to extend our sympathies to them. But I also want to express our thanks—our thanks for all the work that he did, and to give thanks that he was able to achieve so much in a life that was cut short far too soon.

And to conclude the tributes, the leader of Aled Roberts's party, Jane Dodds.

Thank you, Llywydd. First of all, may I send the party's condolences, and all of our condolences, to Llinos and the family? It's a great shock to all of us—here and in the Liberal Democrat family. Aled was one of the kindest, friendliest and most hard-working people that I and others ever met. Aled made a major contribution to the political life of Wales, and to the communities that he served. Rhosllanerchrugog ran through him like a stick of rock. And while we're all familiar with Aled's political career—in the Ponciau ward, a mayor and leader of Wrexham council, or as a Member of the Senedd for North Wales—it was the community of Rhosllanerchrugog, and his family, that came first every time.

Aled was eager as a councillor and as a Member of the Assembly—as it was at the time—to do the little things for his community, through setting solar panels on a housing estate in Llay, investing in public transport infrastructure and community health, or through investing in the schools of Wrexham. And I know how much of a privilege it was for him to work on behalf of the Welsh language as the Welsh Language Commissioner, and to ensure that every child in Wales had the opportunity to receive their education through the medium of Welsh. As somebody from Wrexham, I know that Wrexham isn't usually an area where the language flourishes. And that's what was so special—that Aled was the language commissioner: he was from Wrexham, and had served his community, his nation, and his language with a great deal of dignity, as an example to us all. Thank you, Aled.

I thank you all for wonderful tributes to Aled Roberts, the man of 'gentle passion', in the words of one of our contributors. Thank you very much, and I will ensure that your words are shared with Aled Roberts' family on behalf of us all as a Senedd. 

We'll move on to questions to the First Minister, and the first question is from Gareth Davies. 

Llywydd, the UK Government was very clear that it saw no role at all for the Welsh Government in last year’s shared prosperity fund pilots, in either the design of those pilots or the decisions made within them. I hope for a different approach when the proposals for the fund are eventually published.

Thank you for that answer, First Minister. My constituents have already benefited from the UK Government's levelling-up agenda. Projects in the vale had a share of nearly £3 million in the past year through the precursor to the shared prosperity fund. The community renewal fund has brought in much needed cash for projects across my patch, from youth projects to employment schemes and everything in-between. So, First Minister, if the Vale of Clwyd is to reap the rewards of the shared prosperity scheme, it needs both Governments at either side of the M4 working hand in hand. Will your Government commit to making the levelling-up agenda a complete success, working with the UK Government rather than just sniping from the sidelines? 

Well, Llywydd, I agree that, if a success is to be made in the shared prosperity fund, then it should be a joint endeavour between the UK Government and the Welsh Government. That has been our position for many, many months. The difficulty is not with the Welsh Government wishing to play a part; it is simply that the UK Government is clear—has been up until now, at least—that there is no part at all for us to play. Now, the House of Lords—its constitution select committee—reported on this matter only a couple of weeks ago. It surveyed the history of the shared prosperity fund, and this is what it said: it is the UK Government's lack of engagement with devolved administrations that is unhelpful and has undermined trust. The devolved administrations should have a more constructive role in the governance of the shared prosperity fund. This should include decisions about local priorities and the allocation of funding. Now, if the UK Government is prepared to take the advice of the House of Lords select committee, then we will have a joint approach to decision making under the fund. If the UK Government is prepared to offer that, then the Welsh Government will be a willing partner. 

First Minister, how do you think residents in the Vale of Clwyd will react knowing that Wales will be £1 billion worse off over the next three years as a result of a broken Conservative promise that we would not be a penny worse off? 

Well, Llywydd, I thank Carolyn Thomas for that. I did think that the original questioner had a very strange view indeed of what was in the best interests of his own constituents. He asks them to celebrate the £47 million received in Wales from the community renewal fund without drawing attention to the £375 million that Wales has lost out on in that year. Now, under the previous funds that came to Wales, the Vale of Clwyd and the whole of north Wales benefited far, far more than any small dribbling out of funds from last year's community renewal fund: £28.5 million for renewable energy, marine energy alone, across north Wales; £7 million for major regeneration projects, including the Queen's Buildings in Rhyl and £1 million to upgrade Rhyl station; and major north Wales investments in skills and in research, Llywydd. I think it's very unlikely indeed that residents in the Vale of Clwyd will be celebrating at having been offered sixpence when they've lost a pound. 

These actions were set out by my colleague the Minister for Economy last week when he committed the Welsh Government to invest £366 million over the next three years to deliver an increased number of 125,000 all-age apprenticeships across Wales, including, of course, in Islwyn.

Thank you, First Minister. The Welsh Labour Government's avowed commitment to ensure at least 90 per cent of 16 to 24-year-olds will be in education, employment or training by 2050 is a hallmark of the progressive agenda of this socialist Welsh Labour Government. First Minister, when I speak to my constituents, whether they be a grandmother in Crumlin, a father in Cwmcarn or a young person in Crosskeys, invariably one of their most pressing concerns is the availability of employment, training and apprenticeships in the communities of Islwyn for the next generation of Welsh workers. First Minister, with £1 billion—£1 billion—in promised post-European Union funds missing from this Welsh budget and directly accountable to the UK Tory Government's broken promises, what mitigating measures can the Welsh Government take to ensure that this fundamental aim to reshape the Labour market in Wales is delivered? And First Minister, what message also do you have to employers in Islwyn about the value of apprenticeships to their companies' futures?

I thank Rhianon Passmore for that question. She is absolutely right to point to the fact that that absolute guarantee that we were offered on the floor of the Senedd as well as everywhere else—that Wales would not be a penny worse off as a result of leaving the European Union—has been comprehensively broken and abandoned by the UK Government. In not a single year of the three-year period covered by the comprehensive spending review will money available to Wales reach the level that would have been available while we were members of the European Union. Some £375 million a year would have been available to Wales. We get £92 million next year, £161 million in the year after, and even in the third year of the comprehensive spending review we end up with £345 million. 

Let me be clear, Llywydd, that this is not simply—[Inaudible.]—we are being short-changed from what the Government said in its manifesto for the 2019 general election, and what the Chancellor said in the comprehensive spending review only a few short months ago. We will never, under Conservative plans, get back to where we were, let alone, as they promised, as a minimum—and that's the phrase they used, Llywydd, 'as a minimum'—that we would never be a penny worse off in any single year. It's simply not true, and of course it has an impact on the ability of the Welsh Government to invest in the sorts of skills programmes that are vital in terms of apprenticeships. 

Rhianon Passmore asks me what message I would give to employers in Islwyn. My first message would be to thank them—to thank them for the way in which they themselves play their part in offering young people the opportunities that apprenticeships bring. I've looked recently at the range of opportunities there are for young people in Islwyn who want to take the apprenticeship route, and there are apprenticeships available in the local health board, in the local authority, in local schools and in the private sector—in retail, in travel and in fitness. The single largest number of apprenticeship opportunities available in Islwyn comes in the care sector, Llywydd—20 opportunities or more available to people willing to go into that vital foundational economy industry of the future. 

My message to employers is, as I say, to thank them for the commitment they show already to assisting with the apprenticeship programme. It delivers for young people but it delivers for them as well. It helps them to create that skilled and committed workforce of the future. We need more employers in Islwyn and elsewhere to come forward to be part of that vital investment in the future of Wales.

First Minister, I welcome your Government's commitment to providing 125,000 all-age apprenticeships in Wales over the next three years. However, I'm sure that you will agree with me that we need to ensure quality as well as quantity. It is vital that these apprenticeships should smooth the school-to-work transition of younger workers and support the transition of existing workers into highly skilled senior roles. First Minister, will you commit to setting a series of clear aims for your apprenticeship programme so progress can be measured to ensure it meets the needs of employers and trainees, and delivers the skilled workforce required by the Welsh economy today and in the future as well? Thank you.

I agree very much with the general sentiments of the Member's question. Of course, we have to focus on the quality of the opportunities that the apprenticeship programme brings. As she said, it's not simply for young people; these are all-age apprenticeships—very often, people looking for a second start in life, an opportunity to retrain and put themselves into a different part of the labour market. It is why the modern apprenticeship programme in Wales reflects that wide variety of needs.

I think, Llywydd, it was only a couple of weeks ago that I was discussing with Alun Davies the success there has been in Blaenau Gwent in the shared apprenticeship programme, where a number of small businesses are able to get together, any one of them by themselves not able to support a full apprenticeship, but together able to create those opportunities and to benefit from them by bringing somebody into the workplace and sharing their learning, and sharing, then, their developing skills amongst them. It's why we have put such an emphasis on graduate-level apprenticeships. I know that the Member will be aware of the way in which our investment in those degree-level opportunities has made such a difference, for example, in the cybersecurity cluster—the largest cybersecurity cluster anywhere in the United Kingdom, which we now have in the south-east of Wales.

That range of opportunities means that we're able to match the needs of the individual with the sort of experience that will do the most to help them to make the progress they're looking for in their own lives. And, of course, we do measure all those opportunities. We measure them numerically but we measure them as well, as the Member suggested, in the quality of the experiences that are on offer, in the qualifications gained and the benefits that that brings to the wider economy. 

Questions now from party leaders. Leader of the Welsh Conservatives, Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. First Minister, may I send my best wishes to you? It's good to see you looking well and I hope that you come out of confinement as quickly as possible. It's good to see you on the screen today looking so well.

First Minister, inward investment is going to be critical to building a strong and resilient economy post COVID. What has the Welsh Government got in terms of plans to attract a greater share of inward investment into the United Kingdom? 

Can I thank Andrew R.T. Davies for what he said in his opening remarks? I too am looking forward very much to being released from confinement and back in the Chamber again.

I agree with him that inward investment does have an important part to play in the future of the Welsh economy, alongside—not instead of, but alongside—the investment we need to make in those successful companies that are already indigenous here in Wales to help them to grow, to help them to remain rooted here in Welsh communities. We take a whole range of actions to encourage inward investment. Our international relations offices in different parts of Europe and beyond all have, as their primary purpose, the identification of inward investment opportunities, and also export opportunities for Welsh businesses looking to create new markets elsewhere in the world. I myself have a series of opportunities in the coming weeks to meet with ambassadors from different parts of the world. We always focus on the inward investment that we have here in Wales from those other parts of the world, to make sure that, where opportunities exist to add to that, we as a Welsh Government are active in our promotion of those opportunities and in helping companies that wish to come to Wales to put together the packages that they need to make sure that they can successfully make that transition, and, thinking of the questions we've just had, to make sure that there is a supply of people with the skills necessary to take up those opportunities.

It's interesting you say that, First Minister, about putting the packages together, because in 2020, Britishvolt said that they wanted to set up a battery cell gigafactory in St Athan in the Vale of Glamorgan, creating 3,000 jobs and 4,000 associated jobs—7,000 jobs in total, the second largest industrial investment project in the United Kingdom. That's worth repeating: the second largest industrial project in UK history. This is exactly the sort of project that we should be trying to attract here in Wales and secure its foundations here in Wales. Britishvolt has secured financial backing and will open its gigafactory in Northumberland. It seems that the project slipped through your fingers. What went wrong, First Minister?

The Welsh Government was in conversations with Britishvolt. The St Athan site was one of the main sites that they considered. In the end, they decided that their first investment would be elsewhere. That does not mean to say that we've not had further conversations with them. As a company, they are ambitious to do more in the field of battery development. We continue to be in conversations with them and if it is possible to bring that development to south Wales, of course the Welsh Government remains actively interested and actively engaged in that, alongside many other opportunities.

First Minister, your own joint press release that went out when the announcement was made that they weren't taking up the offer of the St Athan facility said that it was because, and this is the quote from the joint press release, 'the ambitious timescales that the company were working to were not achievable'. As far as I know, planning resolution and construction time frames are no quicker in the north-east of England than they are here in Wales. Yet, still, this project has leaked out of Wales and at a huge cost to our economy. According to media reports with people associated with the project, the Welsh Government's decision, to say the least, was lacklustre and it was never a top priority for the Welsh Government. A leading industrial surveyor, Chris Sutton, has been conducting a review on behalf of Welsh Government into how the project was handled.FootnoteLink Will you commit to making that review available for us all to see, and can you confirm today the progress on that review being completed?

I don't agree at all with what the leader of the opposition said. The Welsh Government was very closely involved in discussions with the company and those discussions progressed to the very final stages. If it was a lacklustre effort, it did remarkably well to be in the final running for the location of that business for the first factory, as I said, that it plans to create. Conversations about further possible investments in St Athan, or, indeed, elsewhere, remain part of what the Welsh Government will continue to take forward. Of course, it is important that, in doing so, we reflect on the experience of our initial discussions with that company. That is why we have asked for a piece of work to be done, and not done inside the Welsh Government, but with the help of external eyes as well. Because, to return to my first answer to the leader of the opposition, we want to make sure that, when there are genuine opportunities that can help us to build the Welsh economy, we will always be actively involved and interested to bring those to fruition. I will make sure that, as that work proceeds, it is properly reported to other Senedd Members.

Leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price.

Many people will have seen Andy Davies of Channel 4's sobering film of his visit to Penrhys last week—a community already struggling now perched on the precipice of poverty the likes of which we certainly haven't seen since the 1980s. Last week, the House of Commons voted in favour of a windfall tax on energy companies. The UK Government has said that it will ignore that Parliament in the same way that it does this. Spain has cut VAT on energy, but the UK Government will not, despite Johnson and Gove's pledge to do so post Brexit. France has capped the rise in energy bills to 4 per cent, while in the UK they will rise in April by 54 per cent. Do you think the powers to tax and regulate the energy sector, to set a windfall tax, to cut VAT, to set a price cap, and, if necessary, to restore public ownership, should reside here in Wales where we can use them, or lie in Westminster where they won't?

Well, Llywydd, for me, that is not the central question. I agree very much with what the leader of Plaid Cymru said in the first part of his question, that there is a wide range of actions that the current UK Government should and ought to take to deal with the Tory cost-of-living crisis. It's the policy of my party that there should be a windfall tax on the gross profits that are being made by energy companies who profiteer from the rise in prices, just as people in Penrhys and other parts of Wales suffer from them.

My colleague Julie James wrote to the Minister in the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy back in January, setting out five separate practical courses of action that could be taken in order to alleviate the impact of fuel and other price rises on households in Wales. That did include reductions in VAT, it did include a differential cap on price rises to protect the lowest income households, it talked about changes to the help that is available through the Westminster Government, it made suggestions about the way in which people who owe money already to fuel companies could have those debts dealt with. For me, it's not a choice between whether the power should be in Wales and exercised here, it's simply a matter that we need a Government in Westminster prepared to do the right thing.

As welcome as the new money that you as the Welsh Government have announced today certainly is, can you understand the criticisms that anti-poverty campaigners have made of the council tax rebate approach, that it spreads the money too thinly and fails to target the hardest hit? If the organisations at the cost-of-living crisis summit you've convened on Thursday come up with better made-in-Wales alternatives, are you prepared to reconsider, improve the plans you've already announced? Can you also comment on how you will deal with groups like students, for example, also facing rising costs but who are largely exempt from council tax, so won't get the rebate? And in the case of the discretionary assistance fund, will you agree to raise the cap on the number of applications that people can make, from five to seven, as the Trades Union Congress has been calling for, so we won't have thousands of people in desperate need being turned away?

I thank Adam Price for those additional points. Well, first of all, of course the point of having a round-table is to collect new ideas and to test ideas that we have already adopted with a wide range of people from across Wales. So, we will certainly be doing that on Thursday of this week. I don't think that criticism of the council tax rebate in Wales is completely fair, because it's not the same approach as has been taken in England. In England the money will be spread more thinly; here, we will provide the £150 not simply to households who pay the council tax, but we will also provide that money to the 220,000 households who are exempt from council tax because we have retained the council tax benefits system here in Wales. That costs £244 million by itself, way in excess of any consequential we may have had from the UK Government as a result of its council tax scheme in England. So, on top of all of that help, those families will now get an extra £150 to help with the cost-of-living crisis. And I think that is both a very efficient, but I think it's also a very progressive way of making sure that we have progressive universalism. Every household in bands A to D will get some help, but those households who need the help the most will get extra help here in Wales that they wouldn't get elsewhere.

As far as the discretionary assistance fund is concerned, here is another fund that was retained in Wales while it was abandoned elsewhere. We are finding a very significant sum of money, way, way in excess of any money that came to us when the social fund was abandoned in England. The ability to make five separate applications to the fund is two more than was possible when the fund was originally established, and we raised the number from three to five to take account of conditions during the pandemic. We're going to sustain that higher number into next year to take account of the cost-of-living crisis as well, and I think that, by itself, demonstrates our commitment to putting as much money as we can directly into the pockets of those families who will suffer the most from the additional costs that they will now have to bear. 

The scenes last week in Swansea of a queue for a food-share scheme, the soup kitchens of our day, in a city where the demand for emergency food parcels has reportedly doubled in just a week, are images of mass poverty we have not witnessed since the hungry 1930s. One of the leading organisations that will be at Thursday's summit will be the Bevan Foundation. They and others have championed the role that free school meals can play in combating poverty. Can we look at the ideas that the foundation and others are suggesting, whether it's accelerating the introduction of universal free school meals in primary schools, increasing the current free-school-meal allowance level for secondary-age pupils or extending the free-school-meal support that has been provided during the pandemic over the summer holidays again this year? These small changes will make a huge difference to many, many families that are currently living life on the edge.

Well, Llywydd, I'm very glad indeed that the Bevan Foundation will be part of Thursday's round-table and very much welcome the work that they do here in Wales. Today's announcement does include £22.5 million to extend free school meals during the school holidays, through the Easter holiday and right through to the end of the summer holiday this year as well. That, once again, is money that goes directly to those families who will struggle the most in the face of the cost-of-living crisis.

The really troubling thing about it all, Llywydd, is, as Adam Price has said—. Look at the struggle that families in Wales face today before the price rises that they face in April, before national insurance contributions will go up, before tax thresholds are frozen, drawing a disproportionately greater number of families in Wales into taxation than in other parts of the United Kingdom. So, I look forward very much to working with him as part of the co-operation agreement on our joint commitment to ensure that, during this Senedd term, all primary-aged children will receive a free meal as part of their daily education. It is a major step forward here in Wales, and I look forward to working with him to see what we can do to accelerate the rate at which we can achieve that ambition, particularly in the face of the sorts of scenes that he described in his final question. 

I thank Laura Anne Jones for the question, Llywydd. Research reports consistently highlight the strong commitment, motivation and progress that schools are making in the most radical curriculum reform for a generation. We work closely with regional and local partners to ensure all schools receive the support they need as they move towards the curriculum implementation in September of this year.

First Minister, with its implementation drawing nearer, none of us want to see the new curriculum fail, so how are you going to address the research commissioned by your very own Welsh Government that suggests that only 53 per cent of education practitioners feel well placed to design their own curriculum ready for September 2022, with 67 per cent of them believing that their school is in need of additional support? First Minister, even though flexibility is very welcome and a key component of the new curriculum, do you not agree that we need some sort of truly national professional learning programme that provides consistency and support for all, whilst allowing that flexibility, in how to plan and deliver the correct content needed for exams—exams that we still don't know what they will look like? First Minister, education has been heavily set back during the pandemic, as you know. Do you agree with me that teachers need this framework support now to ensure that success of the new curriculum?

I agree that it's very important to go on supporting teachers and headteachers as they work towards the implementation of the new curriculum, but I do think that an enormous amount of help of that sort has been provided since that research was carried out, as the Member knows, back in July of last year. The Minister introduced new flexibilities in the introduction of the new curriculum, and, at the same time, suspended a large number of other duties that schools have to undertake in order to create space for schools to develop their own implementation plans for the curriculum. In September we followed that up with a national framework—exactly the sort of measure that the Member was asking for—a national framework with additional guidance for the curriculum roll-out, a new national network established, a professional network. It held 60 sessions right across Wales in the autumn term, with more to follow—those sessions focusing on curriculum design and indeed on qualifications. Then, in December of last year, in our draft budget, we set out major investment over the whole three-year period specifically to support schools in implementation of the new curriculum, and followed that up with further national guidance published in January of this year.

I think the Welsh Government, working with local authorities, regional consortiums, and with programme leaders as well as with Estyn are doing everything we can to make sure that the enthusiasm that is there for the new curriculum at the local school level is being supported by national frameworks, guidance that is nationally available, funding that is available nationally in all parts of Wales. And on Thursday of this week, as well as there being a round-table on the Conservative cost-of-living crisis, Jeremy Miles, as the education Minister, will be meeting all headteachers in Wales to discuss further ways in which their efforts can be supported. 

First Minister, as a former teacher, I take pride in my close connections with schools in my constituency, all of whom report to me very favourably on the speed of the roll-out of the new curriculum. Indeed, a few weeks ago, I enjoyed a virtual visit to Aberdare Town Church in Wales Primary School where year 6 pupils were keen to show me their fantastic work on Cynefin, a central tenet of the new curriculum. It's clear that there's excellent practice already out there. So, in addition to the comments you've already made about training and networks, what assurances can you give us that that excellent practice is being captured and shared?

