National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon and welcome to this Plenary meeting. The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the First Minister, and the first question this afternoon is from Rhun ap Iorwerth. 

Good afternoon, Llywydd. Good afternoon, everyone.

Good afternoon, of course. On his visit to Menai Bridge on Wednesday of last week, the Deputy Minister for Climate Change announced a package of support to ease the transport pressures on people travelling to and from Anglesey. This included traffic flow solutions and access to active travel routes. 

Thank you for that response. There's no doubt that the closure of the bridge has had a negative impact on business. The current economic climate also impacts on how much people spend, but in speaking to business after business, when I hear of a fall of 35 or 40 per cent in trade, which is a figure that's commonly heard—for some it's even more—we obviously need to respond to this. 

I appreciate what was announced last week—free parking for example—but there is real doubt as to what impact that will have in reality, and we do need to find ways of supporting businesses directly. There are many options. One suggestion is that businesses could delay the repayment of bounce-back loans to the bank of Wales, and that's something that could be considered. But, certainly, we need some model of direct support. The county council is considering the results of a survey on the impact on business, but will the First Minister give a commitment to turning that data into action, and to do that as soon as possible, because there are some who fear that some businesses will not survive unless that happens?

Well, I thank Rhun ap Iorwerth for that supplementary question. Of course, we're thinking about local businesses that have seen an impact following the closure of the bridge. And when Lee Waters was in north Wales, he announced a number of things that we can do now. But we are still co-operating with the local councils, and data is being gathered. There will be an analysis of that data conducted by our officials, and by people who are working for Ynys Môn and Gwynedd, to see what else we can do to help businesses in the area who have seen a decline in the number of people who can come through the door, and the impact that that's having on everything that they're doing. 

Can I join the Member for Ynys Môn in highlighting some of the issues that businesses in Menai Bridge are seeing at the moment with the closure of Menai Bridge? I also agree with him on some of the positive steps that Welsh Government are making at the moment to support those businesses there. I was able to join a meeting on businesses in Menai Bridge with the Member for Parliament for Anglesey, Virginia Crosbie, as well as my colleague Mark Isherwood. And they highlighted to us some of the practical solutions that they would like to see on top of the announcements that have already been made. And one of those in Welsh Government's control is certainly around the signage along the A55 to Menai Bridge that highlights to people that, whilst the bridge itself may be closed, Menai Bridge is open for business as usual. So, First Minister, what I'd like to hear from you is a commitment to working with the north Wales trunk road agency to ensure signage is clear, and perhaps also to look at working with Visit Wales to ensure that, actually, Anglesey is being highlighted still as a great place to visit over the coming months, so that businesses there, whether they are high-street businesses or tourism businesses, are able to welcome visitors in the coming months. 

Well, Llywydd, I thank the Member for those further practical suggestions. As I said in my answer to the local Member for Ynys Môn, the Welsh Government continues to be open to discussions at official level, and with people on the ground, to make sure we have the best available data and can see whether further action could be taken. I do know that action has already been taken to make sure that there is additional signage, making it clear to people that businesses in Menai Bridge remain open. And some of the actions that were agreed last week will make it easier for people to be able to visit the town and, with parking charges in car parks lifted from the first of the month, to be able to stay there and do their shopping. But if there's more that can be done to make sure that people are aware that the town is open for businesses, and, indeed, in the longer run, that that part of Wales continues to be somewhere that is absolutely worth people visiting, then of course we'd be keen to be part of that effort.

Llywydd, our commitment to Wales being a nation of sanctuary is undiminished. We work with others to welcome those who arrive in Wales, but, regrettably, many of the UK Government’s immigration policies, such as the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, hamper our efforts to foster integration and community cohesion.

Diolch yn fawr, Prif Weinidog. Your Government, in response to the fifth Senedd committee inquiry into freedom of movement after Brexit, said that

'if the UK Government's future immigration policy does not address the economic, demographic and social needs of Wales then we will further explore options for a spatially-differentiated immigration policy after Brexit'.

As you're aware, Prif Weinidog, that does not necessarily require the devolution of powers over immigration. Only recently, we heard of Rishi Sunak's plans to limit international students. The 21,000 international students in Wales contribute so much, in so many different ways, to our country. The University of Wales tells me that one job was generated for every two international students at Welsh universities. What progress, therefore, have you made, Prif Weinidog, on a different immigration policy for Wales, now that the terrible immigration policies of the Westminster Government after Brexit are so clear to us all? Diolch yn fawr.

Llywydd, it's always been a mystery to me as to why student visas are always reported as part of that global immigration total. If you look at all the surveys of public opinion, even parts of public opinion that have anxieties about immigration are not anxious about students coming to study here in the United Kingdom. So, to include them in that global figure always seems to me highly misleading. It would be much better if it was just taken out of the total and reported on its own merits as a subject by itself. I think that would be helpful to the public, in better understanding why people come to the United Kingdom, or why people come to Wales, and why, certainly, in the case of students, we wish to welcome more of them. They bring income with them, they bring a new source of talent to our universities, and they contribute to life here in Wales.

On the general point of spatially differentiated immigration, actually, that does depend not on the Welsh Government but on the UK Government as well. There was a time when it was possible to have a conversation with the UK Government, but this was a UK Government prior to 2019, where you could have an engaged conversation about whether visas might be directly allocated to Wales, for us to use, so that we could make sure that people who were entitled to come to Wales could be directed to those industries where they were most needed, and to those parts of Wales where their impact would be greatest. In more recent times, those sorts of discussions simply don't take place. It would be very good if the new Prime Minister would be happy to revive those conversations, because they would allow us, closer as we are to the Welsh labour market, to be able to make best use of those people whose skills and talents we're able to attract to Wales.

First Minister, this Government's announcement of Wales as the first nation of sanctuary and as a supersponsor created headlines as you demonstrated that Wales was ready and willing to help in doing more than its fair share in aiding people who were fleeing conflict and persecution. However, sadly, it does now seem that Wales was ill prepared for the overwhelming response, and the system has become clogged while it is dealing with a considerable backlog, hence the repeated pausing of the supersponsor scheme. From what I understand, of the 2,956 sponsored and who have already arrived in Wales from Ukraine, only 698 have moved on from their initial temporary accommodation, which, as you know, poses a significant issue in helping the other 1,640 refugees that the Welsh Government has agreed to sponsor and are awaiting to arrive. In trying to rectify the situation, the Welsh Government has now warned that if refugees continue to decline alternative options, it will deduct up to £37 per week from their universal credit payments in order to cover the costs of maintaining them in their temporary accommodation. First Minister, I'm sure that you agree with me that it sounds very strange that refugees would be declining permanent housing options in favour of living in temporary accommodation, and I'm keen to ascertain why. Is it because the quality of housing is not good enough, or is it because local authorities simply do not have enough suitable accommodation available to offer to them? With this in mind, what assessment has the Welsh Government done of the housing stock that has been made available to refugees? Thank you.

I thank the Member for that question. I think what is absolutely beyond doubt is the fact that Wales has offered a very generous welcome to people from Ukraine. When we opened the Welsh platform, we anticipated 1,000 people coming to Wales as a result of it. We now have 3,000 people who've been welcomed to Wales by that route. The Member is right—that puts stresses and strains into the system. We believe that, in this last 12 months, we've also been able to absorb 1,000 people from Hong Kong here into Wales as well. We have 700 people from Afghanistan who've been welcomed to Wales. All of these things undoubtedly put pressure into the system.

The specific question the Member asked me, Llywydd, was why do some people choose not to take up offers of permanent accommodation that are made to them, and I think the answer is that there's complexity in that. Some people will have settled in their temporary accommodation in the sense they've already found jobs and work. The place that they're offered to live permanently may be in a different part of Wales and they may be reluctant to pick themselves up and start again somewhere where they don't have the things that they've built up while they've been in temporary accommodation. In temporary accommodation, you will be surrounded by other people who've been through the same experience as you. We shouldn't be surprised, should we, that people draw some comfort from that and, faced with moving into independent accommodation where you're necessarily more likely to be on your own, that can be a difficult move for some people to make.

I've no doubt that Joel James is right that, for some people, the contrast between the service that is provided to them in a welcome centre, where they are very well looked after, and being asked to go and make your own future in a flat somewhere in a part of the world you don't know, that's another difficult thing that gets in the way of some people moving on. But, move-on is an essential part of the arrangement. Because the numbers of people coming from Ukraine have declined since August, the system is much closer to being in balance than it was at the height of the flow of people in. So, now the number of people leaving welcome centres compared to people arriving is much closer to being in balance. But, we do have to have that outflow in order to be able to welcome more people into Wales. Challenging as that can be for people, the system is designed to encourage them to make that decision.

First Minister, you've laid out some of the tensions between the UK Government and the Welsh Government and, indeed, I have to say, this nation of sanctuary over the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers. But, surely, it should be impossible for the Home Office unilaterally to place refugees and asylum seekers in places without any advance notice with the communities or with Welsh Government or the local community involved, with the health board in the area, with the education authority in the area, because this is about the care of those individuals, for which those services need to be in place there. So, we need the UK to work far better than this right across the policy piste. Can I ask would you support, First Minister, proposals to strengthen the voice of this Senedd Cymru, or even to create a legal duty of co-operation amongst the governments and the nations and regions of the UK, indeed, as was laid out in the Brown report yesterday?

Can I thank Huw Irranca-Davies for that? He makes a very important point. The Gordon Brown report yesterday does indeed propose a legal duty of co-operation between the four nations of the United Kingdom. That legal duty would be something that would be capable of being tested in a court of law, and it would, I believe, act as a very significant brake on the sorts of actions, I'm afraid, we have seen the Home Office take. The Home Office at one point, and actually for quite a long period, kept to an arrangement whereby refugees would only arrive in a local authority area with the prior consent of that local authority. Well, it's abandoned that principle, and not only has it abandoned the principle, but the practice has far too often—well, has too often—been as the Member for Ogmore just suggested. We have had examples very recently in Wales of large groups of refugees arriving at a hotel, certainly no advance notice to the Welsh Government, but no advance notice to local services on the ground either, and that is absolutely unfair to those people who are being asked to live in that place. They are often people who will have health needs, they will have had traumatic experiences, they need services to be provided to them, and unilateral action, simply to move people to an area without any pre-warning, without any preparation, simply isn't fair, either to those services or to the people concerned. And a duty—a legal duty—of the sort that Huw Irranca-Davies set out, and which is, I think, very cogently described in the Gordon Brown report, would prevent that sort of unilateral action from happening. 

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

Thank you, Presiding Officer. We seem to have lost the gallery, First Minister—  

[Inaudible.] [Laughter.]

It could be something to do with that, I think, Mike. First Minister, today, the chair of the British Medical Association has come out and said that, as a profession, they could very often be criticised for maybe calling wolf on staffing numbers within the health service in Wales, but, actually, on reflection, and the current situation that they find themselves in, the wolf is definitely in the NHS, as there is a massive shortage of staff within our hospitals and our primary care settings. Do you agree with the comments of the chair of the BMA today around the critical and very acute situation that hospitals and the primary care sector are finding when it comes to retaining and attracting staff?

Well, Llywydd, I want to distinguish between two things. And I thought it was a brave statement by the new leader of the BMA to recognise that, on many occasions in the past, the word 'crisis' has been used by the BMA, and that has devalued that term. The two things I want to distinguish are these: I absolutely accept the struggle and the stress that there is in the Welsh NHS, that recruitment is difficult in some places and that it's not always an attractive prospect to come in to a service that, day after day, is portrayed in the media and in newspapers as not providing the service that the people who work in it would wish to provide. So, I absolutely do recognise that. But I do think it's worth just putting some facts on the desk as well, because, if you look at medical and dental staff in the Welsh NHS, we have 1,654 more doctors and dentists working in the NHS than we did a decade ago. We have 1,256 more consultants and doctors working than we did five years ago. Of the 966 more medical staff than we had three years ago, 242 of those are consultants, and, Llywydd, I could go on. We have thousands more nurses working in the NHS, thousands more scientific, therapeutic staff working in the NHS. The fastest growth of all has been in ambulance staff working in the Welsh NHS. So, while I am happy to—well, I am not happy, because the situation is so difficult—but while I recognise the points that are being made, that is against the background of year, on year, on year rises. There are more people working in the Welsh NHS in every single category of people—[Interruption.]—and that includes every health board as well.

You see, that's the sort of remark that absolutely does not help, because it is simply not factually the case. [Interruption.] I do. Believe me, I prepare when I come here, and that's why I am able to tell you what I've told you today. Yes, I actually do prepare, and the truth of the matter is, in every part of Wales, the numbers of people working in the NHS have been going up. Does that mean we don't need more? Of course not. Does that mean that recruitment doesn't need attention? Does it mean that we don't need to go on making sure we have more people in training than we've ever had before? All of that is true, but it does give you the background to what the leader of the BMA said about being clear about what is true and what is not true about the state of play in the NHS.

First Minister, the other comment that the chair of the BMA made is that, obviously, many more people aren't now full time within the NHS and, actually, choose for various reasons to, obviously, do a shift here and a shift there and can't be classed as whole-time equivalents. Last week, I challenged you on a specific issue about the Royal College of Emergency Medicine's baseline figures. It is a fact that, over the years, we have challenged you on this particular area of staffing, and not one accident and emergency department here in Wales manages to hit that baseline figure when it comes to consultants.

The Presiding Officer might be interested in this: in her own A&E department in Aberystwyth, for example, out of the eight consultants they should have available as the baseline figure from the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, they have one. If you go to north Wales, at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd, for example, there is only a third of the number. Fifteen are required, and only a third of that number is in that particular A&E department. So, after many years of trying to seek improvement in this particular area and being told that there's a plan in place, what confidence can you give us that the Welsh Government do have a serious workforce plan in place to address not just the A&E deficit of emergency medicine baseline figures, but the deficit across the whole NHS here in Wales that, even now, the profession, as you said, has bravely come forward to highlight today?

Llywydd, I do understand that the headline numbers disguise the fact that many of those people will not be working full time and that patterns of work in the health service have altered. But even if you look at those full-time-equivalent figures, there are nearly 10,000 more staff working in the NHS today than there were just three years ago. So, while it is true that work patterns are changing and people are choosing to work fewer hours than they once did, even when you take that into account, there is a very significant rise in the number of people working in the Welsh NHS.

As to the future, the only way that you can offer a sustainable solution to Welsh NHS staffing is by investing in the training of people for the future. Everywhere in the Welsh NHS, we are training more people today than ever before. We had a 55 per cent increase in the number of student nurses between 2016 and 2022; a 95 per cent increase in the same period in the number of people training to be district nurses; a 97 per cent increase in the number of people studying to become midwives; an over 300 per cent increase in the number of students who will emerge from Welsh universities as pharmacists to work in the Welsh NHS. That is true of doctors as well as nurses and those professions allied to medicine.

We are increasing the number of places at the Cardiff medical school and at the Swansea medical school, and, of course, we are creating a new clinical school in north Wales, and there will be further numbers there. If you look over the period ahead for which we have plans, in August 2019 we had 339 what are called F1 and F2 posts in Wales; that will be 450 by August 2024. Those are all extra doctors coming into the system, trained here in Wales. We know they're more likely to work in Wales as a result, and that's why we can offer some comfort to those people who, rightly, are occupied by the stresses and strains that the system currently faces.

I asked you specifically about the Royal College of Emergency Medicine's baseline figure, and I have successively asked you this on numerous occasions. From the numbers I've put before you today, First Minister, we clearly can see that there has been little or no improvement in reaching those baseline figures. So, are we going to see an improvement, given the figures you've just put forward, so that when, in six or 12 months' time, we revisit this, we will see that improvement in consultants in A&E departments here in Wales?

And importantly, the statement that the Government put out this morning of short-term plans being put in place to address the concerns that the BMA have highlighted today, can you highlight exactly what those short-term plans are to get us over this particular pinch-point? I appreciate you've highlighted training programmes and training schemes, and you and I can debate and argue about numbers, but it is a fact that the chairman of the BMA has come out today and highlighted the pressure points, so if you could address the specific short-term plan, so that we can have confidence that the Government have sight of this, then hopefully doctors, nurses and other clinical professionals can have confidence that the pressure they feel on a daily basis when they go into work will be alleviated in the short, medium and long term.

Llywydd, let me give the Member just two examples of the actions we can take in the immediate term. One—and there'll be a statement on this next week by the Minister for Health and Social Services—will be to increase the bed capacity of the NHS over this winter, and that's both bed spaces in hospitals, but community services as well, so that people who are in hospital today can be back home or being looked after in the community, and we will provide details next week of the number of bed and bed-equivalent places that we've already been able to create for this winter, and the more that we expect to come. That will relieve some of the pressures, particularly those pressures in emergency departments that the leader of the opposition referred to. 

In terms of staffing, let me say that I welcome the signs from the UK Government that they are about to review the pension arrangements, which have got in the way of so many doctors continuing to work in the NHS, not just in Wales, but across the United Kingdom. He will know that if you are a GP, for example, you hit a point where your pension pot that you have built up is so heavily taxed that you're practically paying to be in work, and very understandably we have seen a whole swathe of people retiring early from the health service in Wales because the financial circumstances created by the pension rules mean that it's simply not viable for them to continue. Now, I've seen reports this week that that is being actively revisited by the UK Government, and that they are about to propose changes to those pension arrangements that would allow people to come back into the workplace who didn't wish to leave it. They may not want to come back full time, we understand all of that, but they want to make their contribution. And if those pension arrangements change, we can be sure that there will be people in Wales who are not in the workplace at the moment and who could, as part of those short-term measures, come back into the workforce to reinforce the people who are working so hard, and under very difficult circumstances, and with three years of really challenging times behind them, to help sustain them in the jobs that they do.

Questions from the leader of Plaid Cymru, Adam Price. 

Thank you, Llywydd. You will have seen the census figures that demonstrate a further decline in the number of Welsh speakers in Wales, and a significant fall in terms of young people between the ages of three and 15 who speak the language. Now, this demonstrates, doesn't it, that a central element of the Welsh Government's policy, namely developing Welsh-medium education across Wales, is failing. Ten years ago, the ambition of a million Welsh speakers was put in place as part of the response to the decline in the census figures at that point. Don't we now need to recognise that the actions are not sufficient to reach the target by 2050? As with climate change, goodwill is not the same as delivering against targets. So, wouldn't the most positive response to today's news be to ensure that the proposed Welsh language education Bill would provide Welsh-medium education for all children in Wales within a clear and adequate timetable?

Well, I don't agree with the final point that the leader of Plaid Cymru raised. I don't think that people in Wales will be willing to support the point that he made, and I think that the most important thing about the Welsh language is to maintain the support of people in Wales for everything that we're trying to do. We've succeeded in doing that. There is a strong feeling for the Welsh language in every part of Wales, and we want to use that goodwill that exists to continue to have more people learning Welsh and using Welsh, and so forth.

The things that underpin the things that we've seen in the census are complex, and I think it's worth finding some time to consider what underpins what we've seen. We are seeing growth in the Welsh language here in Cardiff, in Rhondda Cynon Taf, in the Vale of Glamorgan and in Merthyr Tydfil as well. We see growth in the use of the Welsh language among young adults as well. Where the decline has been is among the three-to-15 cohort. Why has that happened? Well, there are fewer young people in the whole of Wales in that age cohort. So, that's one thing to consider.

The second thing is that we know that the census was conducted during the time of the pandemic. I remember time and again hearing people discussing the impact of the pandemic on young people in Welsh-medium schools when they were not attending school, and when they weren't hearing a word of Welsh when the schools were not open. So, there are a number of things underpinning these figures, and it's worth taking some time to consider what lies behind them.

That's particularly the case, Llywydd, when you consider that some other sources of data show other things. Why are the figures in the census falling when the figures in the Office for National Statistics annual review of the population are going up every year? I don't understand that myself yet. There's a lot of work to be done. I had the opportunity, Llywydd, to speak with Sir Ian Diamond, who chairs the ONS, about this before the census figures were published. Things are more complex, I think, than what the leader of Plaid Cymru has suggested this afternoon. We need to find time to undertake this work and to return to this to see what the best responses are to continue to do what we want to do—to find a way to achieve a million Welsh speakers by 2050.

I am disappointed with your initial response, First Minister, this afternoon, because there was recognition as the figures were published 10 years ago that we were in a critical situation, and that action was needed. That's what led then to the cross-party debate that got behind the aim of a million Welsh speakers. So, there was an acknowledgement that census figures are important. Every language planner I've ever spoken to has said that it's the census that is the most important source of data. The survey that you referred to is a sample, whereas the census includes everyone. Saying that the number of children in Wales is falling—. Well, yes, it's true in terms of numbers, but it's the percentage between three and 15 that's dropped, whatever the number is. I'm afraid that proves, does it not, that your policy in terms of growing Welsh-medium education across Wales is not successful. 

Llywydd, I'm more of an optimist than the leader of Plaid Cymru, but I'm always more of an optimist about Wales than Plaid Cymru is on almost every point. [Interruption.] Yes, I know. They hate it when you point out to them that every time they get to their feet, it's always to give us the most pessimistic view possible of what Wales can achieve. Llywydd, I'm well enough aware of the difference between a number and a percentage, so I thank the Member for reminding me of that. Let me say this to him. He's offered one solution this afternoon. It's a solution that my party will not adopt; let me be as clear as I can with him about that. Compulsory education for everybody through the medium of Welsh is not the answer to the Welsh language in Wales. It will alienate people who are sympathetic to the Welsh language; it will set the language backwards not forwards. You are perfectly entitled to make that your policy, if you like, but I'm clear with you, as clear as I can: it will not be the policy of the Welsh Government.

Can I turn to—[Interruption.] Yes, I know. Can I turn to constitutional matters? The Labour Party 2017 manifesto included a commitment to devolving policing to Wales. The Silk commission, set up by a Conservative-led administration, recommended it in 2014. Your own Government's Thomas commission recommended the devolution of policing and justice as a whole, and the Labour Party manifesto in 2017 said the Labour Government would work with you in using that report to sort out a failing justice system in Wales. The Brown commission recommendation to devolve just youth justice and probation takes us back 10 years in the devolution debate in Wales. But forget the politics, how about the real-world consequences? The Wales Governance Centre has just said that criminal justice outcomes in Wales are among the worst in Europe. What possible moral justification is there for leaving those powers in Westminster a minute longer than we have to, when they're causing such misery in so many people's lives?

I powerfully welcome the Gordon Brown report, and I powerfully welcome its very specific commitment that the devolution of criminal justice will begin with the next Labour Government. And let's be clear, Llywydd: only a Labour Government will ever be able to set off on that journey and complete it. The Tories won't do it, Plaid Cymru can't do it, only Labour. Only Labour is able to deliver that, and the Brown report commits the party to begin that journey. I think it will be a fantastic thing if, in that next term, youth justice and the probation service are both transferred to this Senedd. That will be the start of that process. Of course, we want that process to go further. It's the policy of the Welsh Government that the whole of the criminal justice system should become the responsibility of this Senedd. But every journey begins with the first step, and those steps are very clearly endorsed in the Gordon Brown report.

If you were serious about devolution, Llywydd, if you were serious about the powers of this place, you would welcome that first step. It's all very well shaking your head in that, 'Oh, dear, aren't they dreadful?' sort of way. Actually, the only progress there will ever be will be with a Labour Government determined to do all the things that Gordon Brown sets out for this Senedd. And not simply in criminal justice, Llywydd, but the other things that that report sets out for this Senedd as well—those constitutionally protected statutes, which mean that the Sewel convention will be made legally binding and inescapable for Governments at Westminster. What protections there would have been for this Senedd since 2019 if that had been in place. I think a welcome for the report on your part would be very welcome, because it puts devolution where we would like it to be, it entrenches the permanence of devolution, it enhances the status of this Senedd, and it widens the power of Welsh devolution. What is there not to welcome in that?

Well, following on from that exchange—

Well—[Laughter.]—I thank Hefin David for raising the standard of debate here in the Senedd this afternoon. By working together, we have made real progress on a range of joint commitments that have a direct impact on people's ability to manage during this cost-of-living crisis. These include free school meals, the expansion of free childcare, and measures that help people to live in their local communities.

Last week marked the one-year anniversary of the co-operation agreement—I'm glad to see it's still so healthy. [Laughter.] But, one of the co-operation agreement's commitments, though, was something that we all share—at least this two thirds of the Chamber—namely a national care service for Wales. Unison Cymru launched a report last week at the Norwegian church that set out the need to support the pressing crisis in social care, and, last week, the First Minister said that he himself would like to revisit some of the funding issues on social care. I've mentioned in this Chamber before my personal support for a Holtham levy to resolve the crisis. I know he's said previously that, should we take that route, there is always a chance that the UK Government could take away with the other hand. I fully accept that argument. But, at this point in time, what assessment is he making of the need for us to act now, here in Wales, to resolve this crisis in social care?

I thank Hefin David for that, Llywydd. The expert group that was established as part of the co-operation agreement has carried out its work. Its report has been received; we published it on 10 November. We're very grateful to the members of that group for the very detailed consideration they gave to the challenging circumstances of social care.

It's undebatable, I think, Llywydd, that the context has changed since the co-operation agreement was signed and we asked that group to carry out its work. Prime Minister Sunak has pulled the plug on the social care funding that Chancellor Sunak set up when he was in that office. Prime Minister Sunak has pulled the plug on the paying for social care arrangements that Prime Minister Johnson had put in place while Mr Sunak was the Chancellor. All of that means that we have had to think again about the report and ways in which we can think of paying for social care in the future. And that does mean, as I said, and as the leader of Plaid Cymru said last week when we were talking together on this, that we should revive the work that was done in the last Senedd term—some very detailed work done looking at the Holtham review, the proposals for a social care levy—to see whether it does provide us with an alternative route, given that the UK routes that were meant to be in place have now been closed off, and whether that offers us an alternative route to funding social care in Wales in the future.

The difficulties that Hefin David pointed to remain. The line that divides devolved and non-devolved responsibilities in this area is a very blurred one, and there are actions that lie in the hands of the UK Government that can have a fundamental effect upon the way in which actions we might take would have their impact in the lives of Welsh citizens. That's why it's so disappointing to see the things that we believed were in place now being reneged on once again, because it throws all of that back into uncertainty. The good news is that the work that was chaired by my colleague Vaughan Gething in the last Senedd term is all there for us to go back to. Now my colleague Rebecca Evans will take that up and make sure that in the new circumstances, and with the report that we've got available to us, we look to see whether that offers us any fresh chances to design a system that would work for Wales. 

First Minister, I don't think you'll be shocked by what I'm about to say. I may not share the same sentiments as Hefin David in relation to this. This co-operation agreement, which, quite frankly, my colleagues on these benches and those outside of this Chamber have been referring to as a coalition, because if it looks like one it normally is one, has brought in one damaging proposal after another. I'm referring to specifically the 20 mph default speed limits, a freeze on road building, a tourism tax, and creating more politicians in Cardiff Bay to the sum of over £100 million, and that amount is growing day by day. These proposals feel very far removed from the Welsh public's priorities. No-one here can deny—and no-one could even think about denying—that NHS waiting times have continued to grow. Wales has three quarters of a million people on waiting lists for treatment, the worst A&E waits in Britain, the slowest ambulance response times on record, and our schools are at the bottom of UK Programme for International Student Assessment rankings. So, First Minister, I'd like to know when is the Welsh Government going to address the people's priorities—[Interruption.]

I know that Labour backbenchers think they're helping the First Minister when they're commenting on the question in hand, but I don't think that's actually the case, because I think both the First Minister and myself struggle to hear the questions being asked at that point. 

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

So, if you can carry on with your question.

No problem. So, First Minister, I'd like to know when is the Welsh Government going to address the people's priorities, or can the so-called co-operation agreement with your Plaid pals be best described as a simple Labour-saving device before the next elections? Thank you.

Well, Llywydd, where to start? If I was the Member, I would have crossed out the line she was given about coalition, having heard the discussion on the floor of the Senedd this afternoon. What you've seen is the co-operation agreement work as it was always intended to do—that, where we are able to agree on things, and there are 47 very important things that we were able to agree on, we work on them together in order to put them into practice. And where we don't agree, we're able to have robust exchanges of the different views of our different parties. That would obviously not be the case if there were a coalition.

As for the priorities of people in Wales, people in Wales had an opportunity to vote in an election when all those things that Member read out were in a manifesto that was put in front of them. So, I think that having 45,000 more people offered free school meals in Wales would be a priority for people in Wales. I think the expansion of high-quality childcare to 2-year-olds will be a priority for people in Wales. I think the actions we have taken to make sure that people are able to remain in their local communities, and we reset the balance between the needs of those people and people who are lucky enough to be able to afford second homes, let alone a first home—I think that would be a priority for people in Wales. And if I could try and put it as kindly as I can to the Member: I think, when we speak on these benches about the priorities that matter to people in Wales, it is with the satisfaction of seeing an opinion poll that puts my party at 51 per cent support in Wales and rising, and her party at 18 per cent and falling.  

I thank Llyr Gruffydd for the question. I want to see an NHS that can respond to need in a clinically timely way and that is available to all who choose to use it. The NHS provides almost all of the primary and emergency care provided in Wales. Where patients choose to use the independent sector, they are, of course, free to do so.

Thank you for that response. I want to share with you the experience of a constituent of mine who's a nurse and suffers with carpal tunnel syndrome on both hands. That causes the hands to swell, it brings a burning pain and shooting pain up the arms up to the elbows and, as she is a dental nurse, that has an impact on her ability to work. It also has an impact on her quality of life and well-being as an individual too. Now, having being told that the waiting list, back in July, was 12 months for emergency cases, she received confirmation in September that she is now considered an emergency case, but the waiting list is now two years long. Now, in despair, she's decided that she has no option but to access private treatment and, to fund that, she is having to sell her home. Now, you can accuse us of being pessimists if you choose, but do you think it's acceptable that somebody has to turn to a scenario where they have to sell their home to have access to a private service that should be available on the NHS? And doesn't this highlight the fact that there is an increasing move towards the use of private services, be that intentional or not, under your Government's leadership?

The Member knows that it's impossible for me to respond to a case when I'm hearing the details for the first time in the Chamber. As I said in the original answer, I want to see an NHS in Wales that can provide services to people in a timely way, in every regard and in every part of the service.

And while it's very difficult to hear the sort of case that the Member has outlined this afternoon, it's still important to say that, even if you take the figures that are published by the private sector themselves—and, of course, they are there to make the case for their sector—but if you take their own figures on the use of the private sector in Wales, then, in planned care, 5 per cent of planned care in Wales is provided by the private sector; 95 per cent of it continues to be provided by the NHS. If you take into account the fact that half of operations in Wales are carried out as a result of emergency admission rather than planned admission, that falls to 2 per cent of people in Wales receiving their care through the private sector. And if you begin to take into account things like out-patient appointments, then actually, the fraction of care that is provided by the private sector in Wales falls to less than 1 per cent. So, while I'm always sorry to hear of anybody who has felt obliged to seek treatment outside the Welsh NHS, the global picture continues to show that people in Wales, quite rightly, are able to rely on the NHS to meet their needs, and that it does so for thousands and thousands and thousands of people across Wales every single week.

First Minister, what I've noted is that over the last 12 months in particular, more of my constituents are opting to go for private treatment because they have made that decision that they no longer want to wait on an NHS waiting list, often in pain. On one occasion, one constituent, I know, went into debt in order to pay for private treatment.

Now, the Health and Social Care Committee has heard quite a number of harrowing accounts of people waiting for private health care that has left them in serious debt. One person said this, and I quote: 'The NHS cancelled my scheduled surgery three times, even after my gynaecologist had emphasised how important it was that I have surgery urgently in order to preserve my bowel. Because of this, I paid over £15,000 to have two private surgeries that were essential for my health. This has made a huge impact on my finances and life plans'. My question is, First Minister: what is your advice to people who are on a waiting list, who have the ability to pay for private treatment, and are able to afford to do so? What is your advice to them, and what is your advice to people in the same situation who can't afford to pay but are considering going private, putting themselves into potential debt, because they're concerned about the pain that they're in?

Well, my advice to them is to seek advice from their clinician and then to make an assessment that only they can make. There's no possible advice that either the Member or I can give to people standing here. They should get clinical advice, and then they should make their minds up.

Good afternoon, First Minister. One area where people do not have a choice in relation to whether they go private or not is dental treatment. Getting a dentist in Wales, particularly in a rural area like many of us represent here, is almost impossible. Dentists are choosing, now, to go private. Now, whilst we have always, as adults, paid something towards our treatment, there are many adults who now cannot afford to get dental treatment. But even more concerning, children cannot get an NHS dentist. I'm sure that we would agree that that is an intolerable situation. So, my questions are: do we know how many children in Wales are waiting for an NHS dentist? And could I ask what the Welsh Government is planning to do about that? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Well, thank you for the question, of course.

In many ways, the core of the problem was set out in the question, which is that dentists are private businesses; they are contractors. They cannot be made to work for the NHS. And we have seen, to a very small extent, in fact, some dentists in Wales move out of the NHS and into private practice. What is the Welsh Government doing about it? Well, I've set this out on the floor a number of times, Llywydd. At the core of what we will do is to change the contract of dentists in the Welsh NHS, and we've done that since 1 April. The huge majority of dentists in Wales have opted for the new contract, and the new contract by itself will create some 126,000 additional NHS appointments here in Wales in the first year of that contract. In the Hywel Dda area, which is part of the area represented by the Member, that has already produced over 8,000 additional NHS appointments, and around half of those are for children. So, there are immediate steps that the Welsh Government has taken, in addition to the further investment that the Minister has made available to health boards for dental purposes this year.

In the longer run, the answer lies in reforming the nature of the profession, to liberalise the profession. We have dentists carrying out activity that you simply do not need somebody with the training and the seniority of a fully qualified dentist to carry out, but the profession has been slower than other parts of primary care to diversify so that there are other people trained and capable of carrying out some of the activities that are needed in dentistry, freeing up the time of the dentist—the most precious resource that we have—to do the things that only a dentist can do. And through the training body that we have, we are increasing the number of people being trained to be able to work alongside dentists to offer those sorts of treatments. The faster we can make that happen, the more treatments there will be and the more children will be able to receive NHS dentistry in the way that we would wish to have in Wales. 

Llywydd, we're committed to delivering 20,000 new low-carbon homes for rent in the social sector and have allocated record levels of funding, including more than doubling Swansea's funding since 2020-21. The first statistical release demonstrating progress towards this target is expected early next year.

I thank the First Minister for that response, but there is still a shortage of houses for rent and there's a serious problem with homelessness, including people who are inadequately housed. The only time that we have had, since the second world war, housing that reached the scale that we needed was between 1945 and 1979, when we had large-scale council house building across Wales. This was based upon councils borrowing over 60 years to build houses. This did not cost the Treasury any money, but was based upon the councils' ability to borrow and be able to pay back from the rents they received. How do we return to this method of funding council housing so that we can deal with the serious problem we have with inadequate housing and a shortage of housing?

Well, Llywydd, Mike Hedges reminds us of some important ways in which council house building was possible in the past on a bipartisan basis. People forget that Aneurin Bevan was the Minister for housing as well as the Minister for health, and he put more housing legislation on the statute book than he passed health legislation. And the housing Minister who presided over the largest number of council houses ever built was Harold Macmillan, in a Conservative Government. And that's because there was a bipartisan consensus as to how council housing was important and how it could be funded, and all that came to an end with the Thatcher Governments of the 1980s.

Here in Wales, we have been reversing a number of those inhibitions to building council housing in order to do as Mike Hedges has said, Llywydd, and that is to accelerate the ability of those councils that retain council house stock to add to the number of houses available for rent. So, the borrowing cap imposed on the Welsh housing revenue accounts during the Thatcher era was lifted, and that has removed the constraint over borrowing for council rebuilding. Councils are now able to borrow prudentially against the expected rental income from the houses that they will build. And while that still has to be prudential borrowing, it does mean that councils across Wales now have a source of funding of the sort that Mike Hedges referred to that will allow them to accelerate their own ability to build council housing in the future. 

There are head winds in their way, however, Llywydd. A year ago, in June of last year, the Public Works Loan Board borrowing rate was 1 per cent. Today, as a result of the disastrous period of Liz Truss as Prime Minister, that borrowing rate stands at 4.2 per cent, and that inevitably means that, in a prudential borrowing system, the ability of councils to service the debt they take on to build council housing is becoming more challenging. 

Question 6 [OQ58822] is withdrawn. Question 7, Luke Fletcher. 

Llywydd, as I explained on the floor of the Senedd last week, responsibility for financial services, including banking, is not devolved to the Senedd. While the Welsh Government cannot, therefore, ensure banking availability, we are working with those who are able to do so. This includes provision of innovative services, such as shared banking hubs and our own plans for a community bank.

Diolch, Prif Weinidog. The First Minister will be aware of the most recent spate of bank closure to hit Wales after HSBC announced last week that they'd be closing 12 branches from next April. One of the branches earmarked for closure is in Port Talbot. The announcement is another blow to constituents in my region, who, from west to east, are already being cut adrift by the closures. Gower, for example, now only has three of the big four UK banks, split between Gorseinon and Mumbles, whilst, to the east, in Ogmore, just one bank remains. 