Well, Llywydd, I thank Vikki Howells for that. It's a real report from the front line by somebody who knows exactly what it is to be on the front line of our education service. And exactly what Vikki Howells has reported this afternoon, Llywydd, is my own experience of talking to headteachers and to school leaders at subject level as well. I understand, of course, with everything schools have had to cope with in the last two years, working on curriculum reform is a challenge, but it's a challenge that our schools are meeting with real enthusiasm. They see the enormous possibilities that the new curriculum provides. I think they genuinely appreciate the way in which its roll-out is being developed alongside the profession and with the integral voice of the profession in the way it is being developed. And for that reason, professional learning and making sure that the work that is being done in one part of Wales is shared with schools elsewhere is absolutely at the centre of the way in which we think this curriculum is going to succeed. I mentioned the national network in my previous answer, Llywydd, but it's a really good example of the way in which this is a curriculum not made in Cathays Park, but is being made every day in classrooms up and down Wales by dedicated and committed school staff who want to make it a success.

Llywydd, our support measures are those set out in the co-operation agreement and the programme for government.

Thank you, First Minister. Tomorrow will mark two years since devastating floods hit nearly 1,500 houses and businesses in my region as a result of storm Dennis. I'm sure you can understand the ongoing trauma and fear they feel every time it rains heavily, as it is this week, especially as most of the reports into those floods are not yet published, and very little has changed in terms of defences.

The National Flood Forum—an organisation based in England—has existed since 2002 to ensure that communities and individuals feel supported and empowered to reduce their flood risk. It has only received modest funding to date to operate in Wales. The Scottish Government supported the establishment of the Scottish Flood Forum in 2009, a charity that has gone from strength to strength, receiving a grant of £200,000 per annum to work across Scotland with communities at risk of flooding to develop community flood action groups, as well as providing immediate support when individuals and communities experience flooding. Has the Welsh Government considered the benefits of supporting the establishment of a Welsh flood forum to similarly empower at risk communities in Wales? And if not, is this something that the First Minister would be happy to discuss further?

Well, Llywydd, I'd like to thank Heledd Fychan for that supplementary question, and I agree with her—I'm sure that when it does rain heavily and people see the weather forecast for the week to come, those people who have suffered as a result of flooding are sure to be very concerned and anxious. Now, a lot of work has been done over the past two years at a local level with funding provided by the Government here in Wales in order to help local communities to feel more resilient when these events do take place. We have an independent committee here in Wales already. It's an independent committee representing communities across Wales and which consults with Government. If there are further ideas as to how we can better hear the voice of local people in the work of the committee that we already have, then we're open to any ideas as to how we can move in that direction.

Llywydd, this morning we announced a £330 million package of support to help Welsh households, including those in Bridgend, to manage the cost-of-living crisis. These measures focus on those actions that put money directly in the pockets of those most affected by it. 

Thank you, First Minister, and I do welcome the much-needed package of support put in place by the Welsh Labour Government, because last week I visited Splice Child and Family in Pyle, which runs a baby bank, and Baobab community pantry in Brackla. While there the volunteers shared with me the heartbreaking story of a mother who had recently, but reluctantly, visited and asked for support. That mother is eating once every three days to ensure she can feed her children, and, sadly, this situation is all too common for many people in Wales.

First Minister, there are people out there who are feeling anxiety and shame about needing a helping hand, and this shouldn't be the case. It is not their fault that food prices are increasing. It is not their fault that the cost of heating their home is rising, and they're not the ones who decided to cut universal credit. None of this is their fault. This is a Tory-made cost-of-living crisis. Do you agree with me that the UK Tory Government needs to step up and step in to tackle this cost-of-living crisis?

I do entirely agree with Sarah Murphy. That was a terrible story that she related from a visit that she has made, but it won't be one, really sadly, that is unfamiliar to many Members of the Senedd. Many of us, in our own constituency capacities, will have had to help families who find themselves in exactly that position, and it is, as that story shows, women who bear the burden of poverty in our communities, and I too have met mothers who tell you that they have to go without in order to make sure that they can put food on the table for their families.

This has been the story, Llywydd, now for the last 10 years. This is a cost-of-living crisis that has not been made in the last few weeks. This is a story that has been developed in that decade of austerity, a decade in which, year after year, inequality has grown, and the burden placed on the shoulders of those least able to bear it has been increased.

Now, Sarah Murphy pointed to the £20 reduction every week in money available to the least well-off households in the whole of Wales. I cannot think of a more cruel decision, because it was a deliberate decision. It was a decision where the Government knew before they did it that this would mean there would be children, children in households up and down Wales, who would have to go without as a result of what they did.

So, I do of course agree with what the Member for Bridgend said. On top of all the things that we as a Government are trying to do, and I'm very proud indeed of the package that we've been able to announce today, I'm very grateful for the assistance of our local authority colleagues in providing that help to those families. In Bridgend, Llywydd, just for example, in what we're doing already to help families with a winter fuel support payment, Bridgend council has paid nearly 7,000 families, in the latest figures I have seen, and has responded to over 90 per cent of all the applications that have been made. If the Welsh Government can do it, and if Welsh local authorities can do it in Wales, surely the Conservative Government in Westminster could step in and play their part as well.

Llywydd, unprecedented levels of financial support have been provided to hospitality and tourism businesses throughout the pandemic, but the greatest support has come through the measures taken to keep staff and customers safe in the face of a global emergency.

I was contacted by many concerned north Wales constituents running legitimate self-catering accommodation businesses regarding the Welsh Government's business support grant, launched following the introduction of alert level 2 restrictions in December. For example, one stated, 'Our farm cottages sleep 22 in a courtyard. The grant is only available to self-catering properties for 30 or more guests. I lost all my bookings over Christmas and the new year as guests chose England over Wales for their festive breaks.' Another said, 'Our cottage holidays business is a bona fide holiday let business with accounts to support it, providing enterprise, employment and value to the area of the Dee Valley.' Another said, 'My only income comes from our self-catering business. We've been impacted by 100 per cent decrease in bookings December to February. We feel discriminated against.' When I referred this to your economy Minister, he replied, 'There are no restrictions in place for indoor household mixing. Therefore self-catering accommodation is not eligible', to which businesses replied, 'We lost bookings because of the Welsh Government decision and because of the restrictions put in place on pubs and restaurants. My guests chose to spend the festive period in parts of the UK where there were no restrictions'—.i.e. not Wales—'Can you please ask the Government to return the funding lost from Welsh businesses?' So, this isn't a question about the restrictions you put in place, this is about the support for the businesses affected. So, how do you respond to the many legitimate Welsh businesses in north Wales who have written to me about this?

Well, I respond in exactly the way that the Member has already heard from the economy Minister: those businesses were able to operate. There were no restrictions on their ability to operate. It is not legitimate to expect the taxpayer to step in in those circumstances. 

Llywydd, the 2019 affordable housing review proposed reforms to local housing needs assessments, including new review and sign-off powers for the Welsh Government. Details of this new approach will be published next month.

Thank you, First Minister. The Housing (Wales) Act 2014 places a legal obligation and a statutory duty on local authorities in Wales to both assess and provide for residential and transit provision for Gypsy and Traveller communities, and yet nearly eight years later several local authorities have either no permanent sites or insufficient sites for Gypsy and Traveller communities, or inadequate transit stopping places when they are on their journey. So, year after year, local authorities have had funding earmarked by Welsh Government to enable them to make appropriate provision, and yet year after year, this money has been left lying on the table. So, what action will Welsh Government take to ensure that local authorities step up to the plate on their responsibilities to the Gypsy and Traveller communities, as the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, if passed, will criminalise anyone who stops at an unauthorised site?

Well, Llywydd, I was very pleased that the Senedd voted in line with Welsh Government advice and chose to withhold legislative consent on those clauses in that Bill that infringe the rights of Gypsy and Traveller communities. I share the frustration expressed by Jenny Rathbone, Llywydd. It was an Act promoted by the Welsh Government, of a Labour Government, that led in 2014 to those assessments of need. So, the legislation is there, and, every year, the Welsh Government provides funds to assist local authorities to comply with their duties within Part 3 of that 2014 Housing (Wales) Act, and it is disappointing therefore that progress has not been made in all parts of Wales. When I was the finance Minister, Llywydd, I remember receiving advice that, because the money wasn't being taken up, the money allocated by the Welsh Government should be reduced and used for other purposes. I declined to follow that advice, because I wanted to be sure that the impediment to providing provision would not be because the money wasn't available. 

Now, in this month, we will see the results of the Gypsy/Traveller accommodation assessments that we had to delay last year because of the pandemic. We're expecting to see them in now by the end of this month. And through the proposals in the race equality action plan, we will move to review the compliance of every local authority with those duties through what will now be an annual review. That review will adopt a consistent and robust approach to monitoring compliance, and it will help us with the implementation of the recommendations, as I said, of the 2019 review that does propose additional powers for the Welsh Government in the oversight of the plans that local authorities are obliged to provide. 

Good afternoon, First Minister. 

Llywydd, our Net Zero Wales plan is predicated on ensuring a just transition across Wales, including in rural communities. The plan contains 123 policies and proposals, and draws on many live examples from the rural communities of Wales.

Thank you, First Minister. I'd like to raise the matter of the commitment of the Welsh Government to plant 86 million trees by the end of this decade as part of the plan to reach net zero by 2050. According to the Farmers Union of Wales, only 25 per cent of the plans to plant more than 50 hectares of woodland, which is equivalent to 93 football pitches—.

Farming unions are fully in support of the Government's climate and zero-carbon agenda, but there is concern, First Minister, that policies that drive tree planting, particularly where funding exceeds the level of support available for agricultural land, have the potential to impact on tenant farming categorised by short-term tenancies. Glastir has helped many, many farmers to diversify, as we know, so there's much to learn from, but we must be mindful of unintended consequences.

I'm looking forward to you joining me on a visit to a farmer in my region of Mid and West Wales, and I know that one of the issues they will want to discuss with you is around tree planting. And I wonder if you could tell me how the Government is going to ensure that the burden of decarbonisation does not fall unequally on rural communities. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

Well, Llywydd, I'd like to thank Jane Dodds for that question. And, of course, it is true to say that we do have an ambitious target for tree planting in Wales, and that is important because that's the advice that we've had from the committee advising us. To help us to reach net zero here in Wales, we will have to plant many more trees, and in so doing, there are great opportunities for farmers in Wales to do things that are important to us as a nation, but where they can also receive funding to do things that are important to us all.

Of course I recognise that tree planting has to be the right tree in the right place, and that is an integral part of the plan that we have. It is not simply about planting any sort of tree anywhere. It's to use land that is not available for other activities that farmers can carry out in Wales, and which have a commercial value, but to use land that is not useable in that way to grow a crop that will be to the benefit of us all as we face climate change. 

I recognise the point that Jane Dodds makes. To plant trees is a long-term proposition, and if you're a short-term tenant, then you have to be able to reconcile those two things. We're aware of that, of course, and work with farming unions and others on it. I look forward very much to the visit we plan to make together, now that it will be easier, as we hope, to carry out such visits in Wales, and I look forward to discussing with farming unions in Wales the way in which they can assist their members to take advantage of what I believe is a major opportunity for rural Wales to play its part, as I know it wants to do, in tackling that major crisis of our time in climate change, and to do it in a way that rewards them for the contribution that they will make.

I thank the First Minister, and I very much hope that you make a full and swift recovery from COVID. Best wishes to you.

The business statement and announcement is next, and I call on the Trefnydd to make that statement. Lesley Griffiths. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I have no changes to this week's business. Draft business for the next three sitting weeks is set out on the business statement and announcement, which can be found amongst the meeting papers available to Members electronically.

Thank you, Trefnydd, for your statement. Can I call for two statements this week? The first is from the Minister for Health and Social Services regarding the social care financial recognition scheme, obviously something that we very much welcome indeed for those people who've worked on the front lines in social care across Wales, particularly during the pandemic. But a constituent has raised concerns with me that other people who worked, particularly in care homes, in catering and cleaning, are not eligible for these payments, and of course, they very much have also been undertaking work on the front lines, which I feel does deserve to be recognised in some way. So, I would like the Welsh Government to consider this and come forward with a statement—either from the Deputy or the Minister—to discuss whether that could be extended.

Secondly, can I also ask for a statement from the Minister for Climate Change in relation to the new phosphate targets that were set by Natural Resources Wales at the beginning of 2021? You'll be aware that Welsh local authorities are still waiting for clear guidance from the Welsh Government in terms of how to interpret the planning decisions and applications that come forward, against those new targets. And it is causing a delay in many applications being determined, including in my own local authority area. So, I do think this is something that needs to be addressed, we need some clarity, and a statement would be very welcome.

Thank you. I think you've referred to two issues that many of us have received representations on from our own constituents. The Deputy Minister for Social Services was in the Chamber and heard your question and will come forward with further information, either in the form of a written statement or will write to the Member, and I'm sure they will put a letter in the Library.

In relation to your second point, my understanding is that guidance will be issued in the very near future.

Cardiff has been described, Trefnydd, as the fuel poverty capital of the UK, with a quarter of our residents here in the capital suffering in fuel poverty—higher than any other city or town in the United Kingdom. That is 91,000 people suffering. Can we please have a debate in Government time on fuel poverty and the cost-of-living crisis? Plaid Cymru welcomes the announcement today of additional support, but there's much yet to be done. I'm sure the Trefnydd is an avid listener of Radio Wales, and the payment was discussed this morning in the Jason Mohammad phone-in. Among the issues addressed was the growth of food banks in Ely, and others were pointing out, despite them welcoming the payment, that they stressed that many will still be struggling.

It is these types of points that could be made in a debate in Government time, and we could also tease out some of the issues with regard to the UK Government's response. We will all remember the UK Conservative Government stating that it was due to our membership of the European Union that we had to pay value added tax on energy prices. They promised us that energy prices would go down once we were out of the European Union. Well, Brexit is now done, Trefnydd; why is VAT still being charged on our Bills?

So, these are the types of things we could discuss, Minister. What discussions has the Welsh Government had with regards the UK Government scrapping the 5 per cent VAT? What discussions has the Welsh Government had on the inadequate loan of £200 that has been offered by the UK Government? And what more can we as a Senedd do to help the people of Ely, to help the people of Cardiff and across Wales, who are suffering so much at the moment? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you. As you are aware, at 12 p.m. today, there was a written statement published by the Minister for Finance and Local Government, and, on Thursday, the Minister I just referred to, the Minister for Social Justice, and the Minister for Climate Change, will be holding a cost-of-living summit. The Welsh Government can only do so much. This has been made in London, by the UK Tory Government. You're quite right: they have done Brexit—I think that was their slogan—but what they need to do is make sure that Brexit works for the UK. They did promise lower energy prices if we left the European Union, and I was reading some research last week that showed the variety of countries across Europe where the cost of energy, in some areas, was 50 per cent lower than in the UK.

I have been contacted by my constituent, Evelyn, and her mum, Jacqui, who were shocked and incredibly disappointed to discover that, from September 2022, the Welsh Rugby Union will stop girls playing mixed under-12 and under-13 rugby. Evelyn is an excellent player, and captain for Bridgend sports under-12s, as well as playing for Brynteg Comprehensive School. I did meet with the Welsh Rugby Union to ask why and how this decision to exclude girls from mixed rugby was made. The Welsh Rugby Union, so far, have not provided any evidence that a fair consultation has been carried out that included asking the girls impacted and their team mates for their views, or that an equality impact assessment had been conducted. My concern is that girls have not been asked why they stop playing rugby once they can't play mixed anymore, or for their ideas about increasing their participation, rather than simply excluding them. I have raised this with the sports and culture Minister, and I await answers to my questions from the WRU, but, in the meantime, could the Minister for Social Justice provide a statement on the participation of girls in sport across Wales?

Thank you. I am aware that the WRU did undertake a consultation, as you referred to. I think it was back in 2019, and then it was delayed because of the COVID pandemic, and it wasn't introduced until this year. I think it's really important that we listen to what young people say around the barriers that they feel that they face. As you say, you have made representations to the Deputy Minister for sport and culture, and I'm sure she will respond to you when she has further information from the WRU.

Trefnydd, on 28 September last year, I asked for a debate in the Chamber on the issue of safer travel for horse riders in Wales, and you may recall that your response was that such a debate would be premature, given the up-and-coming changes to The Highway Code. Now that the changes to The Highway Code have been published, I'd like to ask again for a debate in the Chamber on safer travel for horse riders in Wales. I'm asking for this debate because I believe that there's much more that can be done to provide safer routes for the horse riders and carriage drivers, such as better use of signage and the national roll-out of the Dead Slow safety campaign. I also believe that more needs to be done to highlight the new changes to The Highway Code for the benefit of all road users. Sadly, only 22 per cent of publicly accessible routes in Wales are open to horse riders, and many of these routes have been resurfaced to cater for cyclists under the active travel legislation, making them totally inappropriate for horses. Many more routes are also becoming inaccessible for horse riders because of the fencing and barriers that local authorities are erecting to stop motorised vehicles accessing them. With this in mind, I think it's imperative that the riding community have a greater say on the design and implementation of the active travel plan, which, at present, is not meeting their needs, and which can hopefully be addressed and highlighted in this debate. Thank you.

Thank you. I am not aware whether this was addressed in the changes that have been brought forward in relation to The Highway Code changes, but I will certainly ask the Minister to consider your request.FootnoteLink 

I have two statements I wish to call for. Firstly, the cost-of-living crisis is hitting everyone hard, and on a recent visit to the Anthony's family farm in Aberkenfig I learnt just how much the crisis is hitting farmers. They detailed how inflation has taken the price of fertiliser, for example, from £8,000 to £18,000 a year, with similar trends across many of the utilities and equipment they need to run their farm. Therefore, I would appreciate a statement on what support has been provided for the farming community, not just in Bridgend, but across Wales, so that they can afford to continue operating and supplying the domestic market with high-quality food during this cost-of-living crisis. I think it's abundantly clear to the farming community that that support isn't coming from the Tories in Westminster. 

Secondly, I'd like to join my colleague Sarah Murphy in asking for a statement on what the Welsh Government will be doing to address the inevitable reduction in girls playing rugby as a result of the WRU's decision to stop funding for mixed teams after 11 years of age. From the conversations Sarah and I have had, it seems the WRU are blaming girls for not wanting to play rugby or brushing off the drop-off in girls playing rugby as a natural occurrence. Either way you choose to look at it, it's a step backwards and has caused great concern. I fundamentally believe that if we wish to change the culture in our society then we can find no better place to start than our rugby teams, especially in communities like mine and Sarah's, where, more often than not, the rugby club is central to the community. After all, rugby is for everyone. 

Thank you. So, in response to your second question, I don't think I've got anything further to add to what I said in my answer to Sarah Murphy, only to say that I think it is really important that the WRU perhaps go back and look at the responses to the consultation, see if there's anything else they can draw out of it, or just go to the rugby clubs and have those conversations if necessary. And I'm sure the Deputy Minister for culture and sport, if you haven't written to her, you heard me say that I'm sure she will be responding to Sarah in the very near future, but it might be advisable for you to write to her as well.

In relation to the cost-of-living crisis, you'll be aware from the written statement today of the support that the Welsh Government has made available to everyone, and that obviously includes the farming community as well. You mentioned specifically fertilizer prices, and this was something that I discussed with my counterparts from across the UK at the last DEFRA inter-ministerial group meeting that we held, because clearly this isn't just a matter for Wales; this is right across the UK. We're not looking at any specific additional support, but it is something that we are closely monitoring. But I do hope everybody who is eligible is able to access the additional funding. I go back to what I said to Rhys ab Owen: the Welsh Government can only go so far; this is really something that the UK Government needs to get to grips with.

I have a request for two Government statements. First, I'm asking for a Government statement on the provision of 3G and 4G sports pitches in Wales and plans to increase the number across Wales. I cannot stress too much the importance of 3G and 4G pitches, which allow you to play for long periods of time on a pitch rather than getting only two games in in a day, and also allow them to be used at times when the normal pitches, or the grass pitches, are waterlogged. 

My second request is for a statement from the Welsh Government on the possibility of Wales being part of a joint bid for the Euro 2028 tournament and the support available from the Welsh Government. A joint statement from the five football associations said,

'Following an extensive feasibility study, which assessed the potential opportunities in international football, the football associations of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and the Republic of Ireland have agreed to focus on a bid to host...EURO 2028'. 

I would be really pleased to see some of Euro 2028 played in Wales, so what is the Welsh Government doing in order to try and give as much support as they possibly can to the Welsh FA?

Thank you. Investing in our sporting facilities is a key part of our programme for government, and it's really important that, if we are going to encourage additional participation and support the health and well-being of our nation, we really do consider where we invest in our sporting facilities. We have announced an additional £4.5 million of capital funding for this year, bringing our total investment for this year to more than £13.2 million to support our programme for government commitment. We've also allocated £24 million of capital funding to support Wales over the next three years, and that funding will support not just improving the existing facilities that we have, but also developing new facilities, and that includes 3G pitches. 

In relation to your second request, as you mentioned, the five Governments and the five football associations from across the UK and Ireland have collectively agreed to scope the feasibility of a FIFA World Cup 2030 bid, and I think the FAs did conclude quite swiftly that a bid for the world cup would not be successful—it was unlikely it would be successful at the current time—and they've now indicated their intent to develop a joint UK and Ireland bid to host the UEFA European championships in 2028. So, the Minister, and right across Government, will obviously continue to engage very closely with the FAW and the other Governments and FAs to be able to evaluate the costs and, of course, the benefits of hosting such a tournament. 