We have known about this problem for a long time. We know that the communities impacted hardest are in areas of high deprivation. The big banks enjoy massive profits, but simply don't care about their social responsibilities. As they continue to abandon our communities, will the Government accelerate the establishment of the Banc Cambria network?

Well, Llywydd, can I first of all agree with what Luke Fletcher said about the very disappointing announcement last week? I've long argued myself that we need something akin to the United States Community Reinvestment Act 1977, which would oblige banks, when they remove from communities that have supported them for decades and decades, that would oblige them to invest in those communities to make good the lack of services that their withdrawal inevitably leads to. 

My colleague Vaughan Gething wrote to the Monmouthshire Building Society—which, as you know, is now a lead partner in our plans for a community bank—on 16 November, and there is to be a meeting early in the new year, involving the Minister for Economy and the Minister for Social Justice, with Monmouthshire Building Society and the voluntary group that originally proposed a community bank for Wales, to set out a route-map to the launch of that community bank. And we'd like it to happen as quickly as possible. The reasons for it not being as quick as we would like are just the technical ones, the challenging ones of licensing in the financial services area, and that is part, as the Member knows, of why we are working in partnership with the Monmouthshire Building Society, because it already has a number of those permissions in what is a tightly regulated sector. 

As well as the community bank, Llywydd, of course, we work with credit unions to see where they can step in to provide services. We support post offices in the work they do, and we work with Link. So, it's a non-devolved service, but it is responsible for 243 locations for automatic cash-dispensing machines across Wales. And where banks pull out, there will be an obligation that Link will discharge, at least to make sure that people continue to have access to cash in those localities. 

And finally, question 8, Samuel Kurtz. 

Llywydd, the health, social and economic value of sport is widely recognised, which is why we are investing more than £75 million over the next three years, through Sport Wales, to deliver on our shared aims and objectives.

First Minister, yesterday a collective sigh of relief was felt across the men's professional game of rugby here in Wales, not due to Warren Gatland's return as Welsh head coach, but because a six-year framework for professional rugby in Wales was verbally agreed. On Sunday, the Welsh Rugby Players Association released a statement expressing concern as player well-being was being severely impacted by delays to a long-term agreement, with some Welsh players already signing for clubs outside of Wales to ensure some job security.

The financial state of rugby is in a perilous position. Across Offa's Dyke, we've seen both Wasps and Worcester placed into administration and cease trading. Parking to one side the governance structure of the Welsh Rugby Union, which Sam Warburton said was 'stuck in the Stone Age', rugby in Wales, both the community and professional game, is in a nervous position. Given the Welsh Government negotiated a £20 million loan to Wales's four regions, what is the Welsh Government doing to ensure that repaying these loans won't leave some of Wales's regions going the way of either Wasps or Worcester?

Llywydd, just to be clear, for accuracy, the loan of the Welsh Government was £18 million, and it was with the Welsh Rugby Union, not with the regions. The way that the money is used is for the Welsh Rugby Union to determine, and they are responsible for making sure that the loan repayments are made. It was a matter of serious debate within the Welsh Government as to whether or not it was legitimate for us to step in to allow the WRU to buy out the loan that they previously had with NatWest. In the end, the decision to do so was motivated by much of what Sam Kurtz has said here this afternoon—the importance of the game here in Wales and our commitment to sustaining it.

But the need for reform in the game itself is real, and the Government cannot be a banker of last resort that is used to prevent the game from carrying out the necessary actions that it itself has to undertake and for which it is responsible. Now, I welcome the appointment of Ieuan Evans as the new chair of the WRU. The Welsh Government is always happy to work alongside the union and to be helpful to them where we can. But that cannot be a reason for them stepping aside from some of the very serious thinking that the game has to do. And that isn't just structural, Llywydd, and it isn't even in the relationship between the regions and the union and so on, but it's in things like head injuries, the future of the game, making sure it's attractive for young people to want to play it. The game has some very serious issues in front of it. We are there to support them where we can, and the £18 million was a very serious sign of that support. That cannot excuse the game from the serious work that it itself needs to carry out.

Thank you, First Minister.

The next item is thee business statement and announcement. I call on the Trefnydd to make the statement—Lesley Griffiths.

Diolch, Llywydd. There are two additions to today's agenda. Later this afternoon, the Deputy Minister for Climate Change will make a statement on bus reform. And secondly, I know you've now given permission for Stage 4 of the Environmental Protection (Single-use Plastic Products) (Wales) Bill to be moved after completion of Stage 3 later today. 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.

Could I ask for an urgent statement from the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, with responsibility for transport, as to why many of my constituents, and the public of the north Wales coast, were left stranded at Chester railway station on Saturday night, as they couldn't access the 21:40 service from Chester to Holyhead, as the train only had two carriages? Now, in the run-up to Christmas, many people from north Wales enjoy a trip to Chester to go shopping, enjoy going out for dinner and drinks with friends and colleagues at this time of year. So, could I have a statement from the Deputy Minister for Climate Change as to why this happened and why there were only two carriages on the line that night, leaving my constituents stranded and needing to pay in excess of £100 for a taxi back to some of their communities in north Wales? So, can the Deputy Minister please reassure my constituents and the people of north Wales that adequate train services are in place for people to go about their daily business? Thank you.

The issue that you refer to really is an operational matter for Transport for Wales, and I would urge you to write to the chief executive.

I'd request a statement, please, outlining what extra support will be available to households that are really struggling with the cost-of-living crisis. We talk about the cost-of-living crisis so often I think the phrase has become normalised, but there will actually be thousands and thousands of people who genuinely don't know how they're going to get through the winter, if they're going to get through. And for some households, rising energy costs will be felt even more acutely—disabled people or people with complex needs require more heating and electricity, not just to be comfortable but as a basic function. If someone is incontinent, their household will need to use the washing machine and the tumble dryer sometimes multiple times a day. If someone has Alzheimer's, they'll get cold more quickly. Telling people in those situations that they just need to put on an extra layer just won't work. There are people living in our communities who won't just be facing the winter months with worry but with absolute and acute dread. I know that a lot of this is reserved to Westminster, so can a statement please set out if these issues are being raised with urgency with the UK Government? Thank you.

Thank you. I absolutely accept what you're saying about the phrase 'cost-of-living crisis' and how it's just become part of our language, really, over the past few months. I was speaking with the Minister for Social Justice this morning. I know she's making urgent representations to the UK Government, and I'm sure she'll be very happy to update Members when those discussions have—. Well, they're not going to conclude, are they; I think they will certainly carry on over the winter and into the new year. But I know one thing that she is very keen to do, and she's having meetings around this, is around the standing charges for energy. Particularly, one of the areas she's looking at—and it's something that Mike Hedges, who's in the Chamber, has certainly been lobbying her on, I know, very strongly—is around the standing charges if energy hasn't been used on that particular day, for instance. So, I'm sure when—. There are a lot of conversations going on bilaterally with the UK Government and the Minister for Social Justice. I'm sure she'll be very happy to update us in due course.

Trefnydd, could I ask for an urgent statement from the Minister for health regarding the situation concerning group A streptococcus, particularly in schools? The situation is very serious indeed and there are reports in the media now that antibiotics could be used as a preventative measure to protect children from more serious conditions, including scarlet fever and invasive group A streptococcus. Public Health Wales state that, in most cases, strep A causes scarlet fever. Scarlet fever is highly contagious, and parents are therefore advised to seek guidance from their GPs. There is a real risk that GPs could be overwhelmed at a very busy time of the year as it is. So, a statement, an urgent statement, from the Minister of health would be very welcome.

Can I also ask for a statement on the status of the advanced technology research centre? This is a project that Welsh Government has been working on for some five years. It would be the sibling facility for the advanced manufacturing research centre, which has been an incredible success. I understand the UK Government has allocated £10 million in capital towards the cost of establishing the ATRC. I'd be very grateful if we could have a statement on the status of that project and confirmation, if possible, in the budget next week that funding will be made available for it to be created in the next financial year. Diolch.

Diolch. The Minister for Health and Social Services will be making a statement as soon as possible around the strep A situation. We are certainly seeing a higher number of cases of strep A bacterial infection this year compared to recent years, and unfortunately we have seen the tragic outcomes in recent weeks, and our thoughts and condolences go out to all the families and all those impacted by these tragic deaths. You mentioned Public Health Wales, and they're leading the response here in Wales. They're working very closely with our health boards, our local authorities and schools and parents and GPs. As you say, there is information on their website, but the Minister for Health and Social Services will be making a statement, hopefully later on this afternoon. 

In relation to the ATRC, we are currently progressing with the design and the master planning of the ATRC site. We've identified an appropriate operator and currently estimating planning submissions to be made in the summer of next year, so 2023, shows that the facility would be operational in spring 2025.FootnoteLink We very much welcome the £10 million commitment that the Chancellor announced in the autumn statement to support its development.

Minister, please may I request a statement from the Minister of health in relation to the fracture liaison service here in Wales? Osteoporosis—we often hear about it here in Chamber—which can cause bones to break from a cough or even so much as a hug from the grandchildren, affects more than 180,000 people in Wales and costs the UK health service a huge £4.6 billion a year. Tragically, as many people die from fracture-related causes as from lung cancer or, in fact, diabetes. However, a fracture liaison service can help transform the quality of life for older people in Wales and unlock some serious savings for our NHS. As it stands, only 66 per cent of people in Wales aged over 50 have access to a FLS, compared to 100 per cent of people in Scotland and Northern Ireland. This means that thousands of people in areas without coverage are having fractures fixed up and forgotten about without their underlying osteoporosis being diagnosed and treated, and I'd like to know, obviously—. Where FLSs are already in place, there is widespread underperformance with patient identification, monitoring and follow-ups. Extending services and raising the quality can free up 73,000 acute hospital beds and 16,500 rehabilitation bed days, estimated to be taken up by hip fracture patients over the next five years, as well as deliver huge savings, which I mentioned. So, a modest £2 million annual investment in raising the number and quality of fracture liaison services to cover everyone over 50 would deliver a £36 million return over five years. We have a real opportunity, Minister, here to improve the lives of thousands of people across Wales, and such savings, I'm sure, will be welcomed by the Welsh Government. Therefore, a statement from the health Minister about investing in this particular service would be greatly appreciated. 

Thank you. I think you raise a really important point. Osteoporosis affects many of us and many of our constituents, and I will certainly ask the Minister for Health and Social Services to come forward with a written statement. 

Trefnydd, I want to highlight the need for a Government statement by raising the matter of the nursery at Caerphilly Children's Centre, which is left on the brink due to a lack of financial commitment and engagement from the Labour-run Caerphilly County Borough Council. The centre has been providing an incredible service for children with disabilities, developmental delay and additional needs for three decades. To continue to operate, the nursery needs a service level agreement from the local authority, as they cannot apply for larger long-term grant funding without such a financial commitment in place. The centre has been requesting an agreement for the last five years. I've also heard that requests for a meeting on this matter have not been answered or acknowledged by the council in the last year. The situation is now critical, and they face issuing redundancy notices to staff at the end of December unless something changes. Are you disappointed that your party colleagues in Caerphilly are jeopardising the health and mental well-being of the most vulnerable with a lack of engagement and lack of financial commitment? But, from this Government, can we have a statement on the provision for children with disabilities, developmental delay and additional needs in Wales and the need to protect these services?   

Well, I'm not aware of the issue you raise around the nursery. I do think it would be better to correspond directly with Caerphilly County Borough Council on this occasion. 

Minister, there is now a growing campaign in Wales, led by five animal welfare charities, calling for a ban on greyhound racing. Dogs Trust, Blue Cross, Greyhound Rescue Wales, Hope Rescue and the RSPCA collectively believe that greyhound racing causes cruelty and appalling suffering to the dogs. Can the Minister ensure a written statement confirming the position of the Welsh Government on greyhound racing, whether they have met with these five organisations, and what steps they might take to address this vital issue of animal welfare? Thank you. 

Thank you. Well, obviously, this falls within my portfolio, and I am very keen to address the many concerns that have been raised with me around greyhound racing. As you will be aware, the Petitions Committee has had a significant petition, and I'm awaiting the outcome of that, as well as obviously having this as part of our animal welfare plan—that is a five-year plan that I published, which will cover the whole five years of this term of government—but this is something obviously within the programme for government commitment. I have met with some of the organisations that you refer to, and I've certainly received a significant amount of correspondence on the issue. But I think the next thing will be to look at the petition, if that comes forward, obviously, for a debate here in the Senedd, and also my officials are working on looking at whether a consultation is required, which I think it would be, to look at the future of greyhound racing. 

Tempting as it would be to follow up that question from Altaf Hussain—thank you so much—I'm focusing on something else today, and good afternoon, Trefnydd. Can I request a statement, please, from the Minister for Health and Social Services with regard to the strike ballot by Welsh ambulance service workers? We know that nobody takes strike action lightly, least of all those who are in our health service, and it just shows how desperate health workers are. They have voted to strike in December, which does also coincide with the nurses' strike as well in December. So, could I ask for a statement from the Minister about what urgent action the Welsh Government will be taking to ensure that workers are supported, that negotiations are in place and that emergency cover is sufficient during what we know will be one of the NHS's busiest period? Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you. Well, we do recognise why so many ambulance workers have voted the way they did, and the anger and the disappointment amongst so many of our public sector workers at the current time. We believe our emergency services should be fairly rewarded for their important work, but you'll appreciate our current financial settlement falls far short of what's needed to meet the significant challenges faced by public services and by public workers right across Wales. As a Government, we very much value social partnership, and I know the Minister continues to meet with trade unions to discuss a range of issues affecting the workforce.

Trefnydd, I'd be grateful if we could have a statement from the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership on action that the Welsh Government is taking to recruit and keep retained firefighters in the workforce in Wales. You may be aware that there are 125 vacancies in mid and west Wales, a situation that Roger Thomas, chief fire officer for mid and west Wales, is right to say is unsustainable, and so it's vital that we see support forthcoming, perhaps even a national review of pay and conditions for retained firefighters so that we see the situation improving. Given the importance of recruiting and retaining firefighters in constituencies and regions, especially in our rural areas, I would appreciate a statement from the Welsh Government as soon as possible, outlining what it's doing to encourage people to apply for roles within the fire service, and what it's doing to support the workforce in order to protect these vital emergency services.

Thank you. You will have heard me say in my answer to Jane Dodds that we absolutely value social partnership, so the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership is certainly working with the fire service at the moment to see what more can be done to try and attract people to the roles. I wasn't aware of the significant number that you refer to, but I know the Deputy Minister is.

May I ask for a debate in Government time on the state of the NHS? As we enter winter, staff are doing their very best, but the situation is impossible. I've heard of a series of incidents affecting constituents over the past few days: one woman in her 80s, concerned that she'd broken her hip, waiting 24 hours on the floor at home for an ambulance; another elderly woman waiting hours in the emergency department while ambulances were queueing outside; a young woman being treated in the corridor in the emergency department because of a shortage of beds. There's nothing new about that; we all hear these stories. But things aren't improving, and I do fear that debates and statements on health in Government time have been few and far between recently. In the light of that, I would appreciate an opportunity as a matter of urgency to discuss the crisis in the NHS before winter really starts to bite.

I know the Minister for Health and Social Services has been working very closely with all the health boards around winter preparedness, but we obviously recognise there are many challenges, and I know the Minister met with the ambulance service—I think it was two weeks ago, but it may have been last week—to discuss issues with the number of ambulances that aren't able to put patients into A&E as quickly as we would want. There will be another, obviously, health debate in Government time, and I will certainly look to see if this is a topic that we could cover in that.

I'd like to ask the Minister for Health, and repeat what our colleague Ken Skates said, for an urgent statement on the high number of cases of strep A and scarlet fever in Wales. I did submit an emergency question regarding this but, unfortunately, it was not accepted. Therefore, I'm using this business statement as the fastest means possible to make the Welsh Government aware of how many parents, families, grandparents and carers are really concerned. The ongoing cases of strep A and scarlet fever and other complications that it can cause have so far claimed, sadly, the lives of nine children in Wales. This is an appalling tragedy, and my heart goes out to each and every single grieving parent. It has left many families deeply worried as to what they should do next. I had a constituent of mine with two children infected, who were actually at the A&E department yesterday, and waiting nine and a half hours to be seen, and yet we're told speed is of the essence in making sure that we keep our children safe. The updated UK guidance on scarlet fever outbreaks says antibiotics can be used to help stop new cases of strep A in settings such as schools, but that a decision should be taken by local outbreak control teams on a case-by-case basis. I think it's really important that we have a joined-up approach across all parts of the UK so that parents and schools alike can receive the clearest advice possible about what to do.

Now, you did mention before that the Minister may put one out today, and certainly something later this week. We need something today, Trefnydd, and we really do—it's a pity that it wasn't raised by the Minister herself, because there are so many questions. I've been asked by one constituent who had to go around six places looking for antibiotics, so we need to make sure that we've got every single thing in place to combat this and that we don't have these parents and families so worried. So, we want an oral statement, where we can ask questions of the Minister. It's not good enough just to put a statement out outside this Chamber. Thank you. Diolch.

There will be a written statement issued this afternoon, but can I just—

Oral.

There will be a written statement this afternoon, and, if I could just clarify, as the Member I think said nine children had, unfortunately, died in Wales—it's in the UK. I absolutely agree with you, though, these are all really tragic cases.

Thank you, Trefnydd, for that item.

The next item will be a statement by the Minister for Climate Change on climate change and the final statement on carbon budget 1. I call on the Minister for Climate Change to make the statement—Julie James.

Diolch, Llywydd. Llywydd, last month, world leaders came together at COP27 to focus on the climate emergency. Following difficult negotiations, there was both hope and disappointment. Hope came from the agreement for developed nations to create a fund as early as next year to cover loss and damage. The fund will support the most vulnerable nations and communities in their battles with the impacts of climate change. But disappointment came from not making further progress on the phasing out of fossil fuels, which the Welsh Government committed to at COP26 by joining the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance.

This week is the start of COP15, not a climate COP, but a biodiversity COP, which I will be attending. The climate and nature emergencies are intertwined and are not some distant future global crisis. This combined crisis is already upon us, and our vision, ambition and action must achieve a better, fairer and greener future for us all.