Trefnydd, I would like a statement by the Minister for Climate Change on the service provided by Planning and Environment Decisions Wales—that's PEDW. As you may be aware, this new service commenced on 1 October 2021. Now, despite them receiving a 14-month advance warning by Neil Hemington, planning directorate, on 11 October, I've had to send a letter to the Minister for Climate Change highlighting concerns that department officials were without any full access to the new casework system and documents, and as such are now unable to provide essential information on live planning appeals. Five months into the operation of PEDW, serious issues are still being encountered, and it's been raised with me in my constituency, and, indeed, Owen Hughes, the highly respected Daily Post business editor, has reported that planning appeal delays are now holding up business investments in Wales. So, I would be pleased if the Minister for Climate Change could make a statement clarifying how she will ensure that PEDW starts to operate effectively and, of course, to address the appeals backlog urgently. Diolch.

Thank you. As you say, it's only a few months since this new service began. You have written to the Minister for Climate Change, and I'm sure she will respond to you in the near future. 

I'd like a statement, please, on the centralisation of health services in South Wales East—that is, the fact that people now have to travel to different hospitals in order to get different treatments. I've been contacted by a constituent about the fact that all diagnostic breast procedures will only be carried out at Ysbyty Ystrad Fawr in Ystrad Mynach, and that will mean that constituents will need to travel on long journeys by public transport if they don't have a car. So, for someone from Gilwern, for example, but also villages and towns across the region, this could mean journeys that will be complicated, long and involve a number of changes. Patients will often have to wait in the cold for another bus to come. My constituent has pointed out that people requiring cancer treatment will need multiple diagnostic appointments and so would be put through this ordeal more than once. And the patient-carrying service, too, involves long waiting times. Trefnydd, people across the south-east of Wales were told that, when the Grange hospital opened, it would mean better services, but I am concerned or I do share the concern of residents that we're now seeing less direct access to care. The staff of the health board are doing a tremendous job—they need to be commended—but I would like a statement, please, outlining how the Government will tackle the issues to do with access to different hospitals now that different services are being provided in different locations, because the last thing that people who are unwell need is added stress.   

I absolutely agree with your final point. Obviously, the provision of services is down to the health board, and the Minister for Health and Social Services monitors these matters very closely and, I know, meets with the chair and chief executive of the health board on a regular basis. We are seeing specialised services—of course, we are—and we don't want patients to have to travel to many hospitals for treatment of the same condition, but, of course, it is a necessity sometimes if you do have a specific condition and you may have to travel a bit further. But, as I say, this is a matter for the health board. 

I think public transport is also something that's very important. You mentioned the Grange University Hospital, and I've heard many Members refer to constituents' issues around that, and I know, again, that the Minister is working very closely with the Deputy Minister for Climate Change in relation to this. 

Minister, I would like to ask for a debate in Government time on Government policy for the Valleys. You will be aware, since the election last year, there have been very few opportunities to discuss the way in which the Welsh Government is going to develop policy, and economic policy particularly, for the Valleys of south Wales. I'd like that debate to be informed by two statements, with, first of all, a report on the work of the Valleys taskforce. A number of Ministers gave a number of commitments, including myself, in the last Senedd on the ambitions of the Welsh Government, but there's not been a report on the outturn of what the Valleys taskforce achieved in that time and whether it addressed and reached its targets or not. So, I'd like to see a report on the work of the Valleys taskforce published as soon as possible. 

And the second statement that I'd like to ask for is on the Tech Valleys programme. This is £100 million investment programme, focused on my own constituency in Blaenau Gwent. It is now reaching the halfway point, and it would be a good time, I think, for us to look back at what it has achieved over the last five years or so and what the plans are for it to achieve in the next five years.  

Thank you. I will ask the Minister for Economy to publish two written statements on those two issues—the Valleys taskforce and the Tech Valleys. 

Trefnydd, I'd like to ask for a statement from the Minister for Climate Change on water quality in the River Wye. Last week, I met with the UK Government Minister responsible for water quality, Rebecca Pow, and she wants to work constructively with the Welsh Government to improve water quality in the River Wye and across Wales. The Minister for Climate Change was invited to that meeting and it's a shame she couldn't attend. So, will the Trefnydd request that the Minister comes to the Chamber to give an update to the Senedd on what inter-governmental meetings have taken place on water quality, and how she intends to work constructively with the UK Government to improve our inland waterways in Wales? Diolch, Llywydd. 

I did see the letter inviting the Minister for Climate Change to meet with the UK Government Minister. Unfortunately, as you can imagine, our diaries get very booked up; we need a little bit more notice than three or four days. The Minister for Climate Change does work very constructively—as I did when I was in that portfolio—with the UK Government, and, obviously, our programme for government does commit us to improving water quality. Obviously, the River Wye pollution is something that has been very much in the media and very much in our postbags. NRW's initial assessment of P levels in our river special areas of conservation, and that included the River Wye, did indicate that the reason for the water bodies failing P targets was from a very diverse range of sources. The causes really are very complex, and I think that it's really important that we continue to work with NRW, that we continue to work with Dŵr Cymru, and that we continue to work with the UK Government.

I'd like to ask for a statement from the Trefnydd in her role as Minister for rural affairs and agriculture. The Australian High Commissioner to the UK will be visiting Anglesey this week. I always enjoy welcoming visitors to the island, of course, but George Brandis will be meeting with farmers who will be very eager, I'm sure, to raise their concerns about the impact of a trade deal between the UK and Australia post Brexit.

Farmers tell me regularly that they are concerned about this. The agricultural unions say that they have difficulty finding anything in the trade agreement that could help Welsh farmers, and that, indeed, more than anything, they see it as something that benefits those in Australia who would be in competition with Welsh farmers . So, can I have a statement from the Minister on the steps that are being taken to try and safeguard Welsh farmers from the threat that this trade deal between the UK and Australia represents to them?

Thank you. You raise a very important point. There is the Australian trade deal. There is the New Zealand trade deal. If we are not careful, we are going to have the cumulative impact of the trade deals, which could really badly affect our farming community here in Wales. Obviously, an area that really concerns me is about standards. It's really important that we don't have our market flooded by imports from countries that don't have our very high animal health and welfare standards, and our very high environmental standards too.

This is something that the Minister for Economy leads on—trade deals. I work very closely with him on it. It's something that we talk about in the DEFRA IMG that I referred to before. When I have further information about looking at the cumulative impact, I will be very happy to bring forward a statement.

I thank the Trefnydd.

The next statement is the statement by the Minister for Health and Social Services—an update on COVID-19. I call on the Minister to make her statement—Eluned Morgan.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd, for the opportunity to update Members on the current public health situation and the outcome of the latest review of the coronavirus regulations, which was carried out last week.

Wales is currently at alert level 0. We have passed the omicron peak of the Christmas and new year period, and we are growing increasingly confident that cases are declining. Infections in the community are going down. The number of people being admitted to hospital with COVID-19 is going down, and the number of people in critical care with COVID-19 recently is the lowest since July 2021. All of this, of course, is very positive news.

There are, of course, some reasons why we should continue to be cautious. It's clear that the pandemic is not yet over. COVID, unfortunately, is still very much with us. The case rate, which is based on positive PCR tests, is 326 cases per 100,000. This is still a very high rate, although not as high as the extraordinary levels that we saw at the peak of the omicron wave.

We are also keeping a close eye on cases of the sub-variant of omicron, called BA.2. It's an even more transmissible form of the virus than the one that we have become used to. There have been almost 250 cases detected in Wales to date. There has been some speculation that this is what's driving the current high case rate in Northern Ireland.

Llywydd, before I turn to the outcome of the 21-day review, I want to reflect a moment on the huge progress and the difference that our fantastic vaccination programme has made. As we approach the second anniversary of the first case of coronavirus being diagnosed in Wales, more than 6.8 million doses of the COVID-19 vaccine have been delivered. More than nine out of 10 people have had one dose, 86 per cent have had two doses, and 67 per cent have had a booster dose. Vaccination has helped to change the course of this pandemic, weakening the link for so many of us between the virus, serious illness, hospitalisation and death. It has saved countless lives, and the speed of the roll-out of our booster programme undoubtedly helped us to weather the omicron storm.

I am pleased that our online rebooking system is now live and being phased in and integrated to health board COVID-19 vaccine delivery plans. This is another tool for health boards to provide additional contact methods for people to reschedule their appointment if the one they have been allocated is not convenient. Health boards will continue to have phone lines available for people who do not receive the rebooking text or are unable to access the online rebooking service. It is never too late to be vaccinated in Wales, and I would urge anyone who hasn't yet been vaccinated, or who hasn't finished their vaccine course, to come and get their jabs.

Whilst yet to be published officially by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, I have received JCVI advice regarding the vaccination of all five to 11-year-olds. I have agreed it, and we are working with health boards on implementing the offer. We await advice about whether the most vulnerable cohorts should have a further booster to protect them over the spring and summer months. We are working with health boards to plan for various scenarios to ensure we are agile and ready to implement any advice once I have considered this carefully.

Llywydd, I will turn now to the review. This was the first three-week review of all the protective measures we have at alert level 0. As the health situation is generally improving, the Cabinet has decided that we will stay at alert level 0. We can also begin to relax some of the protections we have in place. We will do this carefully and in a phased way.

From this Friday 18 February onwards, we will remove the requirement to show a COVID pass to enter large indoor and outdoor events, and to enter nightclubs, cinemas, theatres and concert halls. From 28 February onwards, we will remove the requirement for face coverings to be worn in some indoor public places. But they will continue to be a legal requirement in all retail settings, on public transport, and in health and care settings. If the public health situation continues to improve, we hope to be able to remove the requirement to wear face coverings entirely by the end of March.

We are working closely with schools to support them with planning a return to operating in line with the local decisions framework, which will happen immediately after half term. Face coverings will no longer be routinely required in classrooms after that date, but they should continue to be worn in communal areas in secondary schools. The rules in regard to self-isolation will remain in place in Wales. These are an important way of breaking the chain of transmission of the virus and preventing more people from becoming infected.

Following the next review, we intend to publish a transition plan for living with coronavirus. This will be a plan for the time when all legal restrictions made under the emergency health protection legislation are removed. We are now able to move forward and begin this cautious lifting of protections, while leaving others in place. For those people who have followed the rules and the measures to keep them and their loved ones safe, we thank them for that. We thank everyone for playing their part. We also thank, of course, our NHS and social care staff for continuing to work tirelessly through these difficult times.

COVID-19 hasn't gone away. As we continue to lift these restrictions, we will continue to monitor the public health situation, but the picture is improving. That gives us the hope that we can plan for a brighter future. Thank you.

Can I thank the Minister for her statement today, and also for the briefing earlier that was made available to health committee members? That was very much appreciated. Minister, I'm very pleased with some of the details in your statement. You talk about hospital rates coming down and those in critical care with COVID-19 being at the lowest levels since July 2021. You say this is very positive, and I agree with you entirely. This is a good positive position to be in. You go on to say that coronavirus unfortunately is still with us. But it'll always be with us; that's my understanding and that's what the health professionals tell us. Therefore, we have to learn to live alongside coronavirus. I'd be grateful if you could just outline if you agree with that position.

After 19 weeks, we have finally decided to scrap vaccination passports. Of course, I'm delighted with that position, because they were ineffective, they were costly to businesses, with no evidence that they actually worked in limiting the spread of coronavirus or increasing vaccination rates. It's my view that the decision of COVID passes should never have been put on the table in the very first place by the Welsh Labour Government. You said that businesses can still keep vaccination passports on a voluntary basis; have you had any indication from businesses that they want this, and if so, what kind of sectors have they come from? It would be useful to know that.

I've asked you about evidence on COVID passes on a number of occasions, and you've either said to me that you've relied on international evidence about vaccine passports in countries where vaccine take-up isn't very high—of course, in Wales, we're not in that position; we're in a much better position, where, as you said in your statement today, 86 per cent have received the second dose and 67 per cent have had the booster—or you've said that the evidence has already been published that demonstrates their effectiveness. But I would point you to your technical advisory cell yesterday. When they published information, they said that there remains a high degree of uncertainty around the effectiveness of the COVID pass in reducing infections, given the absence of robust evaluation of these interventions. You often say that this is one measure amongst many, but the cell does go on to say that while it has its potential to reduce infections with other measures, there remains limited peer-reviewed published evidence to demonstrate this. So, I would ask you again for that evidence. Has that evidence been collated in Wales, and when will that evidence be published? We need to evaluate the effectiveness of COVID passes, because there is potential here that they've caused great damage to the night-time economy, with very little public health benefit.

Minister, I'll ask you about the progress on the waiting list backlog. Of course, we know that we're in a position here in Wales where one in five of the Welsh population are still on a waiting list and one in four have been waiting over a year, and that compares to one in 19 in England and one in 13 in Scotland. Last week, NHS England, of course, published its plan to recover from the backlog, and I think in the health committee last week, Minister, you said that you'd be looking at that plan with interest. So, I'd be grateful for any early assessment that you've made from the plan in England. What aspects in that plan do you think are appropriate to carry over to your plan when you publish it in April?

Minister, in your statement today, you talk about the JCVI advice regarding the vaccine for all five to 11-year-olds, so perhaps you could give us some indication of what considerations you've been giving to what the roll-out of that vaccination plan will look like for this particular age group.

Overall, Minister, I welcome the further lifting of COVID restrictions announced last Friday. I do want to ask you about mandatory isolation, given how much this issue has been discussed. You and your colleagues have expressed amazement and disappointment at it coming to an end in England, and your Government says you'd like to see the evidence to support this move. So, my question would be: what evidence do you actually want to see in that regard? And secondly, the economy Minister, Vaughan Gething, has said that it could be scrapped before the end of next month here in Wales. So, what evidence has informed that statement, if, as you say, no evidence has been provided to justify the UK Government's decision in that regard? And thirdly, your Government colleagues have claimed that the UK Government did not give you a heads-up on their decision. Maybe that's, of course, because they wanted to make the announcement first in the House of Commons, rather than passing to journalists first. But I would ask you: how often do you give UK Government Ministers notice of your decisions here?

Thanks very much, Russell. Of course, we will have to learn to live with COVID. It's not going away, it's not going to disappear, and that's why, in the next three-week review, you'll be seeing us really developing a longer term strategy for how we intend to do that.

I'll jump, if you don't mind, to your last point, which is on mandatory isolation, because I think there's a link here. The difficulty is that the UK Government is acting as if it's all over, and the reality is, if you read the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies advice, it's actually quite sobering about what else could be coming around the corner. At the moment, we're doing well, but we don't know what may come next.

Let me give you some ideas about what may come next. They say that it's almost certain that there will a genetic variation of the virus that will render current vaccines ineffective. Those aren't my words, that's SAGE saying that. They say that, in terms of the milder disease with omicron—so, it's been fairly mild compared to what we've had before—we're unlikely to see that again; it's more likely to be more like delta. Again, this is not me saying this, these are scientists saying this. It's also telling us that we are likely to experience new waves of variants. So, let's just be aware that, of course, we're in a better place now, but dismantling the whole edifice is probably not a sensible idea. Obviously, we've got a lot of thinking to do, and we have got to understand that there is a very close relationship—indeed, a dependency, to an extent—with what happens in England, and so, what they decide will affect what we're able to decide here. So, it is important, when we're talking about learning to live with COVID, that we have to understand that it's not just about what's going on now, it's what may or may not be coming around the corner at us in future.

In relation to vaccine passports, we know that, under delta, for example, the vaccination helped to reduce transmission. So, if you were going to come into contact with someone, you were less likely to pass it on, and that does make a difference when you're going to an indoor enclosed space. There's also international evidence to suggest that it drove up the take-up of vaccines. So, that evidence does exist, and, of course, it is just one measure in a series of other measures. You keep on asking for evidence; where is your evidence to suggest that it caused great damage to the night-time economy? I'm not sure if there is much evidence to suggest that, actually, the COVID passes—[Interruption.] I understand, if you're closing a nightclub and they can't open, that's different. You weren't talking about that. You were talking about COVID passes, and it would be very useful to know where your evidence is for that, because some of the suggestions I had was that, actually, more people felt confident going out knowing that other people around them were vaccinated.

On waiting lists, we are in a really difficult situation, and it's not just here in Wales, but it's across the whole of the UK and, indeed, across the world. We had to take measures to protect the public. There are consequences to that and, of course, we're going to have a huge job of work to do to address that backlog. That's why we will be publishing our plan in April. We have an integrated medium-term plan process. We've got a system now where we're waiting for the health boards to submit their plans. We'll be assessing those plans and we'll be seeing if they marry up to the direction and the ambition that we've got as a Welsh Government. There are plenty of things that I think we would like to learn from other areas. I know you're very keen to see regional approaches. That's something that I'm also keen to see. But I think these are things that we need to consider.

In relation to vaccination of children, the JCVI has yet to publish its report, although there are lots of clues in The Guardian and other places where there seems to have been lots of leaks come out. It's a shame and it's perplexing to understand why that has not been published yet. But I have seen a copy of that advice and we will be commencing the roll-out of vaccinations for five to 11-year-olds. Of course, it's likely to have been a very difficult decision for the JCVI, because generally, children have a milder illness and fewer hospitalisations, but, of course, they have to balance that against the prospect of missing school. So, we have to consider very different issues when it comes to the vaccination of children as young as five years old, of course, so we'll be in a position where we will expect those children to be accompanied by an adult. There will be a need for informed consent, but there will be an opportunity for siblings, for example, to be brought at the same time. Most of this will be done—in fact, all of it will be done in health centres rather than in schools, so I hope that that is helpful to you.

May I thank the Minister for her statement? I am pleased to hear that confidence is increasing, that cases are reducing and that the number requiring hospital treatment is also reducing. I am content with the phased approach and the cautious timetable as we lift the few remaining measures still in place. There are few direct restrictions in terms of its effect on our daily lives.

In terms of COVID passes, I was discussing with the Member for South Wales East about one major cultural event that has decided that, 'No, COVID passes don't have to be used, but we're going to continue to do so, because it gives us confidence in arranging our events.' So, I do think that there are still people who want to put measures in place in order to allay people's fears, because I agree with the Minister's assessment that, although I am urging her to move forward as purposefully as possible in terms of the transition plan for moving to the next phase—. I agree with the assessment that the pandemic is not over, and am shocked that the UK Government is willing to claim that the pandemic is virtually over and that we need to remove all restrictions. And while I, as the Minister I'm sure is, eager to move to living with COVID, we shouldn't forget the pandemic or forget COVID. That's not what we mean by that.

In terms of the BA.2 sub-variant, I wonder whether there is any additional information on any patterns of transmission or where that sub-variant emerged from, so that scientists can focus on that and learn more about it. That is my first question. Secondly, vaccination of children from five to 11 years old: I would appreciate more details on the next steps. I am aware of calls from parents, from staff in education, from health professionals and care workers to push this option of vaccination forward as soon as possible, because of concern that the virus is spreading most among children and the impact that that has on family members who are unable to work and the impact that remains in terms of children's education, where they do lose large amounts of school time. And perhaps you could put that in the context of the decision to remove the requirement to wear face coverings in schools too, because there is concern, as I say, that we need to take all possible steps to try to prevent transmission within schools.

One final issue, as a third point. I have had further contact with the RNIB, following a written response that I received from the Minister on the last day of January, that was answering a question where I had asked about support for blind or partially sighted people in using tests. There are still concerns among that community who do have difficulty in taking these tests because of visual impairment. So, may I ask the Minister whether she is willing to have further discussion with the RNIB in terms of what can be done to assist those, particularly those who, for whatever reason, can't use digital platforms to seek assistance? Because the testing system is still an important part of our response to the pandemic, and it's important that it's a system that everyone is comfortable using.

Thank you very much, Rhun, and I'm pleased that you agree with the purposeful attitude that we have taken. And as you say, there are very few restrictions left in place. And I agree that some will continue to wish to use the COVID passes in some occasions. We're all eager for this pandemic to be over, but that isn't the way that COVID works. COVID has a mind of its own and behaves in its own way, and it's not us who will decide what the next chapter will be.

In terms of BA.2, there is a great deal of evidence in Denmark—that's where we're seeing a great deal of BA.2 prevalence. A great deal of research has been undertaken on that, to learn more about the sub-variant. One thing we do know is that it spreads far swifter than omicron. So, we are more likely to see that swift transmission of BA.2. And I know that many believe that that will become the most dominant variant that we see in our communities.

In terms of vaccinations for children between five and 11 years of age, we are already implementing a plan to ensure that this happens. We're not going to do that as a matter of urgency, as we did over the Christmas period. That's partly because the risk isn't as great to that cohort. And we're also waiting to hear from the JCVI to see whether there will be a need for a booster on top of the booster for older age groups in the spring. So, we certainly would want to consider which of those has to be prioritised. So, we just need to consider and weigh up amongst all of the other things that we need to consider, when it comes to making a decision on vaccination and what we need to do in that regard. So, I'm sure I'll receive a great deal more advice on that.

In terms of the RNIB, I'm sorry to hear that some people are still having difficulties to access tests—I'm more than happy to have a discussion on that. So, I can follow up on that later on.