In June, my written statement to the Senedd highlighted the publication of the latest greenhouse gas emission data. In the statement, I said the raw data indicated we had met our carbon budget 1 targets. I also committed to publishing our legislative final statement for our first budgetary period in December. Today, I am pleased to confirm that the Welsh Government has met both the first carbon budget and the 2020 emissions reduction interim target. Following advice from the Climate Change Committee, we set an interim target for 2020 at a 27 per cent reduction in emissions compared to our baseline year of 1990. The final net Welsh emissions account for our 2020 interim target saw a 39 per cent reduction. Therefore, the 2020 interim target has not only been met, but surpassed. The first carbon budget was set at an average reduction of 23 per cent emission reduction compared to our baseline year. The final net Welsh emissions account saw a 28 per cent reduction. Therefore, our first carbon budget has also been met and also surpassed.

I am therefore publishing Welsh Government's 'final statement' for the budgetary period and interim year as required under the Environment (Wales) Act 2016. This final statement is the first of its kind for Wales and is a factual report looking back at carbon budget 1. It sets out our accounting methodology and the reasons why we met our targets. Importantly, the final statement contains an annex that estimates the consumption emissions footprint for Wales for the carbon budget period. We estimate consumption emissions fluctuated slightly, with a small increase of approximately 2 per cent, over the budget period that the data is available. However, overall since 2001, the first available year of data, consumption emission estimates have shown a general downward trend, dropping approximately 27 per cent. Due to availability of statistics, it's not been possible to calculate the footprint for the entire budget period. The report covers the period of 2016-19 and there will therefore be an update to the annex in 2023 once the data is received and analysed. Whilst this statement is positive, I recognise there are challenges ahead, and we need to do much more to achieve our second carbon budget for 2021-26. Now is not the time for complacency, and we must maintain our focus on delivery of Net Zero Wales.

I am therefore pleased to also inform the Senedd that I will be launching a call for evidence on a just transition to net zero in Wales. Our first policy in Net Zero Wales committed to transitioning to net zero with social justice at its heart. We are now seeking evidence to identify where negative impacts and opportunities might appear and where they may aggregate. We aim to gather evidence on best practice. We are also seeking evidence of need for our communities, economy and infrastructure, so we can see where support can be targeted to ensure a just transition. Today, the Government is publishing the 'Welsh Government's Net Zero Strategic Plan', which will set out how it plans to achieve net zero as an organisation, and the Minister for Economy will be publishing a net-zero skills plan next year. These are all important actions in Net Zero Wales.

Of course, the climate is already changing as the increasing number of devastating weather events globally proves. They provide a sobering reminder that as well as reducing emissions, we also need to build resilience to a changing climate. Climate change is bringing risks to our communities, infrastructure, natural resources and health that we must address. Therefore, finally, today, I am pleased to inform the Senedd that I'm also publishing a progress report on our current five-year national climate change adaptation plan, 'Prosperity for All: A Climate Conscious Wales'. The report shows the huge amount of work we are doing already to address the risks arising from climate change, but, as with our climate mitigation efforts, we must do more, and we will.

Our values and guiding principles set out in the programme for government put social justice and the climate emergency at the heart of our actions for this Senedd term, and it is of upmost importance to me that we deliver for the people of Wales and the future of our children. In terms of today's publications, final checks and typesetting is taking place and the final documents will be laid in the Senedd and uploaded to the website by the end of this term. Diolch.

I would like to start by congratulating the people of Wales, and thank you for statement, Minister. It has taken a nationwide effort to achieve the first carbon budget and the 2020 emissions reduction interim target, and, as such, everyone involved should be proud. 'Prosperity for All: A Low Carbon Wales' was your plan for meeting the first plan carbon budget 2016-20 and the 2020 interim target. It included 100 policies and proposals across ministerial portfolios. However, we know that reductions were dominated by the power sector, which was responsible for 85 per cent of the total decrease in emissions from 2016 to 2018. In fact, the slow-down and closure of Aberthaw coal-fired power station contributed to 55 per cent of the total fall in emissions between 2016 and 2020. So, bearing in mind the previous over-reliance on reductions in the power sector, can you provide an update as to whether we're seeing a similar pattern during the current carbon budget, and, if so, what urgent action will be taken to try and deliver widespread reductions? 

As you know, 'Net Zero Wales Carbon Budget 2 (2021 to 2025)' set out 123 policies and proposals from the Welsh Government. I know that you have said that you'll be publishing a progress report on your current five-year national climate change adaption plan, but can you outline today how many of the 123 policies and proposals are actually on their way to being actioned so far? Only by considering this broader picture and shouldering our global responsibility can we truly protect our precious world for future generations.

The Committee on Climate Change 2020 report, 'Land use: Policies for a Net Zero UK', highlighted that agricultural emissions should not be offshored. To quote:

'Achieving emissions reduction should not be at the expense of producing less food in the UK and increasing imports. As the UK is a relatively low-greenhouse gas producer of ruminant meat'—

compared to global averages—

'this risks exporting emissions abroad and increasing consumption emissions.'

Now, on 9 November, this Welsh Parliament unanimously voted in favour of a motion that called on the Welsh Government to, for example, develop a more self-sufficient food system for Wales, use procurement levers to create a requirement for supply chains to be free from deforestation, conversion and social exploitation as part of the transition to utilising locally produced and sustainable goods, and also to support Welsh farmers to eliminate imported livestock feed that is linked to deforestation and habitat conversion overseas, and, also, to support international projects and initiatives aimed at preserving and restoring forests in the main commodity-producing countries.

So, my final question, Minister: what progress have you made on those actions that we voted for you to undertake? And bearing in mind what we now know about the emissions caused by Wales through the goods and services we consume, which projects are you going to support in the main commodity-producing countries? What progress have you made in establishing a way of interpreting the 30x30 target? Thank you. Diolch.

Thank you, Janet. I completely agree with you that much of what we've achieved, of course, is only possible with the people and the communities of Wales, and that means communities in a geographical sense but also communities of interest like, for example, our businesses, our industries, our agricultural sector and so on. So, I completely join with you in that—I'd do it more loudly, only, as you can hear, I'm struggling a little bit with my voice today.

In terms of the sector emissions, we've got five sectors—so, power, transport, industry, waste and fluorinated gases—that have seen strong declining emissions over the period. You're quite right that some of that is because we've closed Aberthaw power station, and that, obviously, makes it even more pressing that we manage to close the remaining fossil fuel power stations, including the gas-fired power stations in Wales, as soon as is humanly possible. Therefore, making sure that we take full advantage of the renewable opportunities right across Wales is where we need to be.

So, two sectors, in buildings and agriculture, have seen more limited change in emissions over the period. The—I always have to look this up—LUCF, which is the land-use change and forestry sector, has seen a substantial decrease in the size of the sink it provides over the period, although it remains a sink and achieved the anticipated contribution.

The emissions reductions are driven by changing patterns in Wales's consumption and production activities, which are tracked by 57 of the tier 2 indicators. You asked me which ones were on target and which ones weren't. Twenty eight of the activity indicators are green, including major increases in the proportion of electricity generation from renewables, major decreases in the proportion of waste sent to landfill and a strong decrease in transport energy use and industrial energy use.

The sectors seeing the highest proportions of green-rated tier 2 indicators were power at 89 per cent, for reasons we've just discussed; waste at 75 per cent, which is due to Wales's stellar performance in recycling, again thanks to the people of Wales; and in the public sector, driven by our ambition for the public sector to decarbonise by 2030. Of the remaining activity indicators, seven were red, 11 amber and 11 could not be rated.

The sectors seeing the lowest proportions of green-rated tier 2 indicators were the land-use change and forestry sectors, buildings and agriculture. So, buildings have done particularly badly and agriculture is only at 17 per cent. What that's telling us, Janet, is that we need to redress the balance, to some extent, about how we address some of these things.

This isn't aimed in any way at berating our farmers, for example, but in agriculture, if we just look at that, we've had a number of supportive schemes for farmers through the red meat development programme, dairy improvement programme, sustainable production grant and Farming Connect. There was a 6 per cent increase observed in the total agricultural area from 2016 to 2020, and a small decrease in agricultural land area from 2018 to 2020, but output per hectare of land increased by 3 per cent. So, there are some really complicated statistics involved in this.

There has been delivery in some key policy areas, and overall emissions have declined over the carbon budget 1 period, but emissions have not declined at the rate anticipated in the Climate Change Committee's pathway, and the anticipated contribution, therefore, to the 2020 pathway is not yet met. Having said that, though, the reason that we've introduced the sustainable farming scheme is to help our agricultural sector to do what it needs to do to get to where it needs to be.

The other sector is buildings, which I anticipate my colleague and friend Jenny Rathbone is about to ask me about, so I'll answer her on that, but, basically, we need to do a lot more in retrofitting our buildings as well. Diolch.

Minister, I'm sorry to hear that you're unwell; hope you feel better soon. This, indeed, is a momentous moment and it does need to be celebrated; although it's jarring, of course, to be looking at the very bleak picture that we're looking at globally, I think that, obviously, it would be remiss not to do that. The UN has concluded that there are no credible pathways in place at present at least to limit global heating to below 1.5 degrees, and the need to accelerate decarbonisation plans is so urgent because of that. I think that there’s this catastrophe that’s tremendous on the one hand and the window of opportunity that we have is so small, and it’s the difference between those two things that is so stark.

I’m glad that, because of the co-operation agreement, we’ve helped bring about more of a possibility of reaching net zero by 2035. I’m glad of the commitment to establish Ynni Cymru, but again, the backdrop of this globally, and also domestically, actually—there are worrying trends closer to home, like the slowdown in renewable energy development in Wales since 2015, the cost-of-living crisis, which is just having an impact on absolutely every element of policy, the constraints on our grid capacity, and the fact that we still await further devolution of powers over the rail network and managing the Crown Estate. Minister, could you provide an update, please, on the Welsh future energy grid for net zero project, and tell us whether progress has been made to address the slowdown in renewable energy development since 2015? I’d be grateful to know if the Welsh Government has, particularly since June of this year, raised the issue of a lack of grid capacity in Wales in the relevant inter-ministerial forums, and if so, what the response has been, please.

As well as that, I know that on Wales’s net-zero plan, the Welsh Government’s modelling suggests that Wales is on track—and this has come up already—to meet carbon budget 2; there’s a 37 per cent reduction in that, and it will achieve a 44 per cent reduction against the baseline. You’ve committed to an updated budget improvement plan and you’ll consider assessments of the carbon impact of spending decisions through that, and how they could be made more robust. Could you explain, please, Minister, if the anticipated hits to your Government’s spending power because of this cost-of-living crisis will have any impact on the budget improvement plan?

On transport targets, Minister, do you agree that the lack of full devolution of this area to Wales is hampering our efforts to achieve targets in terms of reducing car usage and so on, and that the fact that this isn’t devolved, after all, has inhibited the development of an effective pan-Wales rail network, and we’ve missed out on untold money in Barnett consequentials from the high speed 2 scheme?

There’s one final area I’d like to cover briefly—it has come up already—on land usage. I know the Government has plans to increase woodland creation rates substantially by 2050; I note the concern that’s already been raised about this, about the reduction in carbon capture from land usage between 2019 and 2020. I would add my concern to that already expressed. I wouldn’t wish the Minister to have to repeat what she’s already said, but if there’s anything further that she’d like to say on that, could you tell us of any assessment that’s been made of the implications in Wales of the UK Government’s proposals for their habitats regulations assessment process, please? Diolch.

Yes, thank you very much, Delyth, for that series of things. So, just going through them in order, yes, we absolutely bring up the grid issues every single time I meet anybody even remotely relevant to it in a ministerial group—we bring it up. I’m in the queue to see the new energy Minister. I hope he stays in post long enough for me to actually see this one—the last one left post before I managed it. We are looking for a reassurance that the holistic network design that was discussed with the Minister, which seems like years ago now, but was only a few months ago, goes ahead for Wales. We’ve discussed in this Chamber many times why we need that network design to go ahead and why we need the upgrading of the grid. It is absolutely the case, and every single renewable developer we speak to, and the Crown Estate themselves, agree with us on the case that, if we want to onshore the very significant gigawatt capability of the Celtic sea into south Wales, which we certainly need to do, then we need the grid capacity to be able to do that. We are pushing with some alacrity to make sure that that happens, and there’ll be a number of round-tables and interventions that we are taking part in, and indeed hosting, in January and February of next year, trying to make sure that we’re the first movers in some of those areas, and ensuring that our ports are in prime position to be able to take advantage of what will be a significant opportunity.

In terms of the cost-of-living crisis, this is one of the conundrums, isn’t it, of the world? So, we are trying to put money into people’s pockets in a short-term way for the cost-of-living crisis, because some people simply cannot make ends meet, and at the same time we are also, of course, promoting energy efficiency and adaptations, so the better your house is, the more adapted it is to climate resilience, the less energy you use, and the more money there is in your pocket. If you were lucky enough to be able to afford to put solar panels on your roof, then you are getting a benefit from that.

We’ve also been pushing the UK Government to, frankly, come away from its ridiculous market based on the marginal price of gas, and to split the renewables market away from that. Instead, unfortunately, they've come up with a plan to windfall tax the renewables companies, which seems completely—. Well, it's not what we would have done, that's for sure. We keep pushing that all the time and also, obviously, the renewables do that. But it's right around the coast of Britain. Wales has really excellent renewables, but, actually, Britain has really excellent renewables, so it makes no sense to me that the Government, acting as the English Government in that regard, doesn't see the opportunity for that. We certainly do push that, and I was in an inter-ministerial group only on Monday where it was amongst the things discussed.

The other thing discussed was the threat to the habitats regulations—the EU Bill. We were assured by the Minister who was at that meeting—. Unfortunately, it was not Thérèse Coffey, and I would like to put it on record, Deputy Llywydd, that we would like the Secretary of State to actually attend the meetings, and not send junior Ministers. But the Minister there was at great pains to tell us that the assumption is going to be that things stay in place unless there's a real reason for them not to. It's very difficult to understand what real reason there would be not to maintain the habitats directive in place. Nevertheless, we will be keeping a very watchful eye on what happens, because otherwise we will have to undergo a very rapid programme to make sure that those habitats regulations stay in force in Wales. But I can assure you that that is our intention.

In terms of the land use issue, one of the reasons I'm going to COP15 is because biodiversity totally depends on our ability to make the best use of our land. These carbon sinks are not just forests, just to be clear—these are the peatlands, these are the wildflower meadows, these are the long grasslands where the curlews nest right across Wales that we need interconnectivity between and that we need as habitats. In doing so, we get the double whammy, don't we? We get the increased protection of our biodiversity, but we also get the carbon sink entirely necessary for us to withstand this oncoming onslaught.

And finally, Jenny Rathbone. 

Thank you very much. I too congratulate you and all your stakeholders for achieving both the interim and the net emissions targets, because I really think that's excellent. I look forward to studying the net-zero strategic action plan you commit to publish by the end of this week, and particularly the annex to the final statement, because I want to ask you what's in there about the food carbon footprint that Wales has, because that obviously will help inform us how we reduce that, because it is the single biggest contributor that individuals make, as opposed to large-scale decisions made by Government. 

I agree that there's no room for complacency in all this, and that the planet faces a really desperate situation if we don't act now. The Equality and Social Justice Committee's report, 'Fuel poverty and the Warm Homes Programme', which we published in May, called for a clear long-term strategy for decarbonisation to give industry the confidence it needs to invest in skills, technology and people. We also asked the net-zero skills action plan to be published no later than July. Now we're told it won't even be published by the end of December. I'm underwhelmed by that, and I want to know if not this month, then when exactly next year, because we really, really do need that to pull that whole decarbonisation of our housing together.

Thank you very much, Jenny. One of the things you'll see when we publish the plan by the end of this week is a very useful infographic, which, Deputy Llywydd, I happen to have a rush copy of in front of me. What that does is go through some of the statistics I was responding to Janet Finch-Saunders using. It sets out very neatly which indicators are red and amber and why, and what we need to do about them. One of those is obviously agriculture and food. You'll be able to see that there's a range of green, amber and some that are not yet rated. I did speak in my statement a little bit about some of the data that we're still getting in, and we will be publishing an addendum once the data has been analysed. 

One of the big issues for us is to reduce our carbon footprint in the production of food, and to make sure that our carbon sink stays in place, because, really worryingly, the carbon sink, although it has performed as we would have wanted for carbon budget 1, is clearly reducing. And so, one of the big pushes for me to go to COP15 and to make sure that we're playing a full role there is to make sure that, here in Wales, we can maintain and increase the carbon sink that we are operating, not only for our own purposes but for the purposes of the rest of the globe. That is why we make no bones at all about pushing the national forest, the forestation plans, but also the peatland restoration programme, which I'm very pleased to have been able to triple very recently. Also we're about to, combined with the UK Government, ban the sale of peat in its entirety, and not before time either. So, these things are very important and people really need to get behind them.

But we need to have good-quality locally produced food. I mean, obviously the lower the carbon mileage the better, but actually, the higher the nutritional quality the better for our farmers, so it's an absolutely virtuous circle. What's not to like about it? And just to make the point that Lord Deben actually made at the beginning of Climate Change Week, and it's a controversial point as well: this isn't about a plant-based diet; this is about a sustainable diet, and a sustainable diet is one that understands how food is produced and makes choices accordingly. So, I'm afraid if you eat smashed avocado on your Sunday toast, then you are in a very water-intensive, very climate change-unadapted territory. You would be far better off to have a rasher of local bacon—and I speak as somebody who's been a vegetarian all my life. It is very important to understand where food comes from, how it's produced, and how it gets to our table, and in that way, you will benefit local producers of food.

The other thing to say is that not all food that comes from far away is bad. Actually, global trade that supports women's co-operatives and fair trade, and decently produced food abroad, also helps us fight a global climate, because it helps local people to adapt to what they need to be able to produce and export, in order to make their own particular neighbourhood and area more sustainable. I'm very proud of the work that Wales has done in the Wales and Africa programme and the reforestation programmes that we've had in Mbale. That's a very good example—that's far away, but, actually, the global trade has increased the carbon sink of the whole planet, and the locally produced food and better-produced coffee, immeasurably. So, when you enjoy your morning coffee, and it's been produced in Mbale, you'll be able to know that, despite the fact that it's travelled a long way to you, it's nevertheless been sustainably produced by farmers who are properly paid to do it. I think that is the sort of thing that we need in a labelling regime and in a purchasing policy. My friend Rebecca Evans and myself have been discussing the procurement policies for the Welsh public sector, based on that kind of virtuous circle, for quite some time.

Diolch, Gweinidog. We will look forward to seeing copies of your infographics.

Item 4 is a statement by the Minister for Education and Welsh Language on the supply teaching model. I call on the Minister, Jeremy Miles, to make the statement.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I would like to start by taking this opportunity to once again thank our supply teachers for the work they do, and particularly for the essential support they provided to schools during the pandemic, which was an uncertain and unsettling time for all.