Minister, thank you for your statement this afternoon on COVID-19, and I, like my colleagues here, welcome the easing of restrictions across Wales. Minister, as you know, COVID-19 put huge pressure on our A&E departments, and on Sunday evening there were approximately 17 ambulances queueing up outside Morriston Hospital, waiting for patients to be admitted and seen. In A&E and over the weekend, I've been advised by a front-line paramedic that residents in Brecon and Radnorshire are routinely waiting eight hours for a category 1 ambulance response. And over the weekend, a lady with chest pains waited over five hours for an ambulance to arrive, and there were no ambulances at all in my constituency. Minister, I have raised this on a number of occasions, we've debated it here a number of times, but I want to know what new measures have you put in, and the Welsh ambulance service put in, to try and get ambulance waiting times under control. Because people waiting eight hours plus is just simply not good enough, and I'm sure you'll agree with me on that. Diolch, Llywydd.

Thanks very much, James, and I am also very concerned about the situation in relation to ambulances, and that's why I have had a meeting with the chief executive of the ambulance service this morning, just to see what it is we can do to improve the situation. We have already recruited 127 additional people for the ambulance service—that's happened over the past few months. The other thing to remember, of course, is that we've got the armed services supporting us at the moment, so that's something else that is an additional support that we've seen. We've seen an additional number of people helping us with our 111 calls and 999 calls, and I'm pleased to say that that has helped to prevent the conveyance of around 11 to 15 per cent, so 11 to 15 per cent fewer people being taken to hospitals, because of that service.

We have had a particularly terrible situation in A&E in January, where we have had a very difficult handover period—lots of ambulances, as you suggest, waiting outside A&E departments. There has been a summit meeting this morning to assess the situation in relation to risk, and there's been a risk summit to assess actually what is the harm that is being caused here, because, obviously, that is something that is happening on all kinds of levels. So, we can't get people out of hospital because the care service is so fragile, and you'll be hearing more about what we intend to do in that space from my colleague next. We've obviously put substantial additional funding into the NHS. We're also looking at a roster review that follows on from the demand and capacity review that was undertaken earlier last year. So, it is a difficult situation, and, of course, there are still fairly high levels of sickness that you need to factor in as well.

So, all of these things are creating this perfect storm, but you, like me, want to know the answers rather than the problems. That's why we just keep on throwing and trying to come up with new ideas, and they have clearly helped the situation, but the demands are still enormously high, so we do have a six-point emergency and urgent care plan that we're working to as well. That's a longer term thing, but, obviously, there's an urgent situation we're trying to address at the moment.

I welcome the Welsh Government's stance on taking a sensible, evidence-led approach to relaxing COVID restrictions, because, as the Minister has already said, COVID has not gone away and it can still be really unpredictable. I am particularly grateful to be in Wales, as myself and many others have been, throughout the pandemic, where the self-isolation rules will remain in place. Does the Minister agree with me that it is far more sensible to relax the rules gradually than taking the rash approach of Boris Johnson's Government in Westminster, which seems to be led not by the science but by the polls? And can I also ask if the Welsh Government has a timetable for vaccinating five to 11-year-olds? I know this is something my constituents in Bridgend are very keen to get more information about. Diolch.

Thanks very much, Sarah. I'm pleased to say that we have tried, throughout this pandemic, to take that evidence-based approach, which was why we were slightly blindsided by the UK Government making an announcement that they clearly hadn't discussed with almost anyone in terms of stopping self-isolation. So, it is a shame that we get to that situation, and it's pretty obvious that it's a distraction technique from the very difficult situation that Johnson finds himself in at the moment politically.

Just in terms of the timetable for five to 11-year-olds, we're obviously waiting for that formal advice to come from the JCVI. I'm not quite sure what's holding it up. We know that it's available, and it's important that we are able to forge ahead with our plans. Obviously, we thought that this might be coming our way, so a huge amount of preparation work has already been undertaken, but we can't really press the button finally on it until we have that final JCVI publication that we're hoping to see imminently.

So, we're going to move on now to item 4, a statement by the Deputy Minister for Social Services: the real living wage for social care workers. And I call on Julie Morgan. 

Diolch. I'm very pleased to be able to update Members of the Senedd on the tremendous progress we've made towards paying social care workers in Wales the real living wage, one of our key priorities in the programme for government. In June I made a statement on the approach I would take to implementing this commitment and explained I would be asking the social care fair work forum for its advice on how best to take it forward.

The Deputy Minister for Social Partnership and I met with the forum in July to personally ask for its support and discuss the potential challenges. We asked the forum to consider and advise on some complex issues, including: who should be included in the uplift; pay differentials, sleep-ins and travel time; how we might maximise the impact of funding and what implementation challenges we might anticipate to ensure a successful roll-out. The forum worked very quickly to provide its advice by the end of October, and I'm extremely grateful for its work in delivering to such challenging timescales, and its advice has greatly helped inform our decisions.

In December, I announced we would pay the real living wage of £9.90 per hour to registered social care workers in care homes and domiciliary care, in both adults' and children’s services, and to personal assistants funded through direct payments.

Focusing on these workers recognises our broader ambition to improve the quality of services and strive for parity of esteem with other key public health services through professionalisation. The inclusion of personal assistants paid through direct payments reflects that these roles are often very similar to that of a domiciliary care worker, and we want to continue to protect the service user’s voice and control in how the support they need is delivered, a key principle in the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. We know there will be calls to go further, but it's essential that we deliver this commitment in a considered way that allows us to ensure it is both sustainable and affordable. Additionally, although our original commitment had been to introduce the real living wage during this Senedd term, our  approach now allows us to introduce it from April, helping the sector face its current recruitment and retention challenges sooner.

We've announced that £43 million will be made available to local authorities and to health boards to deliver the real living wage from April. This also includes a contribution towards the cost of maintaining differentials at the lower end of pay scales. This will help provide some flexibility in the funding. This is important to help avoid destabilisation at those lower pay bands. Officials are working closely with the directors of social services and stakeholders from across the social care sector to develop implementation guidance to support a successful roll-out from April.

We will also commission an independent, dynamic evaluation of the implementation to monitor impact, including ensuring that funding reaches the pockets of the workers it's intended to benefit in a timely way, and that implementation guidance is effective in supporting commissioners and employers. It'll also help us to consider what more we may be able to do in future, and inform funding estimates for future years.

We do understand the challenges employers face as staff look to other sectors with seemingly more attractive terms and conditions. So that is why we will also be making an additional payment of £1,498 to those social care workers to whom we will be paying the real living wage. Senior care staff and managers in care homes and domiciliary care will also receive this payment because it's a further demonstration of our commitment to improving the status, terms and conditions of our professional social care workforce. This payment will mean social care workers on the basic tax rate will receive a single additional payment of £1,000 in their pay packet. The details of this scheme will be published in due course.

We want to see more people join the social care sector and start a long and rewarding career. We expect the additional payment and the real living wage will be processed in people’s pay from April to June, due to the complexity of the care sector and the large number of employers involved. Whilst we do not expect the real living wage uplift, or the additional payment, to resolve all of the sector’s problems in terms of recruitment and retention, we believe they are a valuable and vital first step, particularly in helping to retain workers through these very difficult times.

We will continue to work in social partnership with the social care fair work forum on what steps should be taken to improve social care workers' wider terms and conditions, such as how the definition of 'fair work' should be applied for social care workers in Wales, and setting out what good working practices should look like in social care. We remain committed to creating a stronger, better paid workforce in social care, and to supporting the sector through these challenging times to deliver quality social care services that people can rely on.

I look forward to working with Plaid Cymru’s designated Member on our co-operation agreement commitment about the future of social care. This includes setting up an expert group to support our shared ambition to create a national care service, free at the point of need. We will also continue to better integrate health and care, and work towards parity of recognition and reward for health and care workers. Diolch.

Thank you. I want to now call Gareth Davies to speak.

Thank you very much, Commissioner, and thank you for your statement this afternoon, Deputy Minister. And it's really disappointing that you continue to ignore the advice of everyone concerned with social care. The pitiful wage being offered will not attract people into the care sector, neither will the £1,000 bonus you unveiled, with much fanfare. With household bills the way they are currently, care workers can't afford to live on the minimal salary being offered. You can't take advantage of the compassion and dedication of care workers. These amazing people provide vital care to the most vulnerable in our society, and they should be rewarded for it. As it stands, a career in social care is not an attractive option, and unless you grasp the nettle and accept that £9.90 per hour is insufficient, and unless we pay care workers a decent wage, the crisis in the sector will become a disaster. We will not only have a recruitment problem, but also a retention one.

Social care needs to be a rewarding career, but the rewards cannot just be spiritual, they also have to be material. And one-off payments, as welcome as they are, are not enough. Paying less than the retail sector is not enough. So, why are you continuing with the real living wage policy, when the sector and the unions say it isn't enough? Do you truly believe that paying the real living wage will do anything to address the recruitment and retention problems faced by the sector? Deputy Minister, one of the options you have presented was to align social care with NHS pay scales, costing around £54 million by your own estimates. Why did you not go down this route? Was it simply on the grounds of cost? And will you join me in welcoming the Welsh Conservative-run Monmouthshire County Council announcement that they are to pay their care staff £10.85 per hour? Do you expect other local authorities will follow Monmouthshire's fine example?

And you said in your statement that your measured approach is sustainable. How is it sustainable if it does little to address the current recruitment crisis? Why did you opt for a one-off bonus this year, rather than using the extra £96 million to pay a better wage to all staff? Staff cannot rely on bonuses, nor can they be counted towards such a thing as a mortgage. What assessment has been made of the impact of this policy in helping to retain staff? And finally, Deputy Minister, I welcome your aim of seeing more people join the care sector and start a long and rewarding career, as it deserves to be. In order to make social care a rewarding career, we not only have to ensure a rewarding pay packet, we also have to ensure rewarding terms and conditions. What steps are you taking in that regard, or does the sector have to just wait until you and Plaid Cymru hash out your plans for a national care service? Thank you.

Well, I thank Gareth Davies for those remarks, and I think I'm rather amazed at his attitude towards this announcement. This is certainly a first step towards improving the lot of social care workers, and it has been widely welcomed, as has the £1,000 payment. So, I'm very surprised at his attitude to this statement today. Why have we paid £9.90? This was a commitment in our programme for government; it was also a manifesto commitment. It is the amount that is advised by the Resolution Foundation. It is monitored by the Fair Work Commission, and, every year, they recommend an uplift. And so we are following the rules of that commission. And as I say, this was what we were committed to.

We were very pleased to have the opportunity to, in addition, pay the £1,000, which is linked to the paying of the real living wage, because we are looking for the professionalisation of the sector. We set up the social care fair work forum. They advised us on how we could bring in the real living wage, and they are looking at the terms and conditions that we absolutely agree are so important. And I think I did say in my statement that this by itself will not be enough. This is a first step, and what we plan to do is to work again very closely with the fair work forum, who've been tremendous in providing us with advice, and to look next at the terms and conditions and see how we can bring up the social care workforce so that they are able to be recognised as a profession, and will be able to fulfil their duties knowing that they are being paid, they've got reasonable pay and reasonable terms and conditions. So, I'm very pleased to hear that some local authorities are paying above the real living wage. I hope that many people will pay above it, and it's entirely up to the employers to decide if they want to pay more. But I think we need to acknowledge that this is a step towards promoting the social care sector and that it has been widely welcomed. 

I now call Peredur Owen Griffiths. 

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Deputy Minister, for your statement. 

I broadly welcome today's statement with the progress towards a real living wage for all social care workers. Plaid Cymru has long called for a substantial pay increase in this sector. Social care jobs can be very rewarding, but they are very demanding and very responsible jobs. These jobs should be rewarded accordingly. Plaid Cymru wants parity of pay and parity of respect between health and social care staff. Delivering this would go some way towards stemming the drain of care workers from the sector. While the announcement last week of a bonus payment of £1,000 for care workers was welcome, I worry this will only paper over the cracks that run deep and have long standing in social care. I fear this will do little to attract anyone into the sector, and I doubt it will persuade anyone considering leaving to stay.

As I said earlier, this statement today is progress towards the delivery of a real living wage. I would be much happier if this announcement was about the delivery of a living wage to all care workers immediately. Today's announcement will be of little comfort to care workers who are yet to be paid the living wage, and may be kept waiting another two years for it, as per the Government's commitment. The cost-of-living crisis is already here, and it's set to get much worse. Care workers are struggling to pay their bills as things stand; they need that pay rise sooner, rather than later. Can the Deputy Minister therefore clarify the pace of the roll-out of the living wage for care workers? When does she expect 50 per cent of care workers to be earning the living wage? Or when does she expect it to be at 75 per cent or 90 per cent of staff? For reasons already mentioned, is there any possibility of bringing forward your commitment so that all care workers receive the minimum wage ahead of your 2024 deadline for delivering on this commitment? 

Even though this statement is about social care workers, I want to mention the key role that unpaid carers play in society. We cannot forget their immense contribution. I echo the calls of the Carers Trust to ensure that unpaid carers are protected from financial hardship by the Welsh Government. You can do this by ramping up the lobbying of the UK Government to reform carer's allowance to raise it to at least the same level as jobseeker's allowance. This is also one of the moments when anyone who values fairness and progressive policies can cast a jealous eye over proceedings in Scotland. There, they have carer's allowance supplement, which is paid twice yearly by Social Security Scotland. This underlines the need for a separate benefits system for Wales so that we can craft a more compassionate benefits system here in Wales similar to the one in Scotland. Deputy Minister, where do you stand on this matter? Will you be lobbying for the powers to be able to do this? Diolch yn fawr.  

Diolch, and thank you very much for those very positive comments and your welcome for this as a step towards the—a step in the right direction, shall we say? I absolutely support the comments that the Member has made. We do want to reach parity of pay and respect. We know what a hugely responsible job care workers are doing, and we do see this, again, as, I say, a first step on that journey.

In terms of the pace of the roll-out, I said in my statement who would be actually receiving it, and that is all care workers who are directly providing care who work in care homes, those who provide care in people's homes, the domiciliary care workforce, and personal assistants who receive direct payments. So, all those groups will start receiving the living wage from April. We see the first year as a transition year, but we intend all those people to receive the money during this next financial year. It may, because of the complexity of the sector, because of the vast number of employers—. Because 80 per cent of this is in the private sector, this will mean that it may take some time to work out, but we hope that they should get it between April and June, and the same is true of the £1,000 payment.

His last point about unpaid carers, I couldn't agree more. I think unpaid carers have borne a huge brunt of the burden during the whole of this pandemic, and absolutely agree that they have suffered financial hardship. We know that, and we have seen, from all the carers surveys that have been done, the stress that they've been under. I regret the fact that we are not in control of carer's allowance here in Wales, and I am very well aware of the demands from the sector that there should be an uplift to the carer's allowance.

Deputy Minister, thank you for your statement this afternoon, and I too recognise some of the concerns raised by my colleague Gareth Davies, but I am encouraged to see that the Welsh Government are coming forward to give our social care workers in Wales the real living wage and recognise the vitally important work that they do caring for the most vulnerable people in our society. Let's hope there is more that we can do going forward to improve the wages for care workers right across the sector. 

Minister, I raised at business statement last week about the situation in Powys where care packages are being handed back to the local authority due to the major shortages in care staff. Minister, I know that the regional partnership board are looking to set up a Powys health and care academy, but, Deputy Minister, what more interventions can the Welsh Government make to ensure that we have enough care staff in this sector going forward, on top of the welcome announcement that you've made today?

Thank you very much, James, for welcoming the announcement and the comments that you've made. I think it's absolutely vital that we do all we can to attract more people into the system. I'm aware that care packages are being given back due to staff shortages. We have been working very hard to try to attract more care workers. We've had a huge advertising campaign, which many people will have seen. Social Care Wales has spent—. We have given Social Care Wales money to advertise the vacancies in this sector and also to promote what a valuable job it is. I think, as we all recognise, you couldn't really do a much more valuable job than be looking after vulnerable people. Also, we've been offering free training to people who want to come into the sector, and I welcome the proposal for the health and care academy. I think the key issue is that we have to get health and social care working much more closely together, and that will solve a lot of these issues. That's why the health Minister and I have been working so closely together and meeting every week with representatives from the health boards and the local authorities in the care action committee. But I think it is that working together that will enable us to move forward.

I very much welcome the statement and the announcement. I start off from the belief that everyone in Wales should be paid at least the real living wage, and I think that's something that we need to be pushing in every possible way we can. The second thing I would like to say is that I welcomed the original commitment to introduce the real living wage in this Senedd term, and I'm pleased it will be introduced from April, helping fund care services facing recruitment and retention problems. But, we need equality of esteem and pay between the health and care sector. How often do we see people working in care going to work in health because they can get paid more doing roughly the same job?

I've got two questions. Is the £43 million, which will be made available to local authorities and health boards to deliver the real living wage from April, sufficient to fund the increase? And, does the £1,498 for social care workers, who will be paid the real living wage, include cooks and other non-direct care providers? Finally, can I just remind Members just how the Scottish National Party in Scotland have driven up poverty?

Thank you, Mike, very much, and thank you for your welcome for these proposals. I absolutely agree that everyone in Wales needs to be paid the real living wage, but what we're tackling here are the people who directly deliver social care. And those who deliver it indirectly, of course I think they should be paid the real living wage as well, but what we're trying to do is boost the profession of social care to move towards parity with what is received in the NHS. 

The £43 million, we believe, yes, it is sufficient. We've come up with that figure working very closely with the ADSS—the Association of Directors of Social Services—and this £43 million does include £6.7 million that will be coming from the health boards, which will come out of the health budget to pay for the care that the health boards commission. So, I am confident that the £43 million will be enough to fund this proposal.

Thank you, Deputy Minister, for your statement. I do welcome this as a big step in the right direction. You'll be aware that the Welsh Conservatives made a commitment in our manifesto for the Senedd elections of a pay rate of £10 an hour, which is just 10p more than yours, which I hoped you would have been able to stretch to, but obviously I appreciate that this is something that we're all wanting to work towards in terms of the wider recognition of the social care workforce.

You made reference to the fact that senior care staff and managers in care homes and senior managers in domiciliary care will also be in receipt of the bonus as well, which is being given to the social care workforce this year, but I didn't hear any reference to kitchen staff or cleaners in these care homes, all of whom are working really hard and have done throughout the pandemic, and I feel also need to be recognised in terms of the contribution that they've made. Can you confirm today that you'll look into whether the Welsh Government has the resources in order to recognise those extremely valuable and essential roles that kitchen staff and cleaning staff in care homes have been doing during the pandemic, by giving them the same bonus after tax that these front-line care workers will also be receiving?

Thank you, Darren Millar, for welcoming this payment as a step in the right direction. I welcome his support. Yes, senior care staff and managers will receive the additional payment, and I think that I want to repeat, really, that our purpose is to try to professionalise the workforce—those who are directly giving care, the direct care givers.

We did give two recognition payments during the course of the pandemic: one in 2020 and one in 2021; one of £500 and one of £725. The first one did go to all staff in the social care field. For example, in care homes, all the people working in the care homes had them, and the £725 went to all health and social care staff. So, those were recognition payments, but this is not a recognition payment in that way. The recognition payments were recognising the risks that those staff took and how they were so close to all the perils of the pandemic, really, and what a huge amount they put in. So, those were recognition payments; this isn't a recognition payment.

This is a payment that's going to be implemented along with the real living wage and is trying to move the social care staff who directly deliver this care to a professional body. By itself, it's not enough; I think we've said that already today. There's an awful lot more that's got to be done in terms of terms and conditions and development and opportunities for training—all those things—and those are the things we want to move on to next, but in no way are we not recognising what those other staff have done.FootnoteLink

Thank you, and thank you, Deputy Minister for Social Services. We will now suspend proceedings to allow a changeover in the Siambr. If you are leaving the Siambr, please do so promptly, and the bell will be rung two minutes before proceedings restart. Any Members who are arriving after a changeover should wait until then before entering the Siambr.

Item 5 will be the next item this afternoon, and that is the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 (Amendment of Schedule 9A) Regulations 2022. I call on the Minister for Climate Change to move this motion—Julie James. 

Diolch, Llywydd. These regulations form part of a wider set of statutory instruments that I am laying to support the implementation of the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016. Members will be aware from my written statement last month that the Welsh Government's intention is that all of the provisions of the Act will be commenced in July of this year. To enable this to happen, a number of statutory instruments will be required to support the day-to-day operation of the Act. For example, I have already laid SIs that set out the information that landlords must provide to all contract holders in future, and regulations that will ensure that the accommodation landlords let is fit for human habitation.

The Schedule 9A amendment regulations before us today help to ensure that landlords are meeting their responsibilities with regard to the standard and safety of their properties, and are related to the fitness for human habitation requirements. Schedule 9A to the Act already restricts landlords in certain circumstances from exercising a landlord's break clause in a fixed-term standard contract, or issuing a landlord's notice under section 173 or section 186 of the Act to end a contract where the contract holder is not at fault. An example of one of these circumstances is where the landlord has failed to comply with the statutory requirement to provide the contract holder with a written statement of their occupation contract. 

The Schedule 9A amendment regulations will add four further restrictions on a landlord's ability to issue a landlord's notice or trigger a break clause. These are: if an energy performance certificate has not been provided in relation to the property being let; if hard-wired smoke alarms and carbon monoxide alarms have not been fitted; or if a valid electrical condition report or a gas safety certificate have not been provided in relation to the property. If a landlord has not met these requirements they will not be able to serve a no-fault notice or trigger a break clause. Our aim in making these regulations is to encourage landlords to meet the important obligations relating to the safety of energy efficiency of the properties they let, and we are seeking to achieve this by restricting any landlord who has not complied with these obligations from being able to issue a no-fault notice to end a contract or to trigger a break clause in a fixed-term contract. This restriction will apply until such time as they have put things right. 

In summary, these regulations should be seen in the context of our overarching aim of improving security of tenure for contract holders who have not breached the terms of their contract, and our wider drive to support the increasing professionalisation of the private rented sector and to provide a safe home for everyone in Wales. I've noted the points raised by the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee in relation to these regulations and have responded to the committee on all of the points raised. I ask Members to approve these regulations today. Diolch.

I call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies. 

Thank you, Llywydd. With your invitation, this will the first of five speeches I will give in relation to scrutiny undertaken by my committee in recent weeks. I will therefore aim to keep my contributions focused. 

I'll try to keep this as short as possible. We considered these regulations at our meeting on 31 January, and our report to the Senedd contains two merits reporting points. These regulations, as the Minister has said, amend the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016 to place two further restrictions on a landlord’s ability to issue a notice seeking possession—first, if an energy performance certificate has not been provided, and, second, if certain health and safety requirements have not been met.

We noted in our report that regulations 3 and 4 prevent a landlord from giving notice if there are breaches of certain statutory obligations. Any provision that interferes with an individual’s property, or use of that property, will potentially engage article 1, protocol 1 to the European convention on human rights. The explanatory memorandum does not contain a justification for the interference with human rights. So, as such, we asked the Welsh Government to provide details of the human rights assessment that it undertook in relation to these particular regulations. In its response to our report, the Government explained that, provided a landlord is in compliance with the two statutory obligations, any harmful effect is mitigated. As such, the Government was satisfied that the regulations are indeed compatible with the convention on human rights.

Our second reporting point drew attention to the use of Henry VIII powers. It won't only be this Minister that's familiar with us drawing attention to these. These regulations amend primary legislation, in this case the Renting Homes (Wales) Act 2016. During Stage 1 scrutiny of the then Bill, our predecessor committee sought clarification in relation to the justification for the use of these Henry VIII powers. The then Minister’s response stated that the Government needed to have the flexibility to react to how the housing landscape evolves over time and to make appropriate provision as necessary. In its response to our reporting point, the Government noted the response to our predecessor committee’s request for clarification on the use of such powers, but indicated it had nothing further to add. So, I think we'll have to call this a score draw for now. 

Thank you, Llywydd, and thank you, Minister.

I would like to refer Members to my own declaration of interest form regarding property ownership.

Minister, I thank you for laying these regulations, and can confirm that we will be voting in favour. Energy performance certificates should be provided as a bare minimum and the requirements of the Renting Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) (Wales) Regulations 2022 should certainly be met. In fact, it is only common decency to also expect landlords to install carbon monoxide alarms. Every year, there are still approximately 30 accidental deaths from acute carbon monoxide poisoning in England and Wales, and over 200 non-fatal poisonings requiring hospital admission.

I can see no objection either to obtaining an electrical condition report. This could be a positive step in ensuring that our nation sees fewer electrical fires caused by wiring, cabling and plugs. Across Wales, there were 772 incidents between 2014 and 2019. One of the aims of the regulations is to prevent landlords from attempting to take so-called retaliatory evictions in situations where a contract holder has brought to their attention an issue of safety or disrepair—quite rightly. Safety issues, disrepair and any inadequate housing leading to dangerous situations must be addressed. 

The explanatory memorandum states that the Welsh Government has undertaken a considerable amount of work in recent years to tackle poor practice by landlords in Wales. This includes a landlord registration and licensing scheme designed to raise professional standards in the sector. Now that this scheme is, I think, about five years old now, even if it's not today, I would like the Minister to make a statement at some stage as to the benefits to both landlords and tenants that Rent Smart Wales has actually brought. We know now that there have been 4,584 deregistrations or deactivated landlords in Rent Smart Wales between 2018 and 2021.

Whilst I acknowledge that you had a public consultation on increasing the minimum notice period for a no-fault eviction in 2019, I would still have some concerns that no formal consultation has been undertaken specifically in relation to these regs. It is clear from the stakeholder groups that I hold and speak to within the sector that there is still this divide between them and the Welsh Government. It would help greatly if you could use every possible opportunity to engage and co-operate with them. Therefore, should further regulations in relation to the rental sector be forthcoming, will you assure the sector that there will be a fresh opportunity for them to be consulted? Diolch. 

Mabon ap Gwynfor. Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you. I didn't hear you clearly—I'm sorry. Thank you very much, Llywydd, for that. May I also declare an interest and draw your attention to my register of interests, please? These regulations are a significant step in the right direction to improve the quality of housing in Wales. We will therefore be supporting this proposal today, but I would seek clarification on some points, please, from the Minister. 

The regulations set out limits on the issuing of notices. If a landlord does not reach the required standards, they are encouraged to comply with the requirements to be able to give the tenants notice. But what about those tenants who are locked into poor-quality private accommodation, and who aren't in a position to leave because of financial circumstances or other reasons? If they don't give notice or the landlord doesn't do so, then what will encourage the landlord to ensure that the accommodation reaches the standards required at that point?

In terms of efficiency, you will know that Wales has the oldest housing stock in this state, and it is the private rented sector that has the oldest housing stock too, with a higher percentage of poor quality homes. And the percentage of homes in the private rented sector has increased significantly since 1981. The Welsh housing conditions survey 2017-18 showed that it has taken 10 years for the average efficiency band to improve from band E to band D. Naturally, flats were the most efficient homes, with 55 per cent of flats achieving band C energy rating or better, as compared to only 25 per cent of houses that reach the same level. And the houses in our rural communities are even less efficient. So, what steps are the Government taking to accelerate the process of improving the quality of housing in Wales, bearing in mind that it has taken 10 years to improve energy efficiency from one band to another? How will the Government target its actions to ensure that efficiency improves in the least energy-efficient areas, particularly our rural communities?

These regulations will certainly lead to lengthy and complex contracts for tenants, with a large number of regulations incorporated into the contract between the tenant and landlord. How can people understand what their rights are in such a lengthy document? So, what steps are the Government taking to simplify the process, or what support will be available to ensure that tenants understand their contracts?  

Finally, in terms of the legislation more widely, you will know that the legislation, as it currently stands, makes it very difficult for those religious denominations that let homes as a manse for their ministers, vicars or religious leaders. Some denominations have started to sell their properties because of these difficulties. A notice period of six months is shortened to two months for people employed by the company that owns a property, but that does not apply to religious denominations. Will you consider amending the legislation further to reflect the employment status of ministers, vicars and religious leaders, or would you be willing, Minister, to meet with Cytûn and me in the near future to discuss the situation further? Thank you very much.   

The Minister to reply to the debate—Julie James. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I've already addressed the issues on the Human Rights Act in terms of the LJC committee. We are very satisfied that the Act complies with all of the human rights legislation, as Huw set out.

In terms of the points that Janet made, the number of landlords fluctuates over time as new landlords enter the market and others leave. So, she's quite right in saying that figures from Rent Smart Wales indicate just over 4,500 de-registrations over the past three financial years, some of which could of course have been incorrect duplications. There were also nearly 30,000 new landlord registrations during the same period. It's always good to read to the bottom of the page, I say.

So, there's no direct link to the number of private rental properties as the number of properties held by each landlord can also change. I understand that the latest figures from Rent Smart Wales indicate that the number of PRS properties is similar to the published dwelling stock estimates, which have remained at just over 200,000 since around 2015—so, despite the dire warnings about the same in the stock. Obviously, the changes in legislation may introduce some resulting reduction in the flexibility a landlord currently has, but the legislation will not significantly affect the most important driver for investment in the private rented sector, which is of course the rate of return on the investment.

In terms of Mabon's first point, the Act already provides for a new fitness obligation on landlords, and protects tenants against retaliatory eviction if they seek repairs. There is plain language guidance on the contract, which will be available. I have already considered the religious orders point, Mabon. We had an extensive conversation during the passage of the amendment Act with them, and I've advised the church that if it, or any other denominational faith group or ministers or faith leaders, require advice as to the application of the law to their particular arrangements, they will need to seek that independently. That should then be discrete as to the application of the law. It will be a matter for the courts to make the determination.  

So, I'm afraid that I have no intention of excluding properties occupied for ministers of religion or other faith leaders, for that matter, nor of retaining a two-month landlords' notice period for church-owned properties, as I consider that people who are tenants of the church are entitled to the same amount of protection as other people. Other than that, Llywydd, I think that I covered all points in my opening remarks, and I commend the regulations to the Senedd.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? There are no objections. Therefore, the motion is agreed, in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We move now to item 6: the South East Wales Corporate Joint Committee (Amendment) Regulations 2022. I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motion—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion. In March 2021 the Senedd approved the regulations establishing four new corporate joint committees, or CJCs, in Wales. This included the South East Wales Corporate Joint Committee Regulations 2021, which established the south-east Wales CJC.

Members will be aware that the establishment regulations set out the core functions that the CJCs will be delivering. They are: the duty to prepare a regional transport plan; the duty to prepare a strategic development plan; and the ability to exercise the economic well-being function—that is, the power to do anything to improve the economic well-being of their area.

The approach to the development of the CJC model to date has been one of co-development and close collaboration with local government, through a phased approach to both the development of the legislative framework that CJCs will operate in and to their implementation. This included agreement that the core functions would not be commenced until 2022, to provide a period of time for CJCs to put in place the necessary administrative and governance arrangements.

As part of this approach, during the development of the establishment regulations, each region chose when exactly they would want their core functions to commence. The south-east Wales region elected to commence their core functions on 28 February 2022, as part of an ambitious programme to transition this Cardiff capital region city deal activity into the CJC as soon as possible. The other three CJCs elected to commence their core functions on 30 June 2022. However, as part of the preparatory work during the implementation phase, a number of technical issues were identified in relation to the treatment of tax within a CJC, particularly in relation to VAT. The leaders of the south-east Wales CJC have requested a change in the commencement date of their functions to allow time for these technical issues to be addressed.

The regulations we are debating today respond to this request and seek to amend the commencement date of the core functions of the south-east Wales CJC from 28 February 2022 to 30 June 2022. This will bring the south-east Wales CJC in line with the point at which the other three CJCs in Wales start to exercise their functions.

Thanks, Minister, for your statement today and the regulations that have been set out before us as well. As the Minister, I'm sure, is aware, and many people are aware, I'm a keen follower of corporate joint committees. I was intrigued to see them on the order paper here today.

As you've outlined, Minister, the key functions of the south-east Wales corporate joint committee are in relation to economic well-being, transport functions and strategic development, and they're seeking this delay in terms of their start date to end of June 2022. That is a concern, of course, that there have been identified—some of the issues that you noted. And it does play into some of the issues that we have raised on these sides of the benches about concerns around corporate joint committees and the concerns about how valuable they're going to be, or not, here in Wales. But as this request has come directly from councils, it's also clear that it is having some adverse impact on them and on their work that they are trying to complete, and that is worrying.

I would be interested, Minister, to understand the new date of 30 June, not just for south-east Wales but for the other corporate joint committees—. How confident you are with that being a date where CJCs will be able to be in place properly. And you outlined in your statement as well the relationship and the work you are having with councils in implementing these. I'd be interested to know how you feel that relationship is now, in the implementation of CJCs, and to ensure that they are adequately funded, because if these things are going to happen, which they are of course, they need to work as best as possible, and to make sure they are adequately funded and resourced so that they can do the best job possible to serve their communities. 

So, to conclude, Llywydd, as Conservatives over here we have been concerned, and continue to be concerned, with the implementation of CJCs, but we do appreciate that they are there and they do need support to make them work. So, in light of this mix of being concerned about the CJCs but also wanting to support councils in them being properly ready to implement some of these regulations, we will be abstaining on the regulations today, and hopefully we'll see some improvements in this area, sooner rather than later. Thanks, Llywydd.

The Minister to reply.

Thank you very much to Sam Rowlands for his contribution in the debate today, and for confirming that the Welsh Conservatives will be taking a pragmatic approach to the regulations, given that we're not having the debate today about the desirability of CJCs, but responding to a request from one CJC, the south-east Wales CJC, to change the date of commencement. So, grateful for the pragmatic approach being taken there.

CJCs do represent an innovative and powerful way for local authorities in Wales to work in partnership, and in co-developing the legislation that underpins them, we did consult extensively with partners in local government, including with treasurers. However, the need to provide the ability for CJCs to reclaim VAT in the same way as local authorities can was only, unfortunately, raised when we started with the detailed operational planning last summer, but we are working very, very closely with CJCs on this. We've made a request and a business case to the UK Government to ensure that CJCs are able to reclaim VAT in the same way as local authorities do, and it is an uncontentious request to the UK Government, and we do hope that this issue will be resolved quickly.

And I should just add that a small number of other, largely technical, issues have emerged during implementation, but they are also in hand, and they include providing for CJCs to have direct access to borrowing, via the Public Works Loan Board, and also changes in relation to corporation tax and income tax, and legislation to address these similarly uncontentious points is currently being planned. So, just to provide reassurance that these other issues are in hand also. Thank you again for Sam Rowlands's contribution this afternoon.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection, and I will therefore defer voting under this item until voting time.

We move now to item 7, the Corporate Joint Committees (Transport Functions) (Consequential Modifications and Transitional Provisions) (Wales) Regulations 2022. I call on the Deputy Minister for Climate Change to move the motion—Lee Waters.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion. As the Minister for finance has just said in her debate, one of the core functions of the new corporate joint committees is to deliver a duty to prepare a regional transport plan, and as we've just heard, this duty will transfer later in 2022. And what I'm seeking to do today is to modify legislation that refers to the local authority duty to prepare local transport plans and then ensuring that the policies in the existing local transport plans remain in force until the new regional transport plans are approved. We're also revoking the Regional Transport Planning (Wales) Order 2014, which enables local authorities to work together to produce local transport plans.

The Senedd has already agreed to establish CJCs, and that the transport planning function should be transferred from the local authorities. And today I'm asking Members to make consequential technical amendments and transitional improvements related to transport. I'd be grateful for the support of Members in approving these regulations today. Diolch.

I now call on the chairman of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. It's my second opportunity to speak on these motions in front of us this afternoon and I'm going to be even briefer in this excursion here. We considered these regulations at our meeting on 7 February and our report to the Senedd contains one technical reporting point. The regulations, as the Minister has said, make amendments to primary and secondary legislation as a consequence to the modifications to the Transport Act 2000, made by the Corporate Joint Committees (Transport Functions) (Wales) Regulations 2021, and we noted in our report that the regulations at various points refer to section 108(2A)(a) of the Transport Act 2000, which relates to the development of policies as opposed to section 108(2A)(b), which relates to the implementation of policies. We did note, however, that at other points in the regulations, reference is simply made to section 108(2A) as a whole, so it was unclear to us why the reference to paragraph (a) was omitted in some places, given that the regulations dealt only with the development of policies and not their implementation. So, this is very much a technical point here.

But in its response to our report, the Government explained that in the case of corporate joint committees, the 2021 regulations modified section 108(2A) to the effect that it no longer referred to the implementation of policies, and as such, the Government considers that references to section 108 in the regulations before us today to be correct. We're grateful to the Government for this clarification and its response. Diolch.

The Deputy Minister to reply, if he wishes to do so.

I thank Huw Irranca-Davies for his comments and for his feedback from his committee, and I'm glad that we've agreed a way forward, and I hope that Members are able to support the regulations.

Thank you. The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any object? [Objection.] Yes, there is an objection, and I will defer voting until voting time.

The next item is the Plant Health etc. (Fees) (Amendment) (Wales) (EU Exit) Regulations 2022. I call on the Minister for Climate Change to move the motion—Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion. The Plant Health etc. (Fees) (Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 amend the Plant Health etc. (Fees) (Wales) Regulations 2018, in consequence of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. The 2018 regulations specify fees payable to the Welsh Ministers in relation to plant health services, and in particular, certain fees payable to the Welsh Ministers in relation to checks of imports of plants and plant products. The purpose of such checks is to reduce biosecurity risk and protect Wales from the spread of harmful pests and diseases.

On 14 September 2021, the UK Government extended the timetable of the transitional staging period for the introduction and phasing in of border controls on sanitary and phytosanitary imports from the European Union to Great Britain. The revised timetable delays specific controls by a further four months, from 1 March to 1 July of this year. This is to reflect the challenges faced by the imports and food supply sectors in recent months as we recover from the pandemic, which has impacted supply chains across Europe and globally.

This revision of the timetable has been achieved through amendments to the official controls regulations 2021. It has delivered a single date across all GB nations from which the remaining documentary, identity and physical checks on plants and plant products due to be phased in will begin to apply to all SPS goods. However, there remains a further consequential amendment necessary to ensure that Wales is fully aligned to this timetable. Our current regulations require the introduction of plant health fees from 1 March, and the proposed amendment before you today seeks to ensure that we in Wales mirror the timetable now set out in the rest of Great Britain, with the introduction of plant health fees from the new date of 1 July 2022. This is a small but critical amendment that ensures that businesses and importers of plants and plant products in Wales will not be disadvantaged. Diolch.

I have no other contributors to this debate. I assume that the Minister doesn't need to make any further comments. Therefore, the proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. I don't see any objections, and therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We move now to item 9, the Non-Domestic Rating (Multiplier) (Wales) Regulations 2022. I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motion—Rebecca Evans.

I move the motion to approve the Non-Domestic Rating (Multiplier) (Wales) Regulations 2022. These regulations set the multiplier for non-domestic rating purposes for 2022-23. In 2017, the Welsh Government set out its intention to change the measure of inflation used to calculate the multiplier in Wales from the retail price index to the consumer price index from 1 April 2018. This has previously been effected through annual Orders approved by this Senedd. Following the passage of the Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021, an increase in CPI is now the default statutory position. On 20 December, I announced the decision to move away from this position for 2022-23. Instead, the multiplier will be frozen. The regulations need to be approved before the vote on the local government finance reports on the final local government and police settlements for 2022-23, or before 1 March 2022, whichever is earlier. I am therefore seeking approval of these regulations ahead of the vote on the report on the police settlement later today.

The Non-Domestic Rating (Multiplier) (Wales) Regulations 2022 will set the multiplier so that it remains at the level set for both 2020-21 and 2021-22, which is 0.535. The regulations will result in there being no increase in the rate bills to be paid by businesses and other non-domestic property owners in 2022-23. The Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 made a permanent change to the basis for increasing the multiplier from 1 April 2022. Our intention is to use CPI in future years. 

I am grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for its consideration of the regulations. Non-domestic rates policy is largely devolved. Freezing the multiplier prevents increases in rate bills that rate payers would otherwise face. This change will help businesses and other rate payers in Wales, particularly given the pressures they've been facing, while maintaining the stable stream of tax revenue for local services. The change is fully funded by the Welsh Government. We are investing £35 million to cover the cost of the freeze so that there will be no impact on the funding provided for local services. I therefore ask Members to approve the regulations today.

I'm speaking in my capacity this afternoon as the Welsh Conservatives spokesman on finance. As a group, we will be supporting these regulations. As we all know, businesses have experienced significant disruption and financial losses during the pandemic, and so the freezing of NDR multiplier in line with what has happened elsewhere in the UK will help to ease the pressure on businesses. However, I would like to make a brief point that business rates in Wales are still higher than elsewhere in the UK. For example, the multiplier in Wales is 53.5p, whilst in England, the standard multiplier is 51.2p, and for small businesses, it's 49.9p. Even the higher property rate in Scotland is 52.4p and is obviously lower than the standard rate in Wales. And so I do think that more could be done to reduce the multiplier to create a more competitive environment for Welsh businesses, as well as helping them to not just recover from the pandemic, but to thrive. 

Finally, I would call for the Welsh Government to consider introducing a split multiplier, so that smaller businesses can benefit from reduced NDR rates. To me, it's somewhat unfair that such businesses are expected to pay the same multiplier as large businesses, and so reducing the burden on smaller businesses would help to give them a timely boost. Thank you.

The Minister for finance to reply to that.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm grateful to the Welsh Conservatives spokesperson for confirming the Welsh Conservatives support of the regulations today. Of course, the spokesperson doesn't, in his contribution, mention the Welsh Government's permanent small business rates relief scheme, which, of course, supports tens of thousands of businesses across Wales with their rates, with many paying no rates whatsoever. And of course, businesses here in Wales are still benefitting in the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors from paying no rates in this financial year, due to the decision that Welsh Government took to provide a full year's relief, as compared to lesser relief across the border in England. And, of course, colleagues will be familiar with the fact that businesses in those mentioned sectors will receive a 50 per cent rate relief in the next financial year, recognising the pressures that those businesses and those sectors have been under. But, again, I'm grateful for the Welsh Conservatives spokesperson's support for today's regulations.

The proposal, therefore, is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? No. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 10 is the next item, the legislative consent motion on the Health and Care Bill. I therefore call on the Minister for health to move the motion—Eluned Morgan.

Diolch yn fawr. Today, I'm recommending that the Senedd consents to the legislative consent motion on the Health and Care Bill. This is a large and complex Bill, which, whilst mostly applying only to England, contains some provisions that do apply to Wales, and a number of provisions that require the legislative consent of the Senedd. Some of those areas, such as medicine information systems, obesity and international health agreements contain provisions that we would want the citizens of Wales to benefit from.