We know that supply teachers play a vital role in supporting our young people. Several independent reviews have highlighted the need for improvements to both the terms and conditions and working arrangements of supply teachers and supply teaching support staff. We have made good progress in recent years. However, it is clear to me that there is still more that should be done to ensure that supply teachers are appropriately rewarded, that all supply staff have greater choice over how they are employed, and that they're able to access the required support and professional learning opportunities to carry out their roles effectively.

Within the programme for government and the co-operation agreement, we have committed to developing a sustainable model for the employment of supply teachers with fair work at its heart. Today, I will set out how we will deliver against these commitments and introduce much-needed reforms to the education system. To ensure that all aspects of the commitment are addressed, I have indicated that a holistic approach is necessary, with the focus of reforms against three main areas, which are a new local authority employment model, further improvements to agency provision, and consideration of pay and conditions for supply teachers within the scope of statutory terms.

Headteachers and governing bodies are responsible for making decisions on how to staff their schools and which type of cover best meets their requirements. Schools are able to recruit supply staff directly, via their local authority, or via a supply agency. To address issues raised by supply teachers relating to employment via private agencies, the supply agency framework of the National Procurement Service was established in 2019, resulting in improved pay and conditions for agency staff, transparency over fees and greater agency regulation.

In order to take forward the new local authority employment model, I am pleased to announce today that we will establish a new technology booking platform that will be available to local authorities, schools and supply staff from September 2023. The model will provide an additional route for schools to engage supply staff and provide a choice to both supply teaching support staff and supply teachers over how they are employed. A procurement exercise is currently under way, with the contract due to be awarded in the spring term, and a staggered implementation to follow across local authorities from the start of the next academic year. My officials will continue to progress this work in the coming months in consultation with local authorities and appropriate stakeholders. However, as a minimum, the platform will enable supply staff to register themselves for work and enable schools to book supply teachers directly online.

Whilst much of the detail of how the platform will work in practice will depend on the successful provider and the system they have in place, supply teachers will be able to work across local authorities and be able to work via agencies should they choose to do so. This system will not employ supply teachers directly itself; it will be a user-maintained system that will be supported by all organisations that use it. So, to ensure that supply teachers can access the statutory terms, including the teachers' pension scheme, the platform must link to a public sector provider. Discussions are ongoing with the Welsh Local Government Association on arrangements to support the pay and pensions element of the platform, and I anticipate that this important element of the work will be agreed in the coming weeks.

Alongside the platform, the NPS framework will continue to be available for schools, supply staff and local authorities. I am conscious of the work that has been undertaken to make the improvements that the framework brought about. I've given full consideration to how the current arrangements can be strengthened ahead of the next agreement, which will commence from September 2023, alongside the booking platform. The new framework will include the same requirements as the current agreement. In addition, agencies will be asked to demonstrate how they can improve their professional learning offer, and to incorporate the national professional learning entitlement into their employment terms.

All employment agencies are regulated by the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate. Although the framework is not statutory, as part of the new agreement the inspectorate will consider some aspects of the framework terms when inspecting framework agencies, and the findings shared with the Welsh Government. Agencies will also be required to partner with JobsAware and display their logo on payslips to promote safe and fair working practices and signpost their workers to employment guidance. These measures aim to improve compliance in those areas that are not within the Welsh Government's remit and ensure that agency workers are able to access employment guidance and support.

The final area of work is key to these reforms and will ensure that the fair work aspect of the commitments has been fully considered. Responsibility for teachers' pay and conditions was devolved in 2018, which provided the opportunity to consider whether different pay, terms and conditions could apply to the various roles and responsibilities of teachers and supply teachers within the system. As the independent Welsh pay review body makes recommendations to Welsh Ministers on teachers' pay and conditions, it has been asked to include this important aspect as part of its wider strategic review taking place this year. The report and recommendations from the IWPRB will be considered in full, and any changes introduced to the statutory terms and conditions for the academic year 2023-24.

Dirprwy Lywydd, this is a complex area that must balance the needs of all within the school system, including learners and the wider school workforce. Above all, I am mindful that any new supply employment model must deliver for supply teachers, whilst being sustainable for schools to use and not add to the workload of school staff. I hope that the work I have outlined provides reassurance to those undertaking supply roles of the commitment to change in this area. The feedback from our key stakeholders has been invaluable in understanding the scale of the reforms required, and of the need to make improvements across a range of areas to ensure that a new employment model is fit for purpose. Whilst there is still work to do, I am confident that these measures will result in a sustainable improvement across the education system as a whole.

Minister, thank you for your statement today. It's been very clear for a long time now that there is an urgent need to change and reform the supply teaching model. More than £250 million has been paid to agencies for supply teachers by Welsh councils since 2016. Supply teaching demand, of course, was exacerbated by the pandemic, but even in 2015, local authority supply teacher costs in Wales exceeded £130 million. So, whilst we welcome any improvements to fair work and support for supply teachers that you've outlined in the statement today, this statement doesn't even touch the sides when it comes to allaying the concerns raised by the then Welsh Assembly report back in 2016 about the model, where it was made very clear that major reform is needed. And it is; it is complex and it is clear that no one size fits all. 

So, Minister, what is it that you're proposing today that is so radically different to previous changes, besides, of course, a new booking system for only a proportion of the supply teachers, and asking agencies to do things that aren't statutory? And even with the new booking system that you've proposed, the same safeguarding concerns remain. There will be this local authority booking system and outside agencies still. So, the problem highlighted in 2006 will still remain. Where does the buck stop and responsibility fall—agencies or local government—as, fundamentally, Minister, nothing has changed? You still can't control those outside agencies. 

And, also, Minister, supply teachers of course play a vital role, and, of course, we want to join you today in thanking them for what they do. Often, being a supply teacher is a lifestyle choice, but due to the massive differences in pay, we're now seeing a big shift of full-time teachers going over to supply teaching due to having to work less and being paid more. So, how does what you've announced today address this? Thank you. 

Well, I thank the Member for the questions. I'm not sure what the Member has as a positive alternative to suggest to the matters that I outlined. If she has a practical, positive proposal to make, in this, or indeed any other area of education policy, I'm very interested in hearing it. But we exchange in these question sessions, and in debates, routinely, and I never hear a positive alternative to what the Government is bringing forward. 

I think I outlined in my statement the areas where we are working, and it is a complex area. And there are limitations, as I'm sure the Member will appreciate, on a devolved Government's ability to move freely in an area that is often constrained in the context of employment terms and conditions. She will also know that agency law itself is not devolved. And, so, there are constraints that come with that, which she may not fully appreciate in the context of her particular question. I would like us to be in a position where the devolution settlement allowed us as a Government a wider range of options. However, I think the three-pronged approach, which we've been working together with Plaid Cymru on, which I've outlined in my statement, goes to the heart of the challenges that supply teachers tell us that they face within the limitations of the devolution settlement that we have. 

Crucially, the booking platform enables there to be a public sector employment option for supply teachers. That's what we certainly want to see, and I know that's what Plaid Cymru also wants to see. I'm not sure if that is what the Member wants to see as a Conservative. We are at a point today where we can outline the principles that underpin that. So, it allows teachers to be employed in schools by local authorities, and to do that in a flexible way, which supply teachers often want to have. So, it recognises that there are particular dimensions to the employment patterns of supply teachers that mean that you need a flexible way of doing this. 

My hope, my ambition—and, I think, that of Plaid Cymru as well, but perhaps Heledd Fychan may speak to this—is that we have a situation where the booking platform is the appealing alternative to working through the agency route, and that becomes the model that is then prevalent across Wales. I think that is absolutely possible in what we're planning today, what we're announcing today. I want to see a position where the mix of the three alternative approaches, or three complementary approaches, actually, that are outlined in the statement, lead us to that position where supply teachers have a better deal, the opportunity of direct employment through a public sector employer, and then access to the greater securities and better terms and conditions that that brings. 

Thank you to the Minister, and also thank you to the designated Member—thank you, both, for your work on this. I’d also like to echo the Minister’s thanks to the supply teachers, who do such important work. We’ve seen, as you mentioned, during COVID, of course, the ongoing challenges related to that, how crucial they’ve been in ensuring that children and young people continue to receive education. And, very often, they are exceptionally experienced people—many are retired and return to schools and have great experience that they can draw on, and enhance the experiences of our children and young people.

I’m very pleased that, through the co-operation agreement, we are agreed that we shouldn’t support services for private profit, and of course we’re not going that far today, but certainly, this is an important step towards that. Because, certainly, we have seen that private agencies can make great profit at the expense of fair pay and conditions, and I welcome that we’re addressing that.

We’ve already discussed how people will be made aware of this system, and how we will encourage. And my question was in terms of marketing and promotion. How will we ensure that people are aware of this development? Because, unfortunately, not everyone watches Senedd.tv, and they don’t always read every statement made—I know that that will be a huge disappointment to us all. [Laughter.] But in terms of ensuring that those who need to know will know about this system, what communication will there be in order to ensure that this new option, this new platform is available to them, rather than staying with agencies? And how will we then encourage them, in terms of supply teachers and support staff, that they can be reassured that they’re not going to miss out on work and that this system will mean that those opportunities will be available to them and they don’t lose out on work?

I note from the statement too that that there are many things that remain to be worked out. You mentioned the work with the WLGA, and so on. Certainly, it’s crucial that the new platform is linked with public sector providers, in terms of terms and pensions, and so on. So, clearly, I welcome these steps, I look forward to having further information, and I also appreciate the fact that you’ve outlined a timetable for the review in looking at the pay and conditions of supply teachers. So, yes, I welcome it, but in terms of promotion and marketing, can you give us some clarity on that? Thank you.

That point is fair enough. What we’re stating here today is a milestone on this journey. Next year, we will see the advice from the new body on the framework reforms and the launch in September. We have a year, next year, when we hope to see progress happening very rapidly. And I hope that, in the context—. Once the body that implements the platform has been established, we have an opportunity then to ensure that there is a promotion campaign that will accompany that, to ensure that the interests of being on the platform are obvious. And a very important element that the Member mentioned, namely that we can give assurance that it won’t put any supply teacher at a disadvantage. What I want to see, and what you want to see as well, is that this becomes an option that is convenient for everyone to use—so, it will be attractive and efficient, and everyone understands what it does. And that’s the way, I think, that we will be able to give assurance to the teachers, but also a system that works for schools and local authorities as well. But I think that the promotional aspect is very important, and when it comes to the period of appointing the body, we will want to collaborate with you on that.

I thank the Minister.

Item 5 today is a statement by the Deputy Minister for Climate Change on bus reform. I call on the Deputy Minister, Lee Waters.

Diolch, Dirprwy Llywydd. Earlier this year, we published a White Paper, setting out our plans to bring bus services in Wales back under public control. Its title captured our ambition: 'One Network, One Timetable, One Ticket’. And to meet the urgent challenge of climate change, we need more people using sustainable forms of transport. To do that, we need to make bus, rail and active travel the most convenient and most attractive ways to make everyday journeys. In short, we need to make the right thing to do the easiest thing to do, because people will do what is easiest, and we've spent some 70 years making car travel the easiest and most convenient way of getting around, whilst public transport has been left to wither. This has been particularly acute in the case of bus use since privatisation in the early 1980s. The Tories said that this would bring lower fares, better services and higher passenger numbers, but the market has failed. From 1987 to 2019, bus journeys in Wales instead reduced by a third, whilst car usage has increased by 45 per cent since 1993. 

So, as we look at the stark science of climate change, and as we reflect on the advice of the UK Committee on Climate Change, the move to electric cars is not enough. We need to see fewer car trips and a shift of travel modes from car to public transport. To reach net zero, we must acknowledge the centrality of the bus system. Buses already carry three quarters of public transport journeys in Wales, so we need to pay much more attention to the bus system if we are to achieve our legally binding targets. We have to face up to the fact that the commercial, fragmented and privatised bus system that we currently have makes it impossible to achieve our ambition of making buses the easiest and most attractive way to make everyday journeys. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm pleased that the people responding to our consultation on the White Paper agreed with us. We've published today the summary of responses to that consultation, which shows that 96 per cent of respondents agreed that we need to change how we deliver bus services to meet people's needs and respond to the climate emergency. We have a lot of bus operators in Wales doing their best to keep services running, especially those small operators working to make sure that their communities stay connected. However, they're working in a system designed to treat bus journeys as a commodity rather than a public service. Despite relying on hundreds of millions of pounds of public funding in Wales, private operators can still choose which services they want to run, leaving local authorities to pick up the bill for providing services to more rural and less profitable locations. Even with this support, across the UK, bus fares have risen by 403 per cent since 1987, compared to just 163 per cent for driving costs.

We’re proposing instead to put people before profit and bring the planning and securing of bus services back under public control. This means that we can work with communities to design the best bus network we can within the funding available and planning services to improve coverage rather than competing over or cherry-picking the most profitable areas. It means that we can co-ordinate services, so that people can make their connections with trains or with other buses smoothly and easily to get to where they need to go, with all the passenger information they need freely available in one place. And it means that we can simplify ticketing, offering simple area-wide fares, so that people don’t have to navigate tickets from different operators, and don’t end up paying over the odds for tickets on routes that the operator considers marginal. As we have put in our White Paper, it means that we can deliver 'one network, one timetable, one ticket'.

To deliver this in practice, we’re proposing a franchising model. This will need close working relationships with local authorities and regions across Wales to design our bus network and to let contracts to deliver those services. It allows us to create a guiding mind for the bus system in Wales, working in the public interest to determine when and where services run, and how much they cost to use. People agreed with this model in our consultation. Two thirds of people agreed with the need for franchising to improve bus services, and over three quarters agreed with the model that we’re proposing to introduce.

There's still a lot of work to do and we are working with local authorities on their comments in the consultation responses to make sure that we build a system that lets the whole public sector come together and deliver the bus services we need. We’re working with Transport for Wales and the bus industry so that we can bring them with us to create attractive contract opportunities for all our bus operators, including the many smaller operators we rely on in Wales. We also want to allow more publicly owned municipal bus operators into the mix, a move that was supported by over 80 per cent of people who responded to our consultation. And legislation can only take us so far, Dirprwy Lywydd. There will still be difficult decisions to make about investing funding in services, improving infrastructure and making fares affordable so buses truly are a realistic alternative to the car. But legislation to change how we deliver bus services will be a vital first step on that journey. The response to our consultation has been emphatic that this change is necessary, and has given clear support for treating buses as a public service again in Wales.

We have the opportunity, in this Senedd, to change course to tackle transport poverty, to build a public transport system capable of meeting our climate targets. And we'll keep working with our partners to make this a reality, and I look forward to debating legislation that can set us on that path in this Senedd. Diolch.

I thank the Deputy Minister for his statement today, and I'd like to start off by saying that I do believe that it's important to reverse the decline in bus services across Wales. It's fact that the number of bus journeys in Wales has fallen from 100 million a year in 2016-17 to 89 million in 2019-20. With almost 25 per cent of people in Wales not having access to a car or van, this decline needs to be reversed to encourage commuters out of their cars, combat the isolation and loneliness of people, many of whom are elderly and vulnerable, who do not have a bus service, and also to ultimately fight climate change. I accept state intervention in the market through franchising has a role to play if it improves the quality and number of bus services across Wales.

So, Deputy Minister, do you agree with me that, going forward, any new model for the delivery of bus services needs to be affordable, sustainable and deliverable? As such, do you also agree there needs to be certainty about long-term financial support, after years of underfunding of buses in Wales? And how will you ensure that unprofitable but socially desirable services will, indeed, be retained? Will bus franchise contracts, for example, contain clauses to ensure that vital facilities, such as hospitals, are served by bus routes as a priority, which many of my colleagues across this Chamber have said time and time again? How will your proposals, going forward, help those people in remote and rural areas of Wales who have an infrequent or non-existent bus service?

If the new model is to work, it will require greater co-ordination between operators' timetables to ensure seamless journey times to make valuable connections. I'd like to know how will you ensure this is achieved. And could you update the Senedd, moving forward, on progress delivering one of my passions, the all-Wales travel card, to assist passengers to move from one part of Wales to another with ease and in a seamless manner? Previously, you've mentioned the creation of a supervisory board, to include a bus operator representative, to co-ordinate the regional bus networks devised by a corporate joint committee. Who will this board be accountable to? Who will scrutinise its actions? And how will it ensure consistent good service standards are, indeed, maintained going forward?

Finally, Deputy Minister, moving people out of their cars and on to buses obviously benefits the environment. If this new model works, it will increase the number of buses on our roads. So, do you intend to maximise the benefit to the environment by supporting the use of electric buses by operators bidding for the franchise? These are all invaluable questions, Deputy Minister. We, alongside the public, would like to have those answers sooner rather than later. Thank you.    

Thank you for those questions. There are many of them, and I'll do my best to answer them, but I warmly welcome Natasha Asghar's statement that she accepts the role of franchising and asks how we make it affordable, sustainable and deliverable, and this, I think, is at the crux of it, really. I think we need to decouple how do you make the system better and then the question of how do we grow the system and how do we run services, and I think those are two related but separate questions. And the latter will depend upon the funding that is available, and I must tell Members that, when they see the budget for next year, we are really struggling to be able to deliver our public transport ambitions, because of the, in effect, significant cut to our budget, and that is a real constraint for us. So, I think the system will improve the amount of money we already spend by making it more strategic and less fragmented, but the question of how we scale that in time will depend on the budget and the priority that this Senedd is willing to put on public transport. The question was about how we retain unprofitable but socially necessary routes, and that is a critical part of the need for this model. Because what this model allows is us to plan on a regional basis, or an area basis. It's to be decided what the footprint is. It could be carved up into smaller units. It could be done on a corporate joint committee basis. That's to be determined. But within that we will be able to cross-subside routes from the commercially profitable ones, and put the profit into less profitable routes, but socially necessary ones, as Natasha Asghar asks. So, I think that is the core of this approach. That's why this approach is so important, because it allows us to do that, whereas currently it is illegal do that, and that's one of the perversities of the privatised system we live with.

Likewise, how do we link to hospitals and key public services? The exercise that TfW is going through now with local authorities—started already in Ynys Môn and Gwynedd and working through—is to sit down with their local experts and map where the route networks should go, what are the key trip generators they should link to, and make sure those routes are then part of the franchising tendering arrangements. So, it allows us to take a strategic, whole-area approach, again, unlike the current system where, for example, the Grange hospital in Cwmbran is very poorly served by bus routes. So, that wouldn't happen under this system. Similarly, in rural areas, and I've been having a series of meetings with local authorities from rural areas on what we can do together to make modal shift practical and realistic in rural areas, and there are a number of things that we've identified we can do. But having regular bus services—. Because, again, this is matter of choice. There are parts of rural Germany where they have a bus service every hour to every village. Now, that's doable, and we could do that in Wales, if that was the priority we set and if we put aside funding for that. In Germany they raise a regional tax on businesses to pay for that, for example. So, there's a debate to be had about how we do it, but it certainly can be done.

In terms of the all-Wales travel card, I completely agree. That is an aspiration we share, and this will allow that to happen. The interoperability of tickets between different modes of transport in different parts of Wales is something very much we'll be able to do under the legislation.

Who will the board, the supervisory board, be accountable to? Well, it'll combine different elements. So, we absolutely want to have local accountability retained. So, local councils will still be accountable to their voters and to their ward members for the things that local councils are best in charge of—so, local bus stops, routes and so on. At the regional level we'll have the CJC structure, which has its own accountability routes, and then, of course, the Welsh Government will continue to be accountable to the Senedd.

And electric buses, finally, are absolutely essential for the modal shift agenda, as well as meeting our carbon targets, where we have targets to reduce the 50 per cent most polluting vehicles by the end of decade. And I think that is going to be key to the franchising system and the conditions we set for awarding the contracts.

Thank you, Minister. Bus services are an essential means of travel for people all over Wales, but the reason that we're discussing this today, evidently, is the need to reform the system. Fewer and fewer people are opting to use bus services, which is putting the system under strain. We've heard already this afternoon many of the reasons why people are less likely to use buses—changes in behaviour, such as online shopping; too many cars on the roads; COVID; and many other factors—but, as you've set out, Deputy Minister, buses serve an entirely essential role. They offer an alternative way of travelling for people who don't own a car, but they are also so much better for the environment. As it stands, around 14 per cent of Wales's carbon emissions stem from transport. I'm sure you will be very aware of these figures, so we really do need to see a drastic change here. And I welcome the fact that a drastic change is being promoted here.

What I want to know from the Minister is—. You've said a lot in terms of your vision for the electrification of buses across Wales. You said that you want to do the right thing and the easiest thing. Is that the way that you would summarise your vision for this system, particularly, perhaps, in a way that people would understand and support, to try to get people to buy into the need for change?

Another thing that needs to be addressed is transport poverty. Transport for Wales has found that 13 per cent of households in Wales are households that don't have access to a car, and that 25 per cent of people who use buses are living with a disability or a long-term health condition. Providing access to public transport for people facing those kinds of difficulties is vital.

Minister, would you be able to outline how any reforms would improve the affordability of buses and also how accessible they are? I have previously raised concerns about improving how safe women feel, not only when using public transport, but also when getting to the bus or the train, and this is especially the case at night. I'd welcome some comments from you in that.

And finally, the transport system in Wales is not sufficiently interconnected. This has already been raised this afternoon; we all know about that. Too often, walking and cycling routes, and essential services such as schools and hospitals, as you discussed with Natasha Asghar, are not sufficiently connected to the transport system. This all needs to work around the reality of people's lives. So, Minister, what are you going to do to deal with not only that but to ensure that we can try to have behavioural change to accompany the structural changes, because they need to go hand in hand? I know that that is one of the biggest challenges that you will face. Thank you.

Well, thank you for that series of well-targeted questions. So, as I say, we need to make bus use normal again. It used to be normal. It's stopped becoming normal. Over half of people never use a bus. It is by definition something that lots of people have no experience of, and that is critical to change if we want to meet our climate change targets, because, without tackling transport, which is some 17 per cent of our emissions, we're not going to be able to reach net zero. So, how do we get people back? We need a turn-up-and-go system. We need to make them affordable and attractive. We need to make them feel safe. And we need to connect up to places where people want to go. This is all doable. In fact, it is perfectly normal in many European countries. It's just become abnormal here, because we've let the privatised system put the interests of the commercial operator first. That is no criticism of them; that's how the system was set up. They're working within the system. But when you ask about not being interconnected and not linking up to key services, well, the system is not designed to do that. In fact, there's a disincentive to do that, because many bus operators will say that they don't want to link up to the nearest train station, because that then creates competition to the bus route from the train and they would lose customers. So, they sometimes will avoid a bus stop near a train station, because that is against their commercial interest. Now, that is clearly not what we want to see. So, having a strategic system that is linked up is a key part of the appeal of the franchising model, and essential for achieving our vision for buses. 

And your point on transport poverty was very well made. Buses are an essential lifeline. TfW surveys suggest that some 80 per cent of bus passengers don't have an alternative to the car, so we need to see this not just as a climate investment but as a social justice investment, and it's particularly acute for those on lower incomes who rely on buses for essential journeys to work and so on. And the issue of fares you raise is critical to that. We have an ambition to lower fares, and we've been doing a lot of work behind the scenes over the last year to look at modelling of different price points and what modal shift that would bring. It's a great frustration to us that the financial settlement we've got makes it very difficult to advance that agenda in the short term, but I'm clear that we do need to do that if we're going to achieve our modal shift targets and if we're going to make the potential of this legislation. The legislation is ultimately just a framework. It's an essential framework, but it is not sufficient; it is simply necessary. And we do have to, all of us, collectively address—[Inaudible.]

Deputy Minister, we've lost your sound at the moment.

Forgive me. Are you having difficulty hearing me?

Can you just simply say a few words to see if we can hear you again?

No. I'm still not hearing him. Can we just suspend for a couple of minutes—

Sorry, can you hear me now?

We can hear you now, yes. That's better. 

I apologise. 

Do you want to continue from, probably, about two minutes ago?

Yes, I obviously don't know at which point you lost me, and I'm not going to set a test to see who was paying attention, because I'd be disappointed with the result, I'm sure. [Laughter.]

So, I mentioned the point of transport poverty—I'm not sure if that was recorded—which is critical. The issue of women's safety, which Delyth Jewell mentioned, is a really important point too, and there is work going on on a collaborative project with Gender+ Bus Wales, to tackle harassment and violence against women and girls in public transport. But, the other thing I'd say about safety and perceptions of safety is there's safety in numbers. The more people we get using public transport, the safer it becomes and the safer it feels. So, this whole agenda is interconnected, and that's where the final point on behaviour change is so important, because it's not good enough just to provide the services, we have to nudge people who have fallen out of the habit of using buses to get back onto buses again.

I welcome that the Welsh Government's focus remains on sustainable public transport, despite significant real-terms funding cuts from the UK Government. The title of my petition to the Senedd three years ago was, 'Buses for people not profit', and as you said, it's a real social justice issue, ensuring that no-one is left behind, and that's the difference a Welsh Labour Government makes here. I remember using European funding for the procurement of rural buses and services, and that's no more, and councils may look at withdrawing bus subsidies to fill the funding gap. Deputy Minister, how will the cuts impact on this plan you've presented here today, and would you consider looking at bulk fleet procurement, working in partnership with operators as one solution? Another would be providing some public transport as social value through the procurement of maybe a highway resurfacing contract through local authorities and also possibly active travel contracts, and then that could be used for medical appointments and access to free swimming through schools, where I know transport has been raised as an issue—accessing swimming. Thank you. 

Well, thank you to Carolyn Thomas for her continued championing of buses. It has been a neglected policy issue for too long, and not seen as fashionable, and I think it's time we changed that, and she's doing great work leading the cross-party group on public transport to that end. The question of how the cuts will impact is a very relevant and current one. I would say that what we're talking about in the White Paper and the Bill is about how we organise the system, and that system then can be flexed and it can be scaled. So, obviously, the more money we put into it, the better the services we're able to offer. But even if you simply put in what we're putting in now, we would still get a better, more planned, more joined-up, more coherent and fairer system. So, I think the argument for the system in the White Paper stands on its own merits, the question for public funding for buses is an allied one. And, as I said, the budget for next year is going to be very challenging for us to be able to sustain services, let alone expand them. And we'll be going through that when we publish the budget and we go through scrutiny. I and many others are concerned about that, but we will do our very best to preserve a network, as we have done over the last few years, through COVID, to allow that to be expanded when we have a more enlightened Government in Westminster.

In terms of the bulk fleet procurement point, it's a very interesting one. I'm quite concerned about the impact on SMEs. We know, in parts of rural Wales, that the small family bus operator has been key to the public transport ecosystem. That business model is coming under significant strain. Many operators are failing, local authorities are struggling to procure providers for key services. So, I think we are going to need to look creatively at how we fill that gap. The White Paper talks about an operator of last resort, just as we have currently on the trains, and the case for something equivalent on the buses. And one way we could de-risk small family businesses being able to participate could be the central procurement of the buses themselves, which we could then lease to an operator who could run the service for a fee. I think that's the sort of thing that we need to work through with local government and with the sector to understand the practicalities of that. But, Carolyn Thomas identifies a really important point.

I really welcome this statement, and again setting out the vision of where this Welsh Government wants to go, but would he agree with me that one of the acid tests of this will be whether we, here in the Senedd, support the prioritisation of public transport and also of active travel in this? And there will be hard choices to be made on this, because that means squeezing space on the roads for bus lanes, for faster buses, and it means deprioritising other areas. But would he also agree with me that in terms of this one network—one timetable, one ticket, one network—if that network is going to be the main veins, these arteries of bus transport—going, for example, in my area, up and down the valleys connecting with Bridgend, connecting with the Vale, connecting on to Cardiff—we also need those capillaries to be reached as well, and that will require either community transport or Fflecsi bus and so on? If there's one timetable, that needs to be at the times that all these communities need for work, for playing, for socialising and for hospitals and so on. And one ticket: I'm glad to hear you're continuing with the work looking at how we make it really affordable, and for me, affordable needs to be cheap as chips. That price point needs to make it desirable to get onto a bus instead of investing into the sunk costs of another second car.

Well, I completely agree that flexibility is the key here, and as we do the work with TfW and the local authorities identifying where an optimum bus network goes, there will be a place for standard scheduled services and there will be a place for complementary, flexible, demand-responsive services. As Huw Irranca knows, we've been trialling the Fflecsi service across different parts of Wales and we've now completed the pilot in Newport. I took part in a journey in Llanberis last week on the Sherpa service, which also linked in to the local Fflecsi service, which has been hugely successful in Snowdonia, not only helping to serve the visitor economy in the summer, but then using that success to be able to fund a regular service for locals through the winter months.

Now, that'll be horses for courses of where that best fits in. What we found in Newport is the provision of a Fflecsi service has generated new customers, new demand, which in turn has shown that there is in fact viability for a fixed scheduled route, rather than a Fflecsi route. So, I think we need to be flexible—dare I say it—in the way that we apply this model, but it definitely has a very important part to play. And I'd agree with him entirely on his last vision: this is about giving people a genuine alternative to the car.

In your response, Minister, to my colleague Natasha Asghar, you outlined that the Welsh Government had identified ways in which we could address rural public transport. As you're well aware, rural public transport in my area is a massive issue, and if you could please give a bit more detail about the areas that you said you've identified, I'd be very grateful. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

Certainly, and I'd be very happy to brief Members and encourage Members to take part in a round-table themselves with me on any ideas they have to help shape our thinking. Essentially, this is part of the Wales transport strategy. We set out some initial thoughts, looking at other examples in other parts of the UK and on the continent of how rural areas addressed the need for sustainable transport, and, in fact, we've asked the Burns commission in its work on north Wales to specifically look at solutions for rural areas. They'll be looking at it in the context of north Wales, of course, but they will have applicability to other rural parts of Wales. And with the exception of parts of Cardiff, every local authority in Wales has rural areas, so this is not a mid Wales agenda; this is for the whole of Wales, and it's a really important one. Sustainable transport absolutely is achievable in rural areas, but it takes a slightly different approach to urban areas. So, for example, you could have Fflecsi buses, but you could also have car sharing, you could have car clubs, you could have electric bikes alongside safe infrastructure away from traffic. There is a whole range of different schemes that have been tried and shown successful, so that's the work we're doing at the moment is to try and flesh that out, and I'd be very keen to engage with Members for them to feed in to help us shape that together.

And finally, John Griffiths.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for your statement, Minister. As we've heard, it is a social justice issue to make bus travel more affordable and more available here in Wales, and the relative affordability of bus travel versus car has been going in the wrong direction. We have various initiatives around free bus travel, Minister—some Welsh Government schemes, some local authority schemes—and I just wonder whether you have any plans to build on that with more universal free bus travel, perhaps, in defined geographical areas. It's something we're very interested in in Newport, doing further work on that in the wake of the Burns committee recommendation.

I've been very encouraged by the work in Newport, in Swansea and in Cardiff on offering free bus travel at certain periods, and it's worked. We now have data to show that it is successful and there is plenty of international evidence, as well, from Dunkirk to many cities around the world where free bus travel is effective. The reality, though, at the moment, given our financial settlement, is that this is not something that we are able to draw upon. As I mentioned, we've been doing a lot of work, we have a manifesto and programme for government commitment to look at fairer fares, and we've been doing considerable work, detailed modelling options to take that forward, and the Cabinet is very keen to pursue that. But when our budget is falling, in effect, by £3 billion next year, very frustratingly, that is not something that we're going to be likely to be able to afford in the short term.

I thank the Deputy Minister.

Item 6: the Non-Domestic Rating (Persons Required to Supply Information and Service of Notices) (Wales) Regulations 2022, and I call on the Minister for Finance and Local Government to move the motion. Rebecca Evans.

Thank you. I move the motion to approve the Non-Domestic Rating (Persons Required to Supply Information and Service of Notices) (Wales) Regulations 2022. The regulations define third parties that may be required by local authorities to supply information about a non-domestic property and the way in which a related notice may be served. This will assist local authorities in carrying out their non-domestic rates billings functions. The regulations ensure that relevant information for calculating non-domestic rates liability can be obtained in scenarios where the ratepayer is not engaging with a local authority.

I'm very grateful to the Legislation, Justice and Constitution committee for its consideration of the regulations. No issues have been raised. I therefore ask Members to approve the regulations today.

Minister, I have no other speakers. Do you wish to say anything else, or do we move to the vote?

Happy to move to the vote.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? I've heard no objection. The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Before we move to the Stage 3 debate on the Environmental Protection (Single-use Plastic Products) (Wales) Bill, I will suspend proceedings for 10 minutes in accordance with Standing Order 12.18. The bell will be rung five minutes before reconvening.

Will Members please remind themselves to be here on time for the start of the proceedings?

We are ready to reconvene. We will spend the rest of the meeting discussing Stage 3 proceedings of the Environmental Protection (Single-use Plastic Products) (Wales) Bill.

The first group of amendments today relates to the meaning of single-use plastic products and prohibited single-use plastic products. Amendments 39 and 40, tabled in the name of Delyth Jewell, are identical to amendments 11 and 12 tabled in the name of Janet Finch-Saunders. The amendments for both Members were tabled on the same afternoon, and although identical they were admissible at the point of tabling. However, it wouldn't be admissible to consider and vote on identical propositions twice; therefore, I have decided not to select amendments 39 and 40 tabled by Delyth Jewell, as they were tabled after the amendments tabled by Janet Finch-Saunders. 

We will, therefore, move on. The lead amendment in the group is amendment 11, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group.

Thank you. Diolch, Llywydd. What a great day, actually, to be working on legislation coming through this place. I think we've all been wanting this to come forward, and it's actually been quite good to work with the Minister in terms of some of the amendments that I'm putting forward. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Beth Taylor, a researcher working here, who has helped me greatly with this, and I thank all the clerks of the committee and everybody else who's worked to ensure that this Bill can come forward. So, thank you, Llywydd. As you said, I'll be speaking to amendments 11, 39, 12, 40, 13, 14 and 1.

I've tabled amendment 11 to bring the Bill's definition of 'single-use' in line with that of the UK and Scottish Governments' respective legislation. This amendment will insert the word 'conceived' in the definition alongside 'designed' and 'manufactured', which have already been placed in the definition. I did originally table this during Stage 2. However, I disagree with the Minister's response, and so I will reiterate what I said during Stage 2. Stakeholders have made it inherently clear that definitions need to be consistent with legislation that already exists in Great Britain. Otherwise, we are simply risking confusion and misinterpretation. In Stage 2, the Minister stated the practical effect would be delivered more effectively using the definition they have chosen rather than using consistent definitions with existing legislation. I would be grateful if the Minister could explain this further and explain how a consistent definition would be detrimental to the practical effect of the Bill. What in the Wales context makes a different definition necessary?

Amendment 12, which I tabled, seeks to do the same as amendment 11. I would just like to thank Delyth for tabling the same amendments. As they say, great minds think alike. I won't speak on her behalf.

Amendment 13 would change the definition of 'plastic' to that used by the European Union's single-use plastic directive. Again, consistent definitions are very important. This definition of 'plastic' is used by the UK Government in their legislation banning plastic straws, cotton buds and stirrers. It is also used by the Scottish Government in their legislation banning single-use plastic products, so I will ask the same question to the Minister—if she could explain why using different definitions is better for Wales. Is this not simply risking unnecessary misinterpretation?

I also tabled amendment 14, which I tabled as a result of amendment 13. This amendment would simply amend subsection (5) to remove reference to points (a) and (b) due to the changing to the definition of 'plastic'. I won't speak to amendments 39 and 40 as I have already been told that the Llywydd won't bring these forward to be tabled. However, to be clear, these amendments are the same as amendment 11 and 12.

Amendment 1, which was tabled by the Minister, simplifies section 2(1)(b) to address a possible ambiguity in interpretation that would be inconsistent with the policy. It seeks to omit provisions that no longer fully correspond with the provisions in the Schedule and to remove any doubt about the scope of the power of Welsh Ministers under section 3. Thank you. Diolch. 

It's an existential quandary—I want to speak to amendments that haven't been selected, so I'll speak to amendments 11 and 12, which, as has been rehearsed, were identical in scope. Janet, we were in a race and we didn't realise that we were in that race, but well done for tabling them just before I did. I won't repeat again the arguments on these at length. My intention with these amendments was the same—to ensure that 'single-use' covers all possible scenarios, and that the word 'conceived' would appear alongside 'designed' and 'manufactured'. I hope very much that the Senedd will support these amendments. Diolch. 

Minister.

Diolch, Llywydd. Turning first to amendments 11 and 12, tabled by Janet Finch-Saunders, both amendments aim to achieve the same goal, namely to align the definition of 'single-use' to that applied elsewhere, such as in Scotland. The amendments propose the addition of 'conceived' to the terms 'designed' and 'manufactured' currently in the Bill. We discussed these amendments in committee at Stage 2. Prior to this, the key definitions within the Bill were debated at the Climate Change, Environment and Infrastructure Committee's evidence session, where Members felt that these should reflect, word for word, those used in the EU's single-use plastics directive.