In the legislative consent memorandum laid on 1 September and the second memorandum laid on 17 December, I could not recommend consent to the Bill as I had concerns that, as drafted, the Bill would, in some areas, adversely impact on devolved competence. However, following negotiation with the UK Government, we've brought the Bill to a position where I'm able to recommend consent as set out in my third memorandum, laid on 28 January. Time, I'm afraid, doesn't allow me to run through each of these clauses that engage the legislative consent process today. I will instead outline the UK concessions to our main areas of concern and where the UK has extended provisions to Wales at my request.

Firstly, a number of the Bill clauses enabled the Secretary of State to exercise powers in relation to Wales in certain areas within devolved competence. In three of those areas, arm's-length bodies, professional regulation and mandatory reporting, we've secured important concessions from the UK Government to require the consent of Welsh Ministers before the Secretary of State makes legislation under those provisions within areas of devolved competence.

On international healthcare agreements, the Bill has been amended to enable the Welsh Ministers to make regulations in devolved areas for the purpose of giving effect to such agreements. And a memorandum of understanding on the engagement of the devolved Governments in the development of new and revised reciprocal healthcare agreements has already been agreed and been provided to the scrutiny committees to aid their consideration of the legislative consent memorandums on the Bill. 

On medicine information systems, the UK Government has agreed to consult with the Welsh Ministers before the Secretary of State makes legislation under those provisions within areas of devolved competence. Now, this consultation will also be supported by a memorandum of understanding, developed and agreed with the devolved Governments, setting out the detail of how the consultation will be carried out.

My second broad area of concern has been the powers contained in a number of clauses—149, 144 and 91—that enable the Secretary of State to make consequential amendments to provisions in a Measure or Act of the Senedd Cymru. Now, whilst we may have concern about these, they are in fact standard clauses, and it is a fact that we similarly take powers in Senedd Acts to make consequential amendments to UK Government legislation. The UK Government has provided examples of how these powers may be used. The amendments likely would be of a minor nature, for example, the changing of the name of an English organisation that is referred to in Senedd legislation.

On 9 February, Lord Kamall made a despatch box statement on how these powers might be used. In the light of all the assurances given by the UK Government, and the despatch box statement, I regard the risk presented to Wales by these provisions to be acceptable. Other notable concessions have been negotiated in relation to UK-wide patient medicines registries, where we have secured important amendments regarding the collection and use of Welsh patient data.

Finally, the UK Government has also agreed to my request to extend a number of important provisions to Wales. These include criminalising virginity testing and the related practice of hymenoplasty. I'm sure that all Members will support the outlawing of these abhorrent practices in Wales. Taken together, I'm now satisfied the Senedd can give its consent to the Bill. Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd.

I now call, first of all, on the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, Russell George.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I speak today in my capacity as the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee. Our view on the provisions set out in the report are listed in the report that we've presented, but I would draw the Minister's and Members' attention to a couple of areas. First of all, clause 87, which provides for the establishment of a UK-wide medicines information system. Data ownership, and, of course, sharing are sensitive matters and the rights of safeguarding must be in place to protect, of course, Welsh patients' personal and medical data. So, the Bill has been amended to require consultation with the Welsh Government on any regulations or directions relating to medicine information systems affecting Wales. So, I agree with the Minister that this is welcome. But the inter-governmental memorandum of understanding to underpin this consultation is still to be agreed, as I understand, so we would welcome, I think, further information from the Minister about the anticipated timescale of the MOU.

Clause 135, added to the Bill in November, seeks to learn lessons from the COVID pandemic, and it makes provision to enable controls to be applied in a future pandemic or public health emergency to the supply of medical products used for vaccines or the prevention and treatment of diseases that could become pandemics. So, these measures are sensible, but we would welcome assurances from the Minister that the powers can and will only be used when a public health emergency or a pandemic has been declared, and that any use of the powers could be accompanied by appropriate or adequate remuneration for pharmacy contracts.

I turn to provisions, or the powers, in clauses 91, 144 and 149 for the Secretary of State to make consequential amendments, including to legislation passed by the Senedd, without consent. It would perhaps have provided greater and more transparent protections for the devolution settlement in the longer term if the consent requirements had been included on the face of the Bill, but we note that the UK Government has shared information about how such powers would be used, and agreed to make a despatch box statement on this matter. So, I would be grateful, if I've understood this right, if the Minister could confirm whether the agreed statement has been made in the House of Commons or whether she is content that the assurances provided by the UK Government have reduced the constitutional risk to an acceptable level.

And finally, on the LCM process itself, as a committee, we do have concerns about the increasing use of LCMs as a mechanism for legislating on matters that are devolved to Wales. And as a matter of principle, it risks, of course, undermining the Senedd's role as a primary law-making body in areas of devolved legislative competence. So, as a matter of practicality, with limited time available for scrutiny, especially when provisions are added by amendment late in the day, it increases the risk, of course, for unintended or unforeseen consequences that might otherwise be identified and mitigated through scrutiny. So, we've made a number of recommendations in this area that are included in our report. Thanks, Llywydd.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee next. Huw Irranca-Davies.

Thank you, Llywydd. We have produced two reports covering the three consent memoranda that have been laid by the Minister on this Bill. The first of these was completed last December, and the second was laid only yesterday afternoon. 

Now, given the number of recommendations contained within our second report on memoranda No. 2 and No. 3, we did provide the Minister with an early copy so as to better inform this afternoon’s debate, and I thank the Minister for formally responding to our report this morning as well.

Llywydd, our report on memoranda No. 2 and No. 3 was, just to note, our twenty-third report now on legislative consent memoranda. This is my third contribution this afternoon. So, with your invitation, Llywydd, I will speak in the three separate debates on legislative consent motions today for three distinct UK Bills, such is now the extent to which the UK Government is indeed legislating on devolved matters.

Our first report included eight recommendations to the Minister. In our second report, laid before the Senedd yesterday afternoon, we have indeed acknowledged the progress that's been made since last December, whilst we also make some further recommendations to the Minister.

I will not go through each of our reports on the memoranda in detail, but they are available to Members if they wish to read the points we've made and our concerns in full before voting this afternoon. However, I will turn to highlight just a handful of significant matters.

Let me start at the end of our second report. Many of the provisions in the Bill have been included at the request of Welsh Government. Now, while we have made some recommendations in our reports to address our concerns in some areas, they are no substitute, we would argue on our committee, for the ability of Senedd Members to test and improve legislation by means of tabling amendments to Welsh Bills introduced to the Senedd—the point that was picked up by my fellow Chair.

We're aware of the challenges that the Welsh Government do face, which, indeed, we are investigating as a committee, but that shouldn't overshadow the constitutional risk to the devolution settlement that arises from the continued and cumulative use of UK Bills in devolved areas to deliver Welsh Government policy objectives.

Indeed, the Minister has acknowledged and accepted that that constitutional risk does exist. It's in black and white in memorandum No. 3. This Bill contains broad Henry VIII powers, powers that would enable the Secretary of State and the Lord Chancellor to amend Senedd Acts and Measures, as well as, indeed, the Government of Wales Act 2006, without the consent of the Senedd.

The Minister has accepted an assurance from the UK Government, from a despatch box commitment, to satisfy her concerns regarding the use of these powers, and we heard that. But despatch box commitments, despite being part of the toolbox of government, are not binding. They're vulnerable to change, they do not provide a role for this Senedd. While the Welsh Ministers consider them to be an appropriate compromise, we do, respectfully, not share that view.

The Minister has stated that the agreed outcome of negotiations between the Governments has resulted in, and I quote, a 'minor constitutional risk'. In our view, this conclusion, and the Minister’s acceptance of it, indeed, isn't acceptable. Elements of the Welsh devolution settlement should not be put at risk because a UK Bill is being used to legislate in a devolved area.

So, we asked the Minister to explain and quantify what is meant by this 'minor constitutional risk', and, Minister, you outlined this for us in the third memorandum. We do note what you had to say on this in the letter we received this morning. You've provided an update that the despatch box commitment, which I've just referred to, has now been made. However, we feel you've still not fully clarified what that constitutional risk is, which you brought to the Senedd's attention, other than stating in the Siambr this afternoon that that risk is 'acceptable'. So, Minister, I wonder if you could please say more in your closing response on this risk and perhaps provide a fuller written explanation to the committee as soon as possible.

In our second report, we repeated a recommendation from our first report that the Minister should seek an amendment to the Bill so that its powers cannot be used by UK Ministers to make regulations that amend the Government of Wales Act 2006. Senedd Members can see the importance of this. So, we asked the Minister to confirm that she has sought such an amendment and provide an update to the Senedd on the latest position.

So, Minister, we do find it disappointing that you've confirmed to us that you've not approached the UK Government to request that such an amendment be made, and we'd be interested in the reasoning behind not making that approach, because there is an important point of principle here that is relevant: how one Government intends to use powers at any one time could be very, very different from how a future Government may use them in years to come. I would, therefore, encourage you, and the committee would encourage you, to reflect further on this matter.

Finally, I'd like to address clause 136 of the Bill, which relates to the implementation of international healthcare agreements. The position here now is an improvement when compared to the Bill as first introduced to the UK Parliament last year. This clause previously gave regulation-making powers exclusively to the Secretary of State to implement healthcare agreements for Wales. Amendments to the Bill mean that the Welsh Ministers will now also have these powers, and that's a welcome development. But, having now been given these powers, it is our view that the Welsh Ministers should be the ones to exercise them. Where they do not, and instead they ask or they rely upon the UK Government to do so, meaning that the Senedd would be circumvented once again, the Welsh Government should provide a detailed explanation to the Senedd in advance of such regulations being made—not 'should' but 'must', we would argue—and explain why it's not been legislated for in Wales. So, I hope that the Minister in her response can confirm that this is her intention now and can give us that assurance. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. 

I would like to explain why I and Plaid Cymru will be opposing forcefully this LCM. This is a very wide-ranging Bill that it refers to. It contains elements, as the Minister said, that she is eager to see being extended to Wales. I certainly don't have any opposition to seeing the sharing of legislation across these isles, for example, in an area such as making it illegal to test someone's virginity. Of course we support taking that particular step, but, as a health committee, when we look at the content in that way, we also note time and time again how uncomfortable we feel with regard to the use of this process.

We welcome the words of the committee Chair, Russell George, in concluding his contribution, that there is a concern expressed time and time again in committee about the impact of these LCMs on the integrity of devolution. The more the Welsh Government consents, the more I fear that the United Kingdom Government is empowered to do more, to take further steps to undermine the integrity of the devolution settlement as it stands—a settlement that has been supported by the people of Wales—because of the need to ensure that the most detailed scrutiny possible is undertaken here in Wales on the issues that are relevant to our population, and, yes, on issues where we may very well wish to follow the same direction as our friends in other parts of these isles, but that scrutiny has to happen here in Wales.

We have to have the time to undertake that scrutiny. We can't have the time when following a piecemeal process of legislative consent of this kind. And, as I say, in terms of the content and intentions of elements of this Bill in Westminster, yes, we can agree with those, but we can't ignore the undermining that's happening here, and that is why it's very important that we oppose robustly this attempt that's one of an increasing number of attempts across all policy areas of the Senedd. I'm grateful to the Chair of the legislation committee for noting so clearly that he, like me, doesn't consider this a small constitutional risk. The impact of these measures taken together does lead to a genuine risk to the future of devolution, and unless we as a Senedd stress clearly our concerns about that, then who will?

I now call on the Minister for health to reply to the debate. 

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and thank you very much to Members for their contributions to this debate, and a particular thanks to members of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee and the Health and Social Care Committee, and thank you particularly for your reports. I am pleased that we were able to respond to those this morning.

You have heard that the despatch box commitments have already been given, and what was given there is some detail of exactly what is meant by the kind of constitutional interpretation that they were thinking of. So, it's mainly changing the name of an organisation—if they were going to do that in England, that they'd change the name. So, they gave some examples, and that's the whole point of getting that despatch box commitment, because then you can hold them to account, because it's been said on the floor of the house, and you've got something to appeal against, effectively. So, I take your point, that just because you get a commitment from this Government, who knows what Government there may be in future, but you can appeal, as the Member will know, to what is said on the floor of the house to get a better sense of what is meant by the kind of conditions around those agreements.

We have had strong negotiations with the UK Government throughout, and that has led to a number of important amendments. On this occasion, may I say that we did negotiate? We've had a lot of our own way, we've come a long way, and they have understood our arguments, and I'm pleased that that's been the case. In terms of the—

—consequential amendments, I understand that this is not an ideal way to make law. We all understand that. But we're not in a position, always, to get the perfect, and so, of course, there is a constitutional risk for Wales. The question is: how much of a risk are you prepared to take? At the beginning of this process, it was a constitutional risk too far, and that's why I would not have recommended that we accept the LCM. Now, I think we have had enough assurances so that the constitutional risk is smaller.

But also I think we shouldn't miss the opportunity to give protection to the people of Wales, especially when you see something like criminalising virginity testing. Why wouldn't we want to sign up to that? Do we really want to wait for years and years and years until we can get that into a legislative process here, while England forges ahead? No, I'd rather get on with it and get on the bus with them on that particular issue. So, there are occasions. Now, of course I understand that that means it's difficult for you guys to scrutinise—I get that, I understand it—and so, I don't think you'll see us doing that too often, and—. I think you're anxious to come back in here, aren't you?

Intervention, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, I accept the way that you're explaining this, that there is a balance here between the real priority of putting in place good policy that the Welsh Government and the people of Wales would want to see against a balance, which she explained, minimising the constitutional risk. But, perhaps an additional assurance would be, to the Senedd Members, that should there be an unexpected use of the powers that are contained here, in terms of the 2006 Wales Act, or a future Government chose to misinterpret the assurances that had been given at the despatch box by a Minister, that it would be the intention of this Welsh Government to defend this institution and the constitutional settlement robustly.

Well, I can give that assurance, absolutely. Of course we would want to do that. So, I can give you that assurance, and if we saw them taking advantage of the situation, we would play hell with them. So, I think I can give you that assurance. And also I'm happy to give you the assurance that, in terms of international agreements, if those were to happen, then we would be able to give some advance notice to the Senedd. So, I hope that gives a certain assurance to you and your committee.

So, thank you very much, and I do urge Members to support this motion. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, I see an objection, and so we will defer the vote on that motion until voting time.

Item 11 is next. This is the legislative consent motion on the Professional Qualifications Bill. I call on the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution to move this motion—Mick Antoniw.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion. I welcome the opportunity to explain the background to this legislative consent motion on behalf of the Minister for Education and Welsh Language and set out why I'm recommending that the Senedd withholds consent to the Professional Qualifications Bill. I am grateful to both the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee and the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for considering the memoranda, and for the detailed and helpful reports they have produced.

The Minister for Education and Welsh Language has responded to the questions and recommendations in both reports. In particular, I note that the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee continues to share my concerns with the existence of the concurrent powers in the Bill, a view also shared by the Senedd when a legislative consent motion on the Bill was first debated on 5 October and Members voted overwhelmingly to withhold consent to the Bill. Since this debate, the UK Government has introduced amendments to clause 1, and introduced clauses 14 and 15 to the Bill.

As you're aware, the advice to the Senedd is we cannot give approval to the Bill in its current form. Despite both the Minister for Education and Welsh Language and myself making our concerns very clear, the UK Government has refused to remove the concurrent powers given to the Secretary of State and Lord Chancellor in this Bill to legislate in relation to Wales in areas that are devolved. Llywydd, it is the view of the Welsh Government that there should be no concurrent powers in this Bill. However, in an effort to be constructive, the Minister for Education and Welsh Language has indicated to the UK Government on several occasions that he may be prepared to recommend consent to this Bill, including clauses 1, 14 and 15, if an amendment is made to require the Secretary of State and Lord Chancellor to obtain the consent of the Welsh Ministers before making any legislation in areas that have been devolved to Wales. However, it is very disappointing that the UK Government has not been prepared to make any such amendment. UK Government Ministers have failed to provide any evidence-based analysis to support their view that the concurrent powers in this Bill cannot be made subject to a requirement to obtain consent from Welsh Ministers.

They have made an informal commitment that they will not legislate in areas of devolved competence or use the powers in the Bill to undermine the devolution settlement. However, as this commitment is not in the Bill itself and is therefore not binding, it has no statutory effect. The Welsh Government is deeply concerned the concurrent powers in this Bill could be used by the UK Government to implement trade deals that in future could encompass professions for which regulation is devolved to Wales. So, in the absence of a consent requirement, changes to the regulation of these professions could be made by the UK Government without the consent of Welsh Ministers, undermining the role of our workforce regulators, the standards we set for these professions, and undermining qualification and registration requirements because of their desperation to secure a deal.

It is our conclusion that the provisions of clauses 1, 14 and 15 within the Bill fall within the legislative competence of the Senedd, and we do not recommend that the Senedd consent to this Bill as it stands. I urge all Members of the Senedd to reject the motion and deny the Bill in its current form our consent. Diolch, Llywydd.

I now call on the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch eto, Llywydd. It's great to welcome the former Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee in his current role here today. I note the remarks he's made in opening that the Government is not minded to give consent to this LCM, but some of the remarks that I'm going to make are pertinent in case that position should indeed change subsequently.

Our report on memorandum No. 2 on the Professional Qualifications Bill was the twentieth report our committee has produced on consent memoranda, and it followed our report on the original memorandum, which was published in September, which was our committee's second LCM report. Even at that very early stage, we noted that what we perceived to be some unfortunate trends were emerging, which I'll turn to in a moment. It doesn't give us any great joy to stand here again saying that we see these trends continuing. Those worrying signals are there.

We're being presented, as I mentioned earlier on this afternoon, with UK Bills that include, as the Minister and Counsel General has just said, concurrent powers—powers that may be exercised by the Welsh Ministers or the Secretary of State in relation to Wales. And while we understand that the Minister, indeed, as he said today, is equally concerned by such powers, our most recent report on the Bill again highlights that the Welsh Government’s preferred mechanism for resolving this problem is to provide the Welsh Ministers with a consenting role when such regulations are to be made by the Secretary of State. But, Llywydd, we would argue that this, yet again, bypasses the role of the Senedd as the legislature in Wales. We, as Senedd Members, are therefore being denied a role in directly affecting the detail of primary legislation on devolved matters, and also, subsequently, in carrying out our role in scrutinising secondary legislation that will become law in Wales.

An additional and worrying trend is the combined effect of concurrent and Henry VIII powers that would enable UK Government Ministers to amend the Government of Wales Act 2006—there's a common theme here this afternoon—our principal devolution statute, without the consent of this Senedd. I sound like a broken record, but this record will keep on playing as long as this keeps coming up. The Minister agreed to our recommendation in our first report and he has indeed sought an amendment to the Bill to prevent the 2006 Act from being amended by such means. In our second report, we asked the Minister to provide an update on discussions he has had with the UK Government on this matter, and we're really grateful to the Minister for responding to our most recent report at the end of last week.

On this matter, the Minister appears to have pursued extensive discussions with the UK Government, and that's really to be welcomed. That necessary changes to the Bill have not subsequently been made is therefore even more regrettable. As things stand, regulation-making powers in this Bill, if and once enacted, could, as I've said, be used to amend the 2006 Act, and we cannot take this lightly. So, the committee decided to use this memorandum, Llywydd, and this Bill as an example case when we recently wrote to the Rt Hon Michael Gove MP in his capacity as Minister for Intergovernmental Relations. We highlighted a range of common matters, such as those I have just outlined, and asked him, given his responsibilities in this area, to give consideration from a UK Government perspective to the issues we raised. We are taking this very, very seriously.

Before closing, I will briefly mention the second recommendation in our report on memorandum No. 2. In the original memorandum, the Minister highlighted a restriction in what is now clause 16 of the Bill that he described as 'unique to the Welsh Ministers' powers'. This clause effectively imports restrictions set out in the 2006 Act relevant to the making of primary legislation by this Senedd into the regulation-making process of the Welsh Ministers. This, we would say, is not only an unusual but an unwelcome power to be taking. The Minister is of the view that assurances given by the UK Government mean that some concerns have been addressed. However, no information is provided in memorandum No. 2 as to the nature of these assurances. As far as we are aware, no changes have been made to the face of the Bill. As such, and as this proceeds, we would ask for that detail to be provided.

In his response to our report, the Minister also noted that there were concerns that the UK Government had assumed that UK Bills that confer regulation-making powers on the Welsh Ministers should always be drafted in a way that ensures that the legislative competence of the Senedd and the Executive competence of the Welsh Ministers align, and that, given that the UK Government now agrees that there are instances where such competences do not align, the Minister is satisfied with the outcome. But, Minister, we're still unclear as to how the clause does not represent a limitation to Welsh Ministers’ powers. I am aware that you have shared relevant correspondence on this with the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee and, whilst I'd welcome you saying more this afternoon, perhaps I could ask that you commit to providing a further written explanation to our committee as well as soon as possible. Diolch, Llywydd.

For me, this afternoon encapsulates the problems we have as a Senedd with these legislative consent motions. My colleague Sioned Williams will speak on behalf of Plaid Cymru on the Nationality and Borders Bill, an appalling Bill that will lead to many deaths, part of a package of Bills being passed by the Westminster Government at the moment.  