I've carefully considered the amendments and tested them against the Bill as drafted. I can assure the Senedd that we are confident that the intended practical effect is delivered more effectively, using the definitions that we have developed in the Welsh context. The drafting is not identical, as we have sought to clarify text or removed wording that we consider to be unnecessary. This is in accordance with our drafting practice. For the reasons outlined and outlined in committee, I do not support these amendments.

Turning to amendment 13, also proposed by Janet Finch-Saunders, this seeks to amend the definition of plastic by referencing the EU's registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals regulations, rather than including a description on the face of the Bill. Again, this is an amendment that was considered at Stage 2. As I stated then, the proposed change would not be in line with best drafting practice, or with our aim to make legislation more accessible. I maintain that the definition in the Bill is sufficient and worded to provide certainty and clarity. Amendment 14, which is another tabled by Janet Finch-Saunders, is consequential to the amendment, as she's just said. I therefore oppose amendments 13 and 14.

Amendment 1 was tabled by the Government. The purpose of the amendment is to simplify section 2(1)(b) of the Bill. It intends to address a possible ambiguity in interpretation that would be inconsistent with the policy. The amendment will omit provisions that no longer fully correspond with the provisions in the Schedule. Furthermore, the proposed change removes any possible doubt about the nature and scope of the power of the Welsh Ministers under section 3 to amend or add to the exemptions in the Schedule. The amendment is needed to ensure that the prohibition set out in section 2 accurately reflects the policy intention. It makes the Bill more straightforward and accessible, which corresponds to our wider aims when making legislation in Wales. I therefore ask Members to support and vote for this amendment. Diolch. 

Janet Finch-Saunders to reply. 

Thank you, Minister. As I've plainly said earlier, stakeholders that we've engaged with have said themselves that definitions need to be consistent with other UK legislation, and therefore I stand very firm on moving those amendments. 

The question is that amendment 11 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore move to a vote. The first vote therefore is on amendment 11. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 25, no abstentions, 28 against, and therefore amendment 11 is not agreed. 

Amendment 39 has not been selected. Janet Finch-Saunders, amendment 12.

Is it being moved?

I move.

The question is that amendment 12 be agreed. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection to amendment 12. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 12. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against, and therefore amendment 12 is not agreed. 

Amendment 40 has not been selected. Amendment 13. 

Janet Finch-Saunders, is it being moved? 

I move. 

The question is that amendment 13 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 13. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore, amendment 13 is not agreed.

Amendment 14, Janet Finch-Saunders.

I move.

The question is that amendment 14 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 14. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore, amendment 14 is not agreed.

The next group of amendments relates to electronic cigarettes. The lead amendment in the group is amendment 6, and I call on Rhys ab Owen to move and speak to the amendment. Rhys ab Owen.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd, and I'd like to move amendments 6 and 10 on e-cigarettes. And I'd like also to thank constituents for raising this particular issue with me.

It appears that this is an emerging litter trend in single-use vapes, which are not only made out of plastic, but also contain batteries with evaluative harmful chemicals and even pose a fire risk. Each disposable vape comes with its own packaging. There's a box, there's a sealable foil, a vacuum-pack box, which is non-recyclable, and usually, a couple of small plastic stoppers attached to the vape itself that you detach before you use. All of these, then, after a single use, are discarded.

My amendments address a particular concern around vaping devices and e-cigarettes, because the discarded devices all contain a lithium battery, which could be recycled. Lithium is essential for any shift to net zero, so it's completely wrong that these batteries are ending up in landfill. I'm grateful for information that I've received from Keep Wales Tidy, who've started to collect data on vaping litter on our streets. They've heard from a number of Welsh local authorities over the past year, who have all highlighted this as an emerging and growing issue. More specifically, Keep Wales Tidy are concerned about the rise of single-use vapes, which are purposely designed for only one use and then discarded. An increase of these items appears to be creating a new litter trend that correlates with consumer behaviours.

In addition, and probably not relevant here, but there is a public health issue here. Recent evidence shows that single-use vapes are increasingly being used by children between the ages of 11 and 17, and they are sold not in concealed units, like tobacco, but often presented in brightly coloured cabinets. Vaping litter is normally found in the same areas where you might expect to find smoking litter, suggesting that there is some similarity in the behaviours of smokers and vapers, due to the necessity of having to go outside or to designated areas. Like cigarettes, they contain chemicals that are harmful to our soils, our waterways, our wildlife, but also contain batteries, which have an additional toxic mix of chemicals that can be released if the casing is damaged or left to deteriorate. They can even be a potential fire hazard in hot temperatures.

Surveys carried out earlier this year found that they were present on 6.8 per cent of streets in Swansea. Now, although this is likely to be a significant underestimation, as the surveys don't take into account parks, green spaces or beaches, according to Keep Scotland Beautiful and the Marine Conservation Society, more than 1 million disposable vapes are sold every week in the UK, and two are thrown away every second. It is also important to note that there are currently no adequate recycling or take-back facilities for these items. Some people, I hear, are putting them in supermarket battery collection points, although it is unlikely that these will be dealt with properly, due to the additional processing required to access the battery. Single-use vapes are therefore very much at odds with Wales becoming a greener society and prevent us having a more appealing environment for us all. There are no producer-responsibility requirements with them, and they are relatively new on the market. Therefore, I believe that there's a significant case for including single-use e-cigarettes into this Bill specifically. This would represent a truly significant move towards a prevention-first approach, rather than us being on the back foot every time. Minister, we in Wales could be a beacon of early action to address a known problem before further harm is caused. The latest survey by Keep Wales Tidy in my region, the county of Rhondda Cynon Taf, showed a 5.2 per cent presence of single-use vapes. Now, although this may sound small, this is quite high for a relatively new litter item. So, this is 5 per cent on top of current litter levels—not part of. The Keep Wales Tidy surveyor was also keen to point out that the vape pens were often found in numbers, not as single isolated incidents.

These are tough times, with people worried about whether they can have a decent standard of living, but it's not just about money. We know, in Wales, in our hearts, that there are other kinds of wealth, in our relationships with our friends, family, and in our communities, and we have in Wales the beautiful natural environment, our landscape, our mountains, our rivers and our seas, which makes me passionate about our nation. We must do everything in our power in this Senedd to protect them, so please support my amendments this afternoon. Diolch yn fawr.

Minister.

Amendment 9, proposed by Rhys ab Owen, would add disposable e-cigarettes to the Schedule, meaning that they would be banned. Amendments 6, 8 and 10 are consequential to this amendment. Of course we recognise that there's anecdotal evidence of an increased littering problem with single-use e-cigarettes, but this is a complex area, as Rhys himself has just set out, and requires much further evidence gathering before we consider whether a ban is the most appropriate action.

From a health perspective, we have indeed historically had a cautious approach to e-cigarette products in Wales, given that the evidence on their long-term effects is developing and given their potential appeal to children and young people. Just to be absolutely clear, Llywydd, e-cigarettes should never be used by children, young people, or anyone who is a non-smoker. However, we recognise that, for some people, e-cigarettes and other nicotine products are useful tools to help them stop smoking, with current evidence suggesting that they're substantially less harmful than smoking tobacco. In the 2018-19 national survey for Wales, which is the most recent survey where people were asked why they used e-cigarettes, 76 per cent of current e-cigarette users stated their reason for using e-cigarettes was to help them quit smoking tobacco products. We very much need to investigate and balance these factors before coming to a decision on what action to take on the littering of e-cigarettes. So, for this reason, I'm unable to support amendments 6, 8, 9 or 10. 

Turning to amendment 7, which seeks to add disposable e-cigarettes to the list of products appearing in section 4, which relates to the requirement to consider and then report on the potential banning of disposable e-cigarettes, while I agree in principle at looking at e-cigarettes further, I cannot accept this amendment at this time, as the Member has not defined 'disposable'. Further consideration of these products' current use and the type of products marketed as 'disposable' would be required. We do need to be clear about which products we're actually looking at. I therefore cannot support amendment 7, although, of course, the absence of a specific reference to e-cigarettes in section 4 will not preclude us from considering whether certain single-use plastic types of e-cigarettes should be banned, nor from reporting to the Senedd on that consideration, as we will do with other products in respect of which we're considering taking action in the future. I will certainly be asking my policy officials to work with their colleagues in health to begin the work needed, as we consider this matter from both a health and an environmental perspective. Diolch. 

Rhys ab Owen to respond.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. I have nothing much to add to what I've already said following the comments of the Minister. I'm grateful that she will make further considerations following my amendments. Diolch yn fawr.

The question is that amendment 6 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will move to a vote on amendment 6. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore, amendment 6 is not agreed.

We now move to a vote on amendment 1, which was debated as part of group 1. Minister, do you move the amendment?

Formally.

Yes, it's moved. Therefore, is there any objection to amendment 1? Objection?

Is there any objection?

No objection to amendment 1. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

Group 3 is next. This group of amendments relates to guidance. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 15, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendment in the group—Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment 15 inserts a new subsection to point 3 of section 2 of the Bill. Now, under the section 'Prohibited single-use plastic products', this amendment will ensure Welsh Ministers publish guidance explaining how the existing exemptions will apply to straws and how suppliers can be reasonably satisfied that consumers need the straw for health or disability reasons. Now, I think this is really important to get right. Welsh Ministers need to make sure that guidance is published so there is a blanket understanding by businesses across Wales. We cannot be having a consumer being accosted to prove they have a disability or that their disability is worth the exemption. We also can't have one business say 'okay' to providing a straw, then the next business the consumer enters saying 'no'.

Amendment 17 will insert a requirement for Welsh Ministers to consult with persons who they consider represent those who have a protected characteristic before making regulations under section 3. Again, I also think this amendment is really important. Now, I would hope that Ministers would communicate with groups or people who do represent those with protected characteristics. However, I do think it's important to get this confirmed on the Bill. I am grateful that the Minister and her team have worked with me on this amendment. This does show that there is a common goal here between us to make sure that this Bill is inclusive. Diolch.

Turning to amendment 15, tabled by Janet Finch-Saunders, this amendment inserts a provision in section 2 of the Bill to set out how the exemptions contained in table 1 of the Schedule relating to single-use plastic straws should apply: specifically, how a supplier can be satisfied that they reasonably believe a person needs a straw for health or disability reasons. It is very important that this exemption is handled sensitively. Disabled people and their representative groups have continually stressed they care about the environment and want to do their part to protect it. However, at the same time, they do not want to suffer discrimination or be subject to negative views for using products they may rely on to care for themselves or to stay safe. We have made it clear from the start that, when individuals do request a straw, they do not need to provide any evidence of that need. Based on the overwhelming level of support for the bans and exemptions, we do not believe individuals will request a straw unless they genuinely need it. Consequently, we believe there will not be any burden on the supplier to request evidence of that need, nor will there be any requirement of the supplier to make any assumption of that need. To ensure businesses and disabled people are aware of this approach, we are developing comprehensive guidance and producing awareness-raising material. Llywydd, should the Bill pass here today, initial communications will be released this week to start this process. Based on the reasons I've provided, I consider amendment 15 is unnecessary and will not be supporting it.

Next is amendment 17, also tabled by Janet Finch-Saunders. This amendment is in relation to section 3 of the Bill and requires Welsh Ministers to consult with representatives of protected characteristic groups in relation to introducing regulations under the Bill that may impact upon them. This amendment was originally tabled by the Member at Stage 2, and this sought to amend section 3 of the Bill to place an obligation on the Welsh Ministers to consult with representatives of disabled persons in relation to introducing future bans that may impact upon them. While I supported the principle of the amendment at Stage 2, my preference was for an amendment that requires the Welsh Ministers to consult not only the representatives of disabled persons, but the representatives of any protected characteristic group. I believe this approach will ensure we continue to account for the needs of these groups as we take work forward in future phases of the Bill. I very much thank the Member for working collaboratively with us to make these important changes, and I’m very pleased to support amendment 17 and ask Members to do the same. Diolch.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

Again, obviously, I'm very grateful to the Minister for that with amendment 17, but, in order to ensure the protection of those who do have a protected characteristic, and I do want to ensure that Welsh Ministers liaise with groups to guarantee the protection, I'll still be putting forward amendment 15.

The question is that amendment 15 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we'll proceed to a vote on amendment 15. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against. Therefore, amendment 15 is not agreed.

Group 4 is the next group of amendments, and this group relates to the manufacture of prohibited single-use plastic products. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 57, and I call on Delyth Jewell to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group.

Diolch, Llywydd. The purpose of my lead amendment 57 and various consequential amendments to it would be, as set out, to ban the manufacture of the items listed in this legislation, as well as the supply of them. It would be to bring this legislation in line with Scottish legislation, but the principle here should concern us in Wales arguably even more because of the global responsibility contained in the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.

The idea behind these amendments would be to ensure that products can't be manufactured in Wales and then exported to other parts of the world. It would seem to me that failing to ban the manufacture of items would be to inadvertently almost erase the steps forward we are taking boldly in this Bill. We talk often in this Chamber about the need to ensure we do not offshore our conscience. With plastic waste, this principle seems particularly pertinent. Other parts of our globe might still drown in plastic made here in Wales unless we are more prescriptive. We should be proud, of course, of the 'made in Wales' brand. It shouldn't be something that brings us shame.

Because of the future generations Act, in many ways I would argue that these amendments in principle would tie this Bill in with the principles of other law. They would help set out what such important statements should mean in practice. I do hope that they will receive support. Diolch.

Now, I tabled amendment 16, as this would insert a new section onto the face of the Bill requiring Welsh Ministers to implement and maintain a list of manufacturers of single-use plastic products in Wales. I tabled this in Stage 2, and, clearly, I've tabled it again.

During Stage 2, the Minister stated that this amendment could help improve engagement with the industry. Now, I appreciate the Minister said there was more to this than simply maintaining a list. However, understanding the industry is going to be important, because, as the Minister said, we take our plans for plastic forward. I know you have been ambiguous here for a reason, but, whatever plans you have, the manufacturing industry will be affected. Scotland and England have more comprehensive lists than Wales. We need to keep up. This legislation is already long overdue. We certainly don't want to fall further behind.

Amendment 30 is simply consequential to amendment 16. This amendment would insert amendment 16 into the 'Coming into force' section of the Bill. Thank you.

All amendments in this group deal with making it an offence to manufacture, as well as to supply or offer to supply, a single-use plastic product that is banned in the Schedule part of the Bill.

During Stage 2, similar amendments regarding the manufacture of single-use products were put forward and rejected by the members of the Climate Change, Environment, and Infrastructure Committee. This was on the grounds that the Bill deals with prohibiting the supply of single-use plastic products. Therefore, the amendments are out of scope. The scope of the Bill was settled at its introduction and has not changed.

Now to the proposals in this group. These amendments seek to introduce changes to many sections of the Bill. Starting with amendment 43, proposed by Delyth Jewell, the purpose of this amendment is to insert a new section that creates a new offence to cover the manufacture of any of the single-use plastic products that appear in the Schedule. Amendment 44, also proposed by Delyth Jewell, is consequential to amendment 43, and, mirroring the proposed offences of supply and offer to supply, would impose the penalty of a fine for manufacturing of a banned single-use plastic product.

Amendments 45, 46, 47, also from Delyth Jewell, are also consequential to 43, and concern new powers for local authorities. They would in turn allow local authorities to investigate the proposed new offence of manufacturing, allow them to prosecute this offence and take steps to reduce the incidence of it.

Amendments 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 and 53 also concern powers for local authorities, are also from Delyth, and consequential to amendment 43. They mirror the powers already proposed in the Bill regarding the offences of supply and offer to supply with respect to the proposed offence of manufacturing as well. They would give local authorities the powers to access, inspect and seize material from premises during the course of their investigation.

Amendment 54 from Delyth Jewell, and consequential to amendment 43, would extend the Welsh Ministers’ power to make provision by regulations for civil sanctions in relation to the proposed new offence of manufacturing. Amendment 56, also from Delyth Jewell and consequential to amendment 43, would provide for the proposed new offence of manufacturing to come into force a day after the Bill received Royal Assent. Amendment 58 provides for an exemption with respect to the manufacture of carrier bags intended to be used for supply under certain exemptions, whereas amendment 59 would ban the manufacture of oxo-degradable products, in addition to their supply, by amending table 1.

Moving on, then, to the amendments in this group proposed by Janet Finch-Saunders, amendment 16 confers a duty on Welsh Ministers to maintain a list of manufacturers of single-use products in Wales, and amendment 30, consequential to this, proposes that this duty would come into force on the day after Royal Assent.

Llywydd, as I have already said, similar amendments were proposed during Stage 2 and rejected by the committee. This was because they go to the very heart of the principles underpinning this legislation, which have already been settled. This Bill focuses on the reduction of environmental harm by limiting the supply of unnecessary single-use plastic products to consumers. The manufacturing of single-use plastic products covered by the Bill largely takes place outside Wales. I do not consider there would be a substantial benefit to banning manufacture. I consider this would be an unnecessary doubling up on the resource requirements for regulators to additionally inspect the manufacturing side of the supply chain for the same products, at a time when the public funding of regulators is coming under severe pressure.

For these reasons, I cannot recommend any of these proposals. But, Llywydd, I can assure you and Members here that we have plans in place to build on our existing positive relationship with Wales-based manufacturers to look at non-legislative solutions to achieve our policy aims. This will include potential grant support, innovative schemes and extended producer responsibility. This Bill is not the only piece of legislation nor the only power that the Senedd is asked to look at in this regard and I would be happy to further engage with the Senedd on the issues at hand in relation to Wales-based manufacturers. Diolch.

Delyth Jewell to reply. 

Diolch, Llywydd, a diolch, Gweinidog. I do take the point that you were making there about the steps that the Government is taking in terms of extended producer responsibility in terms of the conversations that you're having with manufacturers. Of course those are welcome. I do take the point about the scope of this Bill, but I will be pushing these amendments to a vote, because I think that not taking this opportunity to cover the manufacture of these items would be a missed opportunity with such global consequences. So, I'm grateful for the Minister's explanation, but I will still be putting these to a vote, please.

The question is that amendment 57 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 57. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 41 against. And therefore amendment 57 is not agreed. 

We move now to group 5, which relates to exemptions in relation to pharmacy medicine. The lead amendment in the group is amendment 2, and I call on the Minister to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. Minister. 