Then, we have the Health and Care Bill, a Bill that the Government here in Wales is consenting to; a Bill, as the committee Chair has said, that will give new powers to UK Government Ministers. The health Minister has called that a minor constitutional risk. That is not a minor risk, in my view, when we look at the Government that we have at the moment in Westminster—a Government that is drawing back powers and taking rights away from people. That is not a minor constitutional risk. The Minister said that if they withdraw from their despatch box commitments,

'we would play hell with them.'

But this Senedd is not a soapbox; it is a legislature, a legislature that the people of our nation have voted for. In 2011, when the people voted with a huge majority in favour of primary law-making powers for this Senedd, they had no idea that we would consent to an appalling UK Government drawing back those powers. But, that is what can happen with that Bil, and that is also what is happening with the Professional Qualifications Bill. 

That's the Bill I'm discussing at the moment. This Bill will give conferred powers to UK Ministers to make secondary legislation within devolved areas. We don't agree with it, we won't give consent on this occasion, but then again, we're more than happy to give consent to the health and social care legislation. This Welsh Government cannot have the penny and the bun. Either we're unhappy that they have powers to legislate, either we are concerned about the constitutional risk to this place, or we are not. Where are we when it comes to these?

There's this idea that we are concerned here that it's not on the face of the Bill that they won't amend primary legislation, that it's not on the face of the Bill that they won't amend the Government of Wales Act 2006, the very foundation of our devolution settlement, yet in a previous legislative consent motion, we described that as a minor constitutional risk. Well, I'm not willing to take any risk with regard to the constitution of Wales when we view this Government. There's this idea that a despatch box promise means anything—it's not binding on this current Government, and it's certainly not binding on any future Government. Why are we allowing ourselves time and time again to fall into this trap? 

I agree that many of these Bills that come before us have good clauses within them—clauses, of course, we will support—but we've got to decide: is it our role as the Welsh Parliament to legislate on behalf of the people of Wales within our current devolution settlement, or the role of the UK Conservative Government? 

We cannot hold any despatch box promise to account. They can ignore it entirely, and we can kick up a fuss—

we can play hell as much as the health Minister wants—

and they will not listen. When, colleagues, will we say enough is enough? We will not pass more powers back, or, I can tell you, by the time of the next election, we will have a very different Senedd here. Look at the figures. In the first year of the fifth Senedd, there were 10 Bills brought through the LCM process, with 80 clauses. Already in this Senedd, which isn't 12 months old yet, there are 17 Bills and almost 400 clauses through the LCM process. They are changing our devolved settlement before our very eyes. We must unite as a Senedd to oppose that. Thank you.

I now call on the Counsel General to reply to this debate.

Diolch, Llywydd. If I respond first of all to the comments of the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, and also to inform him—. I'm sure that Members are aware that, of course, within these particular clauses 114 and 115—and, of course, the reference to clause 16—there is no support in any of the devolved Governments for these particular clauses, and the same concerns and observations have actually been made in that respect. And the point that you make also in terms of the scrutiny aspect, I think, is absolutely right. It is a concern. It is an issue that arises when we deal with legislation in this particular way. You make valid points in respect of the Henry VIII powers, and you are right also that there have been very extensive—and on this and on many others—incredibly tortuous negotiations that go through clause by clause. It's important to understand the actual scale of those discussions and negotiations that take place.

It is, of course, of concern that, when you have those issues that are raised and negotiations take place, and when one of the parties refused to give any evidential base for the position they're taking—that does, of course, cause considerable concern. You're right, of course, that clause 16 is effectively anomalous in some ways, and the point that you make about the assurances are I think, again, valid. This is, of course, an LCM where we are recommending rejection, or not granting consent.

If I can just take us further on to the—

Will you take an intervention?

Oh, certainly.

Yes, if the Counsel General is content.

Thank you very much, Counsel General.

The fact that the Westminster Government won't even allow a reasonable request that the Welsh Government will consent to any changes they make, or any secondary legislation they make, within devolved areas—. Doesn't that show the complete disrespect they have for us as a Senedd?

It is certainly something that is of considerable constitutional concern, and it exposes also the dysfunction in the constitutional arrangements we have. I think there is probably common agreement on the need—that somewhere along the way, the constitution has to begin to become justiciable. Of course, we've discussed the inter-governmental review and new arrangements, which may be a step towards that. But, again, they are non-justiciable, and we have to wait to see how they work out.

If I can just refer to some of the points that you did raise, though, with regard to the laying of legislative consent memoranda, and the number of them. Of course, this isn't something that is within the choice of the Welsh Government or, indeed, of the Senedd. We are required by Standing Orders to deal with any piece of legislation that may have an impact on, or might modify, the powers of this place. So, we can't get away from the fact that they are there and we deal with them. And the number of them—. What they actually reflect is the amount of legislation coming from the UK Government.

Now, there will be times, of course, when, within those pieces of legislation, there are things that we might not have as part of our legislative programme that we would actually want to see, or we would not want to deny the people of Wales. The health Minister mentioned, of course, the hymenoplasty and one or two other areas. Of course, the simple answer is, 'Well, we'll legislate ourselves.' But the reality is, if that is our sole response every time something like that arises, then what effectively happens is the UK Government is determining what our legislative priorities are, and what our legislative programme is. Every time they come forward with a piece of legislation like that, we say, 'Oh, well, actually we quite like that, but we're going to do it ourselves.' So, we then actually have to divert from our own priorities and our own legislative programme and resources in order to do that.

So, I don't think there should be shame in actually taking good things that benefit the people of Wales in that particular way, and certainly not to put the UK Government in a position where, effectively, we are doing little more than responding to the priorities and direction of the UK Government. If we were to solely adopt that approach, that is effectively what would happen, because in all of our priorities, we would lose some of them, and we would actually be directing our resources in developing and implementing those legislative priorities in order to take up those initiatives every time they arise in a piece of UK Government legislation. So, I think we have to put that within that context.

I suppose the only other way to conclude this, really, is, of course, that I think we are probably in complete agreement on the basis that, as far as this legislative consent memorandum is concerned, consent should not be granted. The motion puts the issue of consent to the Senedd, and the Welsh Government recommends the Senedd votes against the motion and withholds its consent in respect of this particular Bill. Diolch, Llywydd.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is an objection, and therefore voting under this item is deferred until voting time.

Item 12 is next. This is the legislative consent motion on the Nationality and Borders Bill. I call on the Minister for Social Justice to move the motion—Jane Hutt.

Diolch, Llywydd. I move the motion today, the consent motion on the framework for determining age in the UK Nationality and Borders Bill. I will be calling on Members to withhold consent on the clauses on the framework for determining age in this Bill. I am grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee, the Health and Social Care Committee, and the Children, Young People and Education Committee, for considering the legislative consent memorandum and for their recent reports. I note that the majority of the committee's members agreed with the position I'm putting forward to the Senedd today.

The UK Government Nationality and Borders Bill will fundamentally undermine our nation of sanctuary vision, which the Senedd has endorsed. And I agree with the First Minister: the Bill is an impending tragedy. The Counsel General and I made a statement on 6 December on the Nationality and Borders Bill. In that statement, we said,

'We believe many of the provisions in the Bill will breach international conventions, violate basic principles of justice and will place ultimately extreme and insurmountable conditions on people who seek our protection.'

The Bill's provisions are the antithesis of what is needed to achieve the stated aim of making immigration safer and more effective, and there are compassionate and effective solutions. We've put these forward to the UK Government. We've repeatedly raised concerns with the UK Government about the impact of the Bill on Wales. We've sought details of the clauses relating to age assessment from May onwards, without success. They have provided no satisfactory assurances, no amendments have been tabled to address the concerns that the Welsh Government has raised.

So, Llywydd, in terms of the Bill and the provisions covered by the legislative consent memorandum, it does include the potential referral of age assessment to a new UK national age assessment board, to require the supply of evidence to the Secretary of State where the local authority decides to undertake the assessment themselves, and the creation of a method of assessing age that is in direct opposition to our existing Welsh method in the Welsh Government's age assessment toolkit, including the use of so-called scientific methods to assess the age of child asylum seekers.

The Bill does not recognise the devolved context of Wales and confers powers on the Secretary of State to make regulations imposing functions on devolved Welsh authorities. The practice of assessing the age of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children is primarily carried out to determine access to social services, care and support. And local authorities undertake these assessments to ensure that no child is left vulnerable where they have been separated from their parents or carers. In Wales we treat all unaccompanied asylum-seeking children as looked-after children, and this is set out in Welsh law under Part 6 of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014. Our policy position arises from our commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child to act in the best interests of all children.

Local authorities will have the challenge of navigating two statutory but conflicting approaches to age assessment. Ultimately, this Bill may result in a tribunal making determinations in favour of the Secretary of State's age assessment decisions, which will usurp Welsh local authorities' age assessment decisions.

And I do not agree that the UK Government through this Bill should be able to undermine the Senedd's legislative competence by requiring referral of age-disputed children to other Home Office appointed decision makers or mandating particular evidence or methods of age assessment that are not considered good practice in Wales. Therefore, I ask Members to withhold their consent to these deeply damaging provisions in this Bill today. Diolch.

I call on the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, Russell George.

Diolch, Llywydd. I'm speaking today in my capacity as the Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, and I present the views of its members as a whole. Can I say 'thank you' to the Minister for responding to our report, which was only laid today, I believe? And I think it dropped into my inbox just 30 minutes ago.

As the Minister has said herself, the Nationality and Borders Bill is a large and complex Bill; it has implications for both health and social care and for children's rights and safeguarding, so we are pleased, therefore, to be able to co-ordinate our evidence with the Children, Young People and Education Committee in order to reduce duplication, and we're also grateful to stakeholders who were able to share their views with us within a very tight time frame as well.

Whilst the vast majority of the Bill deals mainly with immigration-related matters, which are outside of the scope of the Senedd's powers, clauses 48, 49 and 51 to 55, relating to the age assessment of asylum seekers, asylum-seeking children and young people, and clause 80, powers to make consequential provisions, impact the non-devolved areas of social care. So, we therefore concluded that the legislative consent of the Senedd is required.

No information on the financial costs of the proposed age assessment clauses is provided in the Bill, and we therefore recommended that, should the Bill be passed as drafted, the Welsh Government seeks assurances from the UK Government that any financial implications arising from the Bill will be met by the UK Government in line with the statement of funding policy.

Also, we would be grateful for assurances from the Minister that appropriate mental health and well-being support will be made available to people affected by the use of scientific methods of age assessment, should such methods be applied in Wales. And our views on the provisions relating to age assessments are set out in our report, but I would focus on two clauses in particular. Clause 49: at present, local authority social service departments undertake age assessments where there is any doubt over a person's age, and the decision about age is therefore taken at a devolved level. So, the Bill proposes to change this process to create a UK-wide system, as has been spoken about. Clause 49 provides that a local authority can refer an age-disputed person to the designated person to assess their age. Alternatively, the local authority can undertake an age assessments itself, or if the authority is satisfied that the person is the age they claim, they can inform the Secretary of State in writing of this, and this clause also enables the Secretary of State to make regulations that impose functions on devolved Welsh authorities.

So, we heard a number of concerns about the provision, including the lack of detail contained in the Bill around the function, power, constitution and independence of the designated person, and how the designated person will engage with Wales and take into account these areas devolved to the Welsh Government that are fundamental to any assessment process. So, having considered the evidence from stakeholders, we concluded that the Senedd should not consent to clause 49, and this is because there are already processes in place for age assessments in Wales that clause 49 could undermine.

And clause 51 gives the Secretary of State the power to make regulations about scientific methods for age assessment. It also allows a decision maker to make a negative interpretation of a person's credibility if they refuse to undergo a scientific age assessment without good reason. So, we concluded that the Senedd should not consent to clause 51 on the basis that stakeholders such as the Royal College of Nursing, the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Physicians have told us that there is no evidence that scientific methods of age assessment are effective. We also, therefore, are not persuaded that conducting potentially intrusive medical procedures on children and young people who could already have been traumatised by their life experiences can be justified. 

Health professionals also raised concerns about whether carrying out age assessments was consistent with their professional ethics of acting in the best interests of the person. So, we note that, in addition to putting such professionals in a perhaps difficult position, some stakeholders have suggested there could be implications for health professionals' own well-being, as well as affecting their ability to build trust with the young person needing support. It was also not clear to what extent the Welsh NHS bodies will be required to participate in the age assessment process, but this could place considerable demands on an already overstretched workforce.

In conclusion, Presiding Officer, we believe that the Senedd's consent is required for clauses 49, 51 to 55 and 80, because they make provisions within the Senedd's devolved competence. However, on the basis of the evidence we have received, the committee could not recommend that the Senedd should give its consent. Diolch, Llywydd.

The Chair of the Children, Young People, and Education Committee now. Jayne Bryant.

Diolch, Llywydd. As Members will know, the legislative consent memorandum scrutiny timetable gives committees very little time to gather evidence. On 18 January, we, the Children, Young People, and Education Committee, and the Health and Social Care Committee, wrote jointly to the Minister for Social Justice and to organisations in the fields of children's health and social care, children's rights and refugees and asylum-seeker children to request their views on a range of matters relevant to the LCM. We set a response deadline of just 10 days later to enable us to consider their views during our meeting last Thursday. I'd like to place on record my thanks to the 13 organisations that responded to our consultation within such a tight time frame, and to the Minister for the valuable additional information she provided to us.

We considered the clauses of the Nationality and Borders Bill that the Welsh Government believes require the consent of the Senedd. We focused our scrutiny on the implications of those clauses for children and young people in Wales. The Health and Social Care Committee, with which we co-ordinated evidence gathering, focused on the implications for the health and social care sectors, as we've already heard from the Chair of that committee. 

Before I summarise our findings, I will highlight that not all committee members agreed with all of the committee's conclusions and recommendations. Our final report provides further details. Our first conclusions relate to whether the Senedd's consent is required. Currently, Welsh local authorities carry out age assessments of age-disputed asylum seekers presenting in Wales. They do so within the framework set out in the Welsh Government's age assessment toolkit. Amongst other things, Part 4 of this Bill gives powers to the UK Secretary of State to carry out age assessments via the proposed national age assessment board. It introduces scientific methods in age assessments and establishes a tribunal to hear appeals related to age assessments. This impacts on the devolved field of social care. We therefore agree with the Welsh Government that clauses 48 to 49 and 51 to 55 in Part 4, alongside clause 80 in Part 7, require the legislative consent of the Senedd. However, the UK Government maintains that no provisions in the Nationality and Borders Bill require the Senedd's consent. We could not reconcile this view with the impact of the provisions in the Bill. We're therefore concerned that the UK Government is acting without due regard to section 107(6) of the Government of Wales Act 2006 by legislating with regard to devolved matters without the consent of the Senedd.

Our report also sets out our views about the proposed approaches to age assessment. The 13 organisations that responded to our consultation, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, BMA Cymru and Public Health Wales, told us more or less the same thing: there is insufficient evidence that scientific age assessment techniques are accurate enough to justify the distress they can cause. We also heard from the children’s commissioner, the Ethnic Minorities and Youth Support Team, local authority representatives and others that scientific age assessments as proposed in the Bill and explanatory material are inconsistent with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Based on the consistency of the evidence we received, we recommend that the Senedd withholds legislative consent today.

The Nationality and Borders Bill is currently in the Report Stage in the House of Lords. There may be few further opportunities for the Welsh Government to seek any changes to the Bill to reflect the concerns of our committee and maybe the Senedd more widely. However, the Welsh Government is able to take action to try to influence any regulation that the UK Government makes using powers in this Bill.

We have recommended that the Welsh Government press the UK Government to ensure that scientific age assessment techniques are not introduced in Wales via regulations using powers set out in the Bill. As a committee, we have agreed that children's rights will be central to our work throughout the sixth Senedd. Not all the committee members were able to support all of the conclusions and recommendations in our report. However, we were able to coalesce around one important conclusion: whatever the approach taken to assess the age of asylum seekers or migrants, children's rights must be at the heart of the process. We urge both the UK Government and the Welsh Government to ensure that they are. Diolch.

The Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee is next—Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Llywydd. It's a pleasure to follow my fellow two committee Chairs. And can I just say, on the fifth occasion that I've risen this afternoon, my thanks to the committee clerking team and colleagues as well for their consideration of these matters? And can I just note in passing the spirited defence by the Counsel General earlier on the Professional Qualifications Bill, which was really interesting, and we'll return to this? He's always willing to be very engaged with the committee and I'm sure we will explore these matters further.

So, in my final contribution this afternoon, we turn to the Nationality and Borders Bill LCM. If people aren't tired of my voice by this stage, heaven help us. We made one recommendation in our consideration and report on this. We noted the clauses that the Minister considers require the consent of the Senedd and we also noted that UK Government does not believe that the Senedd's consent is required. Our report agreed with the Minister that the consent of the Senedd is indeed required for these clauses and acknowledged also that she does not recommend that the Senedd gives its consent to these clauses being included in the Bill.

Our report expressed concerns, for example, that regulations under the Bill can impose functions on devolved authorities in relation to social care and that neither the Welsh Ministers nor the Senedd will be required to provide consent in such circumstances. Fellow Chairs and their committees have picked up on these as well. We are equally concerned at the powers available to the Secretary of State to make regulations that could amend primary legislation by the Senedd, without any requirement for its consent. As far as we are aware, there are no limitations on these powers—it's again a theme I'm returning to—such that they could be also used to amend the Government of Wales Act 2006 by means of regulations. As I've indicated previously in my contributions this afternoon in respect of other LCMs, we just believe that such an approach is constitutionally unacceptable.

But what makes the situation more complicated is—as I alluded to at the start of this contribution—the fact that the UK Government does not consider that the provisions of the Bill fall within the competence of this Senedd. Now, so far as the UK Government is concerned, this debate is unnecessary and Senedd consent is not required, even though, in our view and that of the Welsh Government and of other committees, the Bill impacts the devolved area of social care. So, in light of these observations, our single recommendation, in three parts, asked the Minister to update the committee on various matters before today's debate. And we're very grateful for the detailed response we have received from the Minister.

The first part of our recommendation asked for an update on her discussions with the UK Government as to whether the provisions of the Bill fall within the legislative competence of the Senedd. The second part asked the Minister to explain whether, as part of her discussions, she has sought amendments to the Bill relevant to our concerns about the regulation-making powers being given to the Secretary of State to act in devolved areas, and which potentially permit the amendment of the 2006 Act.

In her response, and at the risk of repeating some of what the Minister indicated earlier, the Minister has told us how she'd repeatedly raised concerns with the UK Government, including jointly with the Scottish Government, but had not received any satisfactory assurances in response. And she also explained to us how the Home Office did not engage with the Welsh Government over concerns regarding age assessment because of their stance of it being a reserved matter, meaning there was no opportunity available for them to pursue amendments, including in relation to our concerns about the powers being given to the Secretary of State.

She also noted that, as recently as 8 February, the Home Office wrote to say that the UK Government position remained unchanged, such that all the Bill’s clauses were within reserved competence and no legislative consent motion is required for the clauses related to age assessment. So, we do share the Minister’s clear disappointment and frustration at the lack of constructive engagement with the UK Government on these issues, not least because further promised correspondence explaining the UK Government’s stance in more detail has not been received. We would be very grateful to receive copies of any further correspondence on this issue, given our interest—ongoing interest—in inter-governmental relations.   

And that brings to me the third part of our recommendation, which asked whether the Minister will be engaging the dispute resolution procedures in line with the final package of reforms announced in the recently published review of inter-governmental relations. In response, the Minister said she would indeed give further thought to managing this through the new machinery, and, again, we as a committee look forward to being kept in touch with developments on this very important matter. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Yesterday, I was with members of Swansea City of Sanctuary and the people who they are supporting who are seeking asylum. It was at a wonderful event at the Hoogah restaurant, who have recently pledged to support Swansea City of Sanctuary in their aim of promoting a culture of welcome for asylum seekers and refugees, and to be a safe space for those seeking a new home in the city.

The people Swansea City of Sanctuary are supporting are just that: people. People who are fleeing persecution, danger, war, hunger, despair. People who want their children to live in peace, to have every opportunity to be able to take their place in the world without fear. People. The sentiments expressed towards the people I met yesterday, those of compassion and understanding, couldn't be more different than those promoted by this Bill. Yesterday, there was fear, despair, anger that the UK Government, through this Bill, would fundamentally and grotesquely undermine Wales's history of welcome and our aspiration to be a nation of sanctuary. And the way it disregards children's rights, again so central to our national vision here in Wales, is nothing less than stomach-churning.

Tory UK Government Ministers have asserted that the measures within the Bill are aimed at cutting costs to the public purse, breaking people-smuggling gangs, and protecting people seeking asylum. Experts in the field, however, profoundly disagree. Amnesty is one of the many organisations that has argued that the Nationality and Borders Bill will worsen the UK's asylum system. The model of asylum being proposed is, according to the United Nations, one which

'would penalise most refugees seeking asylum'

and therefore

'undermines established international refugee protection rules and practices.'

The Good Law Project has gone as far as saying that the Bill will embed racism in UK legislation by means of the draconian clause 9, which would enable a Secretary of State to unilaterally strip British nationals of their citizenship without notice.

And even if we look at this from a financial point of view, the UK Government's argument that the changes it is proposing are based on saving money spent on the perceived high cost of supporting refugees and asylum seekers makes no sense. A report published yesterday by the Together With Refugees coalition found that the Bill would double these costs to £2.7 billion. We must do everything we can to stop this inhumane Bill, everything we can to protect those who would be welcomed and treasured as new citizens of Wales from these racist, dangerous and dehumanising provisions within the Bill.