Diolch, Llywydd. At Stage 2, I accepted an amendment tabled by Delyth Jewell to reduce the number of exemptions for plastic single-use carrier bags from the ban introduced by the Bill, specifically to remove the exemption that applies when a patient receives a plastic single-use carrier bag when dispensed with a prescribed medicine or medical device, defined as a 'listed appliance' in the Bill. However, at that time it was acknowledged that accepting this amendment would result in an anomaly in that it still permitted single-use plastic bags for a pharmacy medicine, where it is not supplied in accordance with a prescription issued by a health professional. Therefore, I have tabled amendment 2 to remove the exemption for non-prescription pharmacy medicine to ensure the amendment agreed at Stage 2 is technically correct.

Amendments 3 and 5 are consequential amendments to amendment 2 and remove the definitions of 'health professional' and 'pharmacy medicine' from Schedule 1 to the Bill. Amendment 4 is consequential to Delyth Jewell’s amendment at Stage 2 and removes the definition of 'medicinal product' from the Bill, as it is no longer required. And I'm grateful to Delyth for having brought forward the amendment. Diolch. 

I have no other speakers on this group, so the question is that amendment 2 be agreed to. Does any Member object? There is no objection, and therefore, amendment 2 is agreed.

We now move to amendment 58, which was debated as part of group 4. Delyth Jewell, is amendment 58 moved?

Moved.

The question is that amendment 58 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore proceed to a vote on amendment 58. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 42 against. And therefore, amendment 58 is not agreed.

We'll move next to group 6, which relates to exemptions in relation to cotton beds. The lead amendment in the group is amendment 31, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Llywydd. So, I will be speaking on amendments 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37 and 38. Amendments 31, 32 and 33 would add to the Bill exemptions for cotton buds. Amendment 31 would add an exemption for cotton buds supplied to a forensic service provider from the Bill. Amendment 32 would add an exemption for cotton buds used as a relevant device for medical purposes or by a health professional for medical purposes. Amendment 33 would add an exemption for cotton buds supplied for diagnostic, educational or research purposes from the Bill.

Amendment 35 would amend the existing definition of a 'health professional' in this Bill. The amendment would bring the definition of a 'health professional' in line with the UK Government's respective legislation. I don't want to keep repeating myself, but I think that where we can, we absolutely do need to be using consistent legislation with the rest of Britain. The existing definitions are clear: the UK Government and Scottish Government obviously believe the definitions are clear. So, I just don't believe we should be here, spending time rewording definitions just to make a point.

Amendment 36 would insert a definition of 'medical purposes' onto the face of the Bill for the purpose of the table of prohibited products and their exemptions. Amendment 38 would insert the definition of a 'relevant device' into Schedule 1 of the Bill for the purpose of table 1 or the table of prohibited products and their exemptions. Thank you.

I don't have any other speakers on this, other than the Minister to respond.

Diolch, Llywydd. The intention of the Bill is to prohibit the supply and offer to supply for sale or for free the products listed in the Bill to consumers in Wales. Amendments 31, 32 and 33 tabled by Janet Finch-Saunders propose to amend Schedule 1 to the Bill to specifically exempt the use of single-use plastic cotton buds for forensic purposes, as relevant devices used for medical purposes or to be used by a health professional for medical purposes, or for cotton buds to be supplied for diagnostic, educational or research purposes.

As previously noted in Stage 2, our policy intention is to capture cotton buds used in a domestic setting and which are potentially disposed of incorrectly by being flushed down the toilet. We believe sticks with cotton ends used in medical, laboratory or forensic settings, which are disposed of correctly, would be considered swabs. Additional context has been provided to the definition. This ensures that cotton buds used in a medical setting are exempt from the provisions, in line with our policy intention. The supply of these products for research or forensic purposes would be from business-to-business supply and therefore would not be captured by the bans. On this basis, these exemptions are not required.

Amendments 36 and 38 are consequential to amendment 32, therefore these amendments are also not required. Amendment 35 amends the definition of 'health professional' in the Bill. This amendment is technically deficient because it relies on defined terms set out in the Interpretation Act 1978, which do not apply to the Bill. For the reasons I have set out, I therefore do not support amendments 31, 32, 33, 35, 36 and 38.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

I'll just move the amendments. Thank you.

The question is that amendment 31 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we will proceed to a vote on amendment 31. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against. Therefore, amendment 31 is not agreed.

Amendment 32, is it being moved?

Is it being moved, Janet Finch-Saunders?

Yes.

Yes.

The question is that amendment 32 be agreed to. [Objection.] No, there is objection. Therefore, we will have a vote on amendment 32. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against. Therefore, amendment 32 is not agreed.

Amendment 33—

—is it being moved? Amendment 33, Janet.

Yes, I move.

Yes.

The question is that amendment 33 be agreed to. [Objection.] There is objection to amendment 33. We'll have a vote on amendment 33. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against. Therefore, amendment 33 is not agreed.

We now move to amendment 9, which was debated as part of group 2. Rhys ab Owen, is amendment 9 moved?

Yes, thank you.

Amendment 9 is moved. Is there any objection to amendment 9? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. Therefore, we'll have a vote on amendment 9. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 41 against. Therefore, amendment 9 is not agreed.

Group 7 is next, and this group of amendments relates to products made of oxo-degradable and oxo-biodegradable plastic. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 34, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Thank you. I move amendment 34 in the Minister's name—oh no, that was you then. [Laughter.] Just stealing your thunder then. Right, amendment 34 would remove 'oxo-degradable plastic' from table 1 of the Bill. This would remove the prohibition of supplying oxo-degradable plastic to consumers in Wales.

Like I said earlier, the Minister and I, we disagreed on oxo-degradable plastic in Stage 2. I do want to, though, emphasise again that I think it is wrong to ban oxo-degradable plastics when (1)—No. 1—the Minister has admitted that she believes herself that oxo-degradable plastic is ill-defined and that (2), the material was simply not costed. So, I suppose the question I have to ask is this: does the Minister believe it is okay to introduce legislation when it's not costed?

I recognise that the Minister claimed that oxo-degradable plastics would take time to become prohibited, but that does make me wonder why you've committed to banning it if you yourself recognise that more research is needed. I'm also sure that the Minister is aware that the Welsh Government will face a legal challenge if it remains included. I agree with the Minister that more research is needed, and that will take time, and so, to me, the sensible and the correct option is to not ban the material on the face of the Bill.

Amendment 37 would remove the definition of 'oxo-degradable plastic' from the face of the Bill. I have retabled this amendment. I know the Minister disagreed with me on this last time, and I don't think it's a good use of time to repeat ourselves again just to come to the same conclusion, however, my reasoning for this amendment echoes what I've just said regarding amendment 34.

Amendment 20 would insert 'oxo-degradable plastic' into section 4 of the Bill, where Welsh Ministers must set out information surrounding their consideration of whether to exercise the power in section 3. Welsh Ministers would therefore need to enact this provision when seeking to prohibit the supply of oxo-degradable plastic in the future. Now, I tabled this amendment as I am hoping that the Minister may by now have accepted what we've said previously on oxo-degradable plastic and agree with me that it's not right to prohibit the material when no costings have occurred, and during committee Stage 2, I made clear some of those it would affect here in Wales, potentially including our farmers.

The Minister stated that more research is needed. Again, I ask why, when the Minister believes this, it is on the face of the Bill to be banned. I think this amendment that we've put forward is a good compromise. Moving oxo-degradable plastic to section 4 gives time—adequate time—to research it. If you're going to introduce legislation, if we're going to scrutinise legislation here in this place, we have to get it right.

Amendment 22 would insert a definition of 'oxo-degradable plastic' into section 4 of the Bill. The definition is the European Committee for Standardization's definition, as used by the EU directive on single-use plastics. Thank you.

I think it's worth having a brief discussion on this, because I have heard that there's no actual proper definition, that's completely agreed, on which oxo-biodegradable bags are actually biodegradable and which are not. For my money, obviously they have to disintegrate completely on contact with water or light, and they don't actually leave plastic in the environment when they disappear.

So, I went down to the Co-op to pick up one of these biodegradable bags, which they claim are certified to BS EN 13432 and the OK Compost HOME standards, and labelled compostable carriers are similarly of the same sort of material. The Co-op argues that using these bags as food caddy liners is cleaner and more convenient than not using a bag. Now, the alternative, obviously, if you're going shopping, is that you can use a paper bag, or be given a paper bag, but when it comes to disposing of kitchen waste, is a paper bag going to do the job, or it perversely going to lead to more people refusing to do food-waste recycling? I just wanted to probe this, as to whether there are perverse consequences to banning all biodegradables, if they are what they claim to be. Or what are the alternatives going to be? And what information has the Minister had from local authorities as to how they would deal with food waste if we ban these sort of things, which are widely used by local authorities to encourage people to recycle food?

The Minister.

Diolch, Llywydd.

Oh, before I ask the Gweinidog to respond, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Thank you very much. Just speaking in support of Jenny's points, to probe the Minister a little further, one of the things that the Co-op particularly say is that they work with local authorities on this, that it is compostable. They've strenuously avoided the issue of degradable, because they say, 'Well, this is actually at the cutting edge, it will go into the compost heap, it will degrade', and so on. So, I just want to test the Minister a little bit further to see what her thoughts are on this and where the science currently is, as to whether this is a solution or whether it is, in effect, a solution to a question that was being asked previously—yesterday's solution, if you like.

But also, in addition to that, if this isn't the solution, if there is an intention to ban plastics entirely, and to take plastics out of the system, then how does she work with retailers and manufacturers of a British standard product in order to make sure that they can transition towards other products that will fall within this approach to actually tackle single-use plastics?

The Minister.

Diolch, Llywydd. I will address amendment 34 first. Amendment 34 would remove oxo-degradable plastic products from the list of prohibited products in Schedule 1, as well as the definition of 'oxo-degradable plastic'. And Janet's quite right, I did note in earlier committee appearances and at Plenary that oxo-degradable plastic is a complex area that is still being researched. But, at this stage, we are absolutely satisfied that there is credible evidence of the harm that oxo-degradable plastics cause to the environment. In our view, this absolutely justifies including the ban on the face of the Bill. However, we recognise the need to consider evidence further; for example, whether there are sub-categories of oxo-degradable plastic that ought to be exempt before the ban is brought into force. The commencement of the ban on oxo-degradable plastics is, therefore, being phased to allow time for further research and policy development. The regulation-making power would permit exemptions for oxo-degradable products to be added, or for this category of plastic to be removed entirely from the Bill should new, robust evidence indicate that such a course is advisable.

Just turning to the points made by both Jenny and Huw in relation to the bag from the Co-op, obviously some retailers have gone to some lengths to get ahead of the game at various points, but the evidence is ongoing all the time. If you collect food waste for collection by a municipal authority in Wales in a food caddy, that food does not go to compost, it goes to anaerobic digestion. That is much hotter, and many of the bugs that eat the food compost that you put in there are operating at temperatures that far exceed any domestic compost heap. Obviously, what goes into those anaerobic digesters is carefully regulated. We also don't want to kill the bugs; the people who run them get very fond of the bugs and talk about them as if they're pets. So, the food caddy bags that you have distributed to you by the local authorities are designed to work with the bugs to keep your food in a compact form for you to hand it in, but then to go completely into the anaerobic digestion system without having to be removed in advance. If you use oxo-degradable plastics, then I can assure you that they are removed from that system, and, actually, they cause problems.

It is also a fact that they are compostable in some circumstances, but most domestic compost heaps never reach anything like the temperatures required by BS EN regulations. I myself am a very keen home composter, and I can tell you that they do not degrade in my compost heap, which is quite hot—it has adder eggs in it, to my extreme delight. That's the issue; the issue there is that it's fine if you're going to do it through a municipal system that can deal with them, but we're talking about bags that are handed out to members of the public, and they can't be expected to be able to compost them. I applaud the Co-op for having worked really hard to get ahead of the game, but this science is advancing all of the time. Really, if you can get plastic out of the chain altogether, that is clearly preferable. There is a whole plethora of products that we consulted on—60 plus that people wanted us to look at. This Bill enables us to continue on that journey in a controlled fashion and make sure that we're on top of the research at all times so that we can add and take away from the list of products.

Of course, if the farmers can come up with a way of using oxo-degradable plastic that does not harm the environment and that can be demonstrated not to break down to leave nanoparticles in the soil, which, actually, are the worst kind of particles, then, of course, we will exempt them, but that information is not currently available. So, Llywydd, I make no attempt whatsoever to withdraw from us putting them on the face of the Bill. If the evidence becomes clear that they can be exempted, then, of course, we will act. 

Turning back to the amendments, Llywydd, amendment 37 is consequential to amendment 34 and would remove the definition of oxo-degradable plastics from the Schedule to the Bill. Amendment 20 amends section 4 of the Bill. It requires Welsh Ministers to include in the report they are required to publish under section 79(2) of the Government of Wales Act 2006 any consideration they had made about adding oxo-degradable plastics to column 1 of the table in paragraph 1 of the Bill’s Schedule. The amendment is predicated on amendment 34 having removed oxo-degradable plastic products from the Schedule. However, oxo-degradable plastics are already in column 1 of the table in paragraph 1 of the Bill’s Schedule, so Welsh Ministers need not consider adding them to the Schedule.

Amendment 22 would add the Bill’s definition of oxo-degradable plastics to section 4, predicated on amendment 34 having removed it from the Schedule. There are no definitions for the other products in this section, for example wet wipes and sauce sachets. The Bill is structured so that all definitions are in the Schedule; for instance, where the bans and restrictions are implemented. A definition Welsh Ministers used for consideration and reporting may differ from any final definition used in any regulations Welsh Ministers might decide to lay, and thus be in the Schedule. I therefore urge Members to reject amendments 20, 22, 34 and 37. Diolch.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

Diolch, Llywydd. Oxo-degradable has not been costed, so it simply comes down now to whether Welsh Ministers think it's acceptable to include a material that's not been costed, one that they admit needs more research. We've offered a compromise by inserting 'oxo-degradable' into section 4, and this is potentially preventing a legal challenge against the Welsh Government, so I'll be moving those amendments. 

As someone who has to sort my food waste out later on tonight, I was unexpectedly interested in that debate on that group of amendments.

The question is that amendment 34 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection, so we will move to a vote on amendment 34. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 40 against, and therefore amendment 34 is not agreed. 

Amendment 59 is next, which was debated as part of group 4. Delyth Jewell, is it moved?

Formally.

It is. Therefore, is there any objection to amendment 59? [Objection.] There is objection to amendment 59. We will therefore proceed to a vote on amendment 59. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 42 against, therefore amendment 59 is not agreed. 

Amendment 10 is next, debated as part of group 2. Rhys ab Owen, is amendment 10 moved? 

Move, Llywydd. 

It is moved. Is there any objection to amendment 10? [Objection.] There is. We will therefore proceed to a vote on amendment 10. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 12, no abstentions, 42 against. Therefore, amendment 10 is not agreed. 

Amendment 3 is next, debated as part of group 5. Minister, is amendment 3 moved? 

Formally. 

It is. If amendment 3 is agreed, amendment 35 will fall. The question is that amendment 3 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection, therefore we will move to a vote on amendment 3. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 40, no abstentions, 14 against, therefore amendment 3 is agreed. 

And amendment 35 falls.

Amendment 36 is next, debated as part of group 6. 

Janet Finch-Saunders, is it being moved?

I move. 

It's moved. The question is that amendment 36 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 36. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against. Therefore amendment 36 is not agreed. 

We'll now move to amendment 4, which was debated as part of group 5. Minister, is it moved? 

Move.

It is moved, therefore is there any objection to amendment 4? No, there is no objection to amendment 4. It is therefore agreed. 

We now move to amendment 37. Is it moved, Janet Finch-Saunders?

Move.

It is moved. Is there any objection to amendment 37? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 37. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 39 against, and therefore amendment 37 is not agreed. 

Amendment 38, is it moved, Janet Finch-Saunders?

Move. 

It is. Is there any objection? [Objection.] There is. Therefore, a vote on amendment 38. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against. Therefore, amendment 38 is not agreed. 

We'll move now to amendment 5. Minister, is amendment 5 being moved? 

Is it being moved? 

Yes. 

It is. Is there any objection to amendment 5? There is none, therefore amendment 5 is agreed. 

We'll move now to amendment 16. 

Is it being moved, Janet Finch-Saunders? 

Yes. 

If amendment 16 is not agreed, amendment 30 will fall. The question is that amendment 16 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will open the vote on amendment 16. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against, therefore amendment 16 is not agreed, and amendment 30 therefore falls. 

We'll move to amendment 17 next. 

Janet Finch-Saunders, is it being moved? 

Yes, please. 

The question is that amendment 17 be agreed to. There is objection to the amendment. 

No, I'm not objecting. 

All right. Okay. That was a double negative in my mind there. No objection. I don't think there's an objection to amendment 17. 

Therefore, amendment 17 is agreed. 

We move now to group 8, which relates to prohibited single-use plastic products and the power to amend. The lead amendment is amendment 18. Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group. 

Diolch, Llywydd, and diolch to the group for supporting our amendment.

Amendment 18 is a technical amendment to provide further clarification in section 4(1). This amendment will ensure interpretation of section 4 is carried out as intended. Amendment 19 amends section 4(2)(a) to provide easier understanding of its purpose. This amendment simplifies the wording. Amendment 21 is, again, a technical amendment that simplifies the wording of section 4(2)(b). The amendment will provide easier understanding of the purpose of the provision.

Amendment 23 inserts a new subsection under section 4 of the Bill. The amendment requires Welsh Ministers to publish the number of prosecutions brought forward, and the number of persons found guilty of the offence under section 5 as part of the report they are required to publish. During Stage 2, the Minister explained that these figures will not be on the face of the annual review, but will be provided to the Minister in order for the report to be completed. But I think it's important that this review includes these figures.

If we are introducing legislation here, it's important that we, us as Members of this Senedd, and also the public, can see the true scale of the success of the Bill. That way, we can scrutinise the legislation. We can offer alternatives. We can offer ways to better ensure compliance if it's found to be low, and quite simply, it just means we can all work together. Thank you.  

The Minister.

Diolch, Llywydd. I will address amendments 18, 19 and 21 together. Firstly, just to thank Janet Finch-Saunders for agreeing to collaborate on these three amendments. Taken together, they would revise the reporting requirements in section 4 of the Bill, so Welsh Ministers would need to report not only on any considerations they make about prohibiting single-use plastic wet wipes or sauce sachets, but also about any proposed use of their section 3 powers. This applies whether they propose to ban further products, to remove a ban, or to add, remove or amend exemptions to bans. Wet wipes and sauce sachets were amongst the products that respondents to our consultation suggested should be banned or restricted. Therefore, I am pleased to see them highlighted in the Bill. I must remind Members, however, that product labelling is not devolved to Wales, so we will be working with the UK Government to address the need for wet wipes to be labelled with their plastic content. At present, it is not possible for consumers