As a member of the Children, Young People, and Education Committee, I read the responses of the organisations who operate in Wales in the field of children's health and social care, children's rights and those working with refugees and asylum seekers, to this legislative consent memorandum before us today. The concerns about the impact of this Bill on Wales as regards the clauses relating to age assessment of children, contained in Part 4 of the Bill, were overwhelming. The consensus that the Bill impacts on the devolved areas of social care and confers powers on the Secretary of State to make regulations on devolved Welsh authorities was crystal clear.

The adjectives used to describe the proposals, which involved intrusive, medical and so-called scientific age-assessment methods in relation to unaccompanied asylum seekers who do not have documentation to prove their age, included the words 'insufficient', 'inappropriate' and 'traumatic'. And the children's commissioner told us that, as the Bill stands, it'll be detrimental to children's fundamental rights, set out within the UNCRC.

We wholeheartedly endorse the Minister's analysis of these clauses, and the Government's view that consent should be withheld. We in Plaid Cymru fundamentally oppose any attempt to undermine the right and power of this Senedd to legislate in devolved policy areas, particularly in the face of this Westminster Government's unprecedented desire to undermine our devolved authority, our national identity and our democratic right to decide what benefits our own communities. And a Bill such as this foregrounds our reasons for opposition.

The philosopher Hannah Arendt said that the loss of citizenship is the loss, in her famous phrase, of 'the right to have rights'. She was reflecting on the totalitarianism that forced her to flee from her homeland, Germany, stripped of her citizenship, on to France, to Portugal, eventually settling in the United States. As she and millions of other people found in 1940s Europe, the world, in her words,

'found nothing sacred in the abstract nakedness of being human.'

What Arendt realised was that citizenship is necessary for human rights to be enacted. To deny a person's citizenship, a place to belong, is to deny them their fundamental rights.

The nation we are building in Wales should give rights to its citizens. What this UK Nationality and Borders Bill does is take rights away. The values of contemporary Welsh nationalism as manifested in the politics of Plaid Cymru are fundamentally opposed to the xenophobic British nationalism embodied in this Bill. We must send the strongest possible message today from this place, from the nation of sanctuary we aspire to be, that we will not stand by, that we will not consent.

There are many things that we could all say, those of us who oppose this consent today, about this Bill, and many of them have been said. But I'm going to focus here particularly and speak to the issue at hand, and the issue at hand is about medical examinations and age assessments of unaccompanied minors seeking refugee asylum—children. And I think there's one message that has to be absolutely clear here today: we are talking about children. We are talking about traumatised children, not just children who've arrived and they're going to go nicely into some hideous assessment that all the medical profession who've responded to requests to respond from the Health and Social Care Committee won't validate. They said that there is no evidence to support that these medical assessments are accurate. So, we need to start there. The medical profession themselves, who have responded, say that these assessments don't have any merit.

Secondly, and we've heard it said, and more importantly, these are children. They are traumatised children and we're asked to give permission to a process to further traumatise them, a process that they won't be able to object to, because they won't have a voice in that objection. And whatever will be done to them will be pretty traumatic in itself, and it's bound to cause post-traumatic stress, and that's already alluded to here. Not to mention, of course, their mental fragility when they're actually entering the process and it being increased as a consequence of having gone through that process. So, none of it is good news.

Should they fail, of course, you will then be putting children into adult facilities, and again with no protection whatsoever, no right to appeal—all taken out of their hands. As you all know, I'm a founding member of the all-party group on trafficking and slavery. I don't think you'd have to use a huge amount of imagination to understand the implications of putting unaccompanied minors in facilities whereby they would become potential victims of trafficking and slavery. There are many, many accounts of that already happening in those facilities as we speak. And, of course, they will be separated in some cases from their families, so they equally won't be able to raise their voices on behalf of the children because somehow this Government is quite happy to throw away the rights of those children, to ignore the basic fundamental humanity that you would expect to exist when you're talking about traumatised children.

So, I'm really pleased that it seems that all the people who took evidence are saying, 'No, we will not give consent. We will not give consent to brutalise and traumatise the children who find themselves in this UK.'

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

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. Can I thank Members for their powerful contributions to this very important debate this afternoon? I'll start by thanking the Chairs of the committees—the Chairs of the Health and Social Care Committee and the Children, Young People, and Education Committee—for the thorough way that they have examined the evidence and have considered my views and perspective, and also consulted widely and thoroughly to come to the views that they have, and, of course, the majority support my view that we should withhold consent to these deeply damaging clauses in this Bill.

I do thank the Children, Young People, and Education Committee and the Chair, Jayne Bryant, for again being able to share with us today some of the views that have come back as a result of that consultation. I indeed myself met with the Welsh Refugee Coalition. It's interesting as well to hear those views that have been expressed and come to us as Members on nation of sanctuary. Sioned Williams met with those people of Swansea who were expressing their concern. That concern has been expressed across Wales, and, as Joyce Watson has said, this is so serious in terms of the children who have been so traumatised to come to seek that sanctuary with us.

I'm very proud that we're very clear in our programme for government—and I quote from our programme for government—that we are committed to

'Continue to support and uphold the rights of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children'. 

We continue to uphold those rights and entitlements, and that's why we must stand together today and be very clear in our response to the UK Government, because we are proud to take a 'child first, migrant second' approach, which upholds the best interests, rights and entitlements to providing care and support to children in Wales, and any—any—policy proposal that appears to diminish the statutory position—it's a statutory position that we hold in Wales—is not one that we should support.

I think it is important to recognise, as I've said, that in Wales we treat all unaccompanied asylum-seeker children as looked-after children. And we must repeat that, again: this is what we've agreed to in this Senedd in line with Part 6 of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, because the Act does provide for a range of assessment functions, and we treat the assessment of age as part of the 'what matters' assessment functions provided in the Act, and all social services functions are fully devolved to the Welsh Government. All social services functions. That's why this is so critical.

And just also, finally on this point, to reflect with Members that we have an extant policy on the use of medical reports in age assessments. In summary, this is a toolkit. It says, about scientific methods of age assessment:

'This Toolkit does not recommend or support the use of medical examinations as determinants of age. The science underpinning the determining of age is inconclusive, unclear and in any event, subjecting young people to invasive medical examinations is judged to be morally wrong.'

So, as we conclude this debate today, Llywydd, I have to say again and repeat that this UK Government Bill clearly makes provision within the devolved competence of the Senedd. I thank the Chair of the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for his contribution today, because I will be following up the points I made in his letter. I think this is a critical issue in terms of respecting our devolved competence and what we have agreed through legislation here in Wales, upholding the rights of a child in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. So, this Government Bill clearly does make provision within the devolved competence. We are responsible for social services, and it is, therefore, very clear today that we, as a Senedd, must withhold consent to these provisions being included in the Bill.

I would finally say, summing up again what Jayne Bryant and other Members have said, that children's rights must be at the heart of all we do, at the heart of our considerations this afternoon, for all Members. Diolch yn fawr.

The proposal is to agree the motion? Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection, therefore we'll defer voting under this item.

The next item, therefore, is the debate on the police settlement 2022-23. I call on the Minister for finance to move this motion—Rebecca Evans.

Diolch, Llywydd. Today I'm presenting to this Senedd, for its approval, details of the Welsh Government's contribution to the core revenue funding for the four police and crime commissioners in Wales for 2022-23. First, and particularly given the events of the past two years, I'd like to record my gratitude to the police for the role they've played in keep our communities safe whilst maintaining the highest standards of duty and dedication.

The core funding for the police in Wales is delivered through a three-way arrangement involving the Home Office, the Welsh Government and council tax. As policing policy and operational matters are non-devolved, the overall funding picture is determined and driven by Home Office decisions. We have maintained the established approach to setting and distributing the Welsh Government component based on the principle of ensuring consistency and fairness across England and Wales.

There are three technical and administrative changes to the funding arrangements this year. These result largely from Home Office decisions and have minimal practical implications for PCCs in Wales. Since the 2015 comprehensive spending review, the Home Office has made an annual transfer of funding to the Welsh Government in order for us to deliver our agreed contribution to police funding. From 2022-23 onwards, this transfer will end and the funding will be delivered by the Home Office through the police grant and top-up grant. This will result in the Welsh Government contribution to policing reducing by just under £30 million to £113.5 million, although there is no impact on the overall level of funding for police forces as a result.

Secondly, in order to facilitate a smoother transition towards partial non-domestic rates retention for city and growth deal regions, a technical adjustment has been made to the composition of the Welsh Government's contribution to police funding. This amendment sees the proportion of NDR that police forces receive reducing from 5 per cent to 0.1 per cent, with the revenue support grant increasing to offset this reduction. Again, this is a technical change that will not result in any loss of funding for any police force.

Finally, the Home Office has taken the decision to transfer funding for special branch to transfer funding for special branch out of the police main grant to the counter-terrorism policing grant in line with the 2021-22 budget. As the total amount being transferred is based on forces' 2021-22 budget, and will remain at that level for 2022-23, the transfer will have a zero net impact for police forces.

As outlined in my announcement of 2 February, the total unhypothecated revenue support for the police service in Wales for 2022-23 stands at £432 million before the adjustment made for the special branch transfer. The Welsh Government's contribution to this amount is £113.5 million, and it is this spending that you're being asked to approve today. As in previous years, the Home Office has overlaid its needs-based formula with a floor mechanism. This means that, for 2022-23, PCCs across England and Wales will all receive an increase in funding of 5.9 per cent when compared with 2021-22 before the adjustment made for the special branch transfer. The Home Office will provide top-up grant totalling £62.9 million to ensure all four Welsh police forces meet the floor level.

The motion for today's debate is to agree the local government finance report for PCCs, which has been laid before the Senedd. If approved, this will allow the commissioners to confirm their budgets for the next financial year, and I ask Senedd Members to support this motion. Diolch.

As we've heard, funding for the four Welsh police forces is delivered through a three-way arrangement involving Home Office, Welsh Government and council tax, with the Home Office operating a common needs-based formula to distribute funding across Welsh and English police forces, and a Welsh Government component based on consistency across Wales and England. Police budget cuts to 2014 were first announced in Labour's March 2010 UK budget statement, which stated that the scale of the deficit meant that the UK didn't have enough money. I think that was Mr Darling's quote.

Since 2015, the UK Government has raised its contribution to overall police funding in line with inflation, and, since 2019, the UK Government's announced the investment of over £1.1 billion to increase police officer numbers and provide forces with resources to tackle crime. The UK Government has now announced an overall £1.1 billion police funding increase compared to the 2021-22 funding settlement, bringing the total up to £16.9 billion, and confirmed three-year total grant funding for our police forces. This provides an extra £540 million by 2024-25 to recruit the final 8,000 police officers to meet the UK Government's commitment of 20,000 additional officers across Wales and England by 2023. All forces are receiving a 5.9 per cent core funding increase, and overall the funding package for Wales and England represents a 7 per cent cash increase on last year, with north Wales, for example, receiving an 8.4 per cent increase. Wales has also benefited from other UK Government programmes, with North Wales Police, for example, receiving over £0.5 million from the UK Government's safer streets and safety of women at night funds.

Funding to police and crime commissioners will increase by up to an additional £796 million, assuming full take-up of council tax precept flexibility, with council tax increasing in Wales this year by 5.5 per cent in south Wales and Gwent, 5.3 per cent in Dyfed-Powys, and 5.14 per cent in north Wales. Across Wales, this equates to a band E property paying below 30 per cent extra a week.

According to the crime survey for England and Wales, the best indicator of long-term trends in crime, overall annual crime increased 14 per cent, but this included a 47 per cent increase in fraud and computer misuse, and crime excluding this decreased by 14 per cent, largely driven by an 18 per cent decrease in theft offences. Further overall crime rates in Wales, as we know, are fairly low compared with the rest of the UK on average.

As I learned when I visited Titan, the north-west regional organised crime unit, an estimated 95 per cent or more of crime in north Wales operates on a cross-border east-west basis, and almost none on an all-Wales basis. North Wales Police therefore collaborates with five north-west England police forces to tackle serious organised crime. Devolution of policing would therefore be operational insanity and financial lunacy. Diolch yn fawr.

May I also echo the Minister's thanks to the police for the work that they have done and do, particularly during the very challenging circumstances over the past year or two? We won't be opposing the motion before us today, but I do have a few comments to make, mainly around the fact that we do feel that the formula doesn't deliver for Wales as it should. The formula, for example, discriminates against council tax payers in Wales. In some areas, like north Wales, it's local taxpayers who fund 50 per cent of the police budget, but that compares with only 30 per cent in some areas such as the west midlands and Northumbria, where local taxpayers contribute only 30 per cent of those costs. So, there are questions about an imbalance or an unfairness in that regard.

The Home Office doesn't, either, provide any additional funding to police Cardiff as a capital city. We know that it attracts major national and international events, and that brings additional financial pressures, but there is nothing provided from the Home Office to cover those costs, although provision is made for London, although provision is made for Edinburgh, and provision is also made for Belfast. So, again, there is a disparity there in terms of how we are funded here in Wales. 

I would strongly argue, too, that the funding formula doesn't sufficiently recognise the specific challenges posed in policing rural communities. We regularly hear in this Chamber the concerns around theft from farms in rural areas, we hear about attacks by dogs on livestock, and those unique challenges in that rural context aren't sufficiently recognised, in our view. So, we do need to look at the formula, and it would be good to hear some support from the Welsh Government for that in responding to this debate. 

Now, over and above the formula and this funding, of course, we mustn't simply look at this settlement in isolation. 

We mustn't look at it in isolation. We need to look, of course, more broadly beyond the settlement at the wider role that Welsh Government has in tackling some of the root causes of crime, and the core budgets from Welsh Government really need to make sure that we do provide sufficiently for youth services, for substance misuse programmes, and for better career pathways for those who might be susceptible to certain issues around breaking the law, and making sure that people have the prospects and the support that they need to make the best that they can from the opportunities that are available.

We need to make sure that, of course, we see this in the round. And, I'd argue, obviously, that devolving policing to Wales would be a positive step to help address many of these issues. It's the only emergency service that isn't devolved, and of course it is devolved in other parts of the United Kingdom. So, it would be much more pragmatic and logical to devolve the justice system and policing to Wales so that we can be afforded the same advantages that are enjoyed by other parts of the United Kingdom. Diolch.  

I would very much like to welcome this afternoon's debate, particularly as it gives us an opportunity to recognise the steps that the UK Government has taken to protect our communities and make our neighbourhoods safer. Indeed, in my own constituency of Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire, I have seen first hand how important this funding is to our local communities. The UK Government has committed an extra 60 policy officers to the streets of Dyfed-Powys, and, from speaking to local officers on the force, I know just how valuable the 60 extra police officers will be in helping to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour across my constituency and those of my colleagues represented by Dyfed-Powys Police.

However, I do wish to use this opportunity to draw Members' attention to the scourge of rural crime, and in particular the role of Wales's rural and wildlife crime co-ordinator, Rob Taylor. Rob is currently seven months into a 12-month position, which is funded by the Welsh Government. And Members will be aware that I have raised this position in the Siambr before, numerous times. Crime in the countryside causes serious distress to our rural communities, from agricultural vehicle thefts and sheep worrying to the vandalism of wildlife nesting, rural crime has often gone underreported while its victims continue to feel its terrible effects and impacts. Having worked with Rob and witnessed first hand his infectious passion and determination, it is clear that he will leave no stone unturned in his fight to slash rural crime.

I recently invited Rob to my own constituency to meet local farmers as part of a breakfast event to discuss his work and priorities. Local farmers were able to quiz Rob and ask the probing questions. The farmers were also able to meet their local rural crime police officers. However, I and those attending the event were disappointed to learn that Rob has yet to receive a firm commitment from the Welsh Government that the funding for his role will surpass the original one-year term, bringing into doubt the ability for Rob to complete his work and really make that material impact. I'm sure you will agree with me that if we are to get buy-in from Welsh police forces, it is vital that we make this role a permanent position, thus removing the uncertainty that surrounds the need to bid for funding year on year. 

Would you take an intervention? 

I'll happily take an intervention.

I'm just wondering whether you feel that if the police were properly funded by the UK Government, then the Welsh Government wouldn't need to bail them out and provide that? 

Well, this is the point that I was going to come on to. One suggestion that has been offered to me by local police officers in Dyfed-Powys Police is that the rural crime commissioners themselves, or the police and crime commissioners themselves, are able to contribute to the funding of this position to secure its long-term future. And that's something that I would like to explore—seeing the four police and crime commissioners of Wales coming together, working together to support Rob in his work and that future funding. 

Therefore, in conclusion, Llywydd, I would like to ask and be interested to learn if the Minister has  had any discussions with the UK Government or her Cabinet colleagues to secure the long-term future of this important position. Diolch. 

I call on the Minister for Finance now to reply to the debate—Rebecca Evans. 

Diolch, Llywydd, and I thank Members for their interest and their contributions today, and it's very clear the respect that we all have for the work of the police and what they do in our communities across Wales, clearly being an absolutely key part of our public service family, working with health boards, local councils and other partners. 

I'll respond to some of the specific points relating to the motion in front of us today. First of all, the point was raised in terms of the devolution of policing. Of course, Welsh Government made clear our support for policing to be devolved. It is the only emergency service that isn't devolved, and I think that remedying this would enable stronger joint working with the other emergency services in Wales. And it would also enable future legislation affecting policing and community safety in Wales to be properly tailored to our Welsh circumstance, and it would be a safeguard against legislative changes being made that the Senedd does not agree with. 

The point about a review of the formula is very important, and there is currently a review of that formula in progress, with UK Government Ministers having confirmed their intention to complete this work before the next general election. The Home Office does recognise that the current police funding formula is out of date and no longer accurately reflects the demands on policing, and it is committed to introducing a new formula that fairly and transparently distributes the core grant funding to the 43 police forces in England and Wales. So, there's a technical phase of the review that's now under way, and that will deliver proposals for new funding arrangements, and a senior sector group and technical reference group has been convened with representation from the policing sector and relevant experts to lead on the development of the formula. The Home Office will work closely with the sector throughout the review, and any proposals will obviously be subject to a full consultation. But it's important to us that the views of this Senedd and the Welsh Government are taken to the heart of that review. 

We do continue to work with the police to identify and take forward any opportunities that we see here in Wales, as identified by our commitment to increasing our 500 community support officers to 600 officers. And we continue to make clear our support for policing to be devolved, as I said, so that we can deliver against the needs, priorities and values of Wales.  

Will the Minister take an intervention? 

Yes, of course.

I appreciate that, Minister, and I welcome the Welsh Government's work to support additional PCSOs. But do you agree with me it's a bit rich for the Welsh Conservative benches to be claiming that Welsh Government is not doing enough, when Prime Minister Johnson came to Deeside in 2019 and promised 96 additional officers for Deeside, and we've received none?  

Absolutely. I think that Jack Sargeant said it very well in terms of how you can't just have it both ways. You can't call for Welsh Government to be doing more in the area of policing and oppose the devolution of policing whilst at the same time not delivering on UK Government promises for policing in our Welsh communities.

While the settlement does, on the face of it, seem to be a good one, I think it's fair to say that some police and crime commissioners have expressed concern that when you take into account the national insurance contribution increases, and the final phase of the UK Government's police uplift programme, essentially they are looking at a cash-flat settlement. Of course, this is a matter for the Home Office. Nevertheless, we are committed to—[Interruption.] Yes, I'll take the intervention.

Would you recognise, in terms of the extra officers, that the promised number is on track to be met by 2023, that Wales has had its full share of that, and that where police forces place those officers is an operational matter for those forces? 

The Welsh Government absolutely wants Wales to have its fair share of additional officers, but let's consider what 'additional' means in this sense. The police force across England and Wales has been decimated in numbers throughout the period of austerity, so the UK Government is only seeking to make good on some of the decreasing numbers of police officers that we have seen over the years anyway. And our communities have felt their loss as well.

I will move on to just completing my contribution today, Llywydd—just reiterating our commitment to working with PCCs and chief constables, to ensure that any changes are managed in ways that limit the impact on community safety and front-line policing in Wales.

The final element of police funding, of course, is raised through the council tax precept. Unlike in England, we have retained the freedom for our Welsh PCCs to make their own decisions about council tax increases. Setting the precept is a key part of the PCCs' role, which demonstrates accountability to the local electorate. I know that in a period of increasing pressure on local households, commissioners will be considering this carefully. Llywydd, I commend this settlement to the Senedd. 

The proposal now, therefore, is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? Any objection? No, I don't see any objection. Therefore, the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We will now take a short break to prepare for voting time this evening. So, a short break.

That brings us to voting time. The first vote is on item 6, the South East Wales Corporate Joint Committee (Amendment) Regulations 2022. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, 14 abstentions, none against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on item 7, the Corporate Joint Committees (Transport Functions) (Consequential Modifications and Transitional Provisions) (Wales) Regulations 2022. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 39, 15 abstentions, none against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

Our next vote is on item 10, the legislative consent motion on the Health and Care Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Eluned Morgan. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 43, no abstentions, 11 against. And therefore, the motion is agreed.

We move now to item 11, the legislative consent motion on the Professional Qualifications Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Jeremy Miles. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 39 against. And therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We move now to item 12, the legislative consent motion on the Nationality and Borders Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, and 39 against. And therefore, the motion is not agreed.

And that concludes voting for this afternoon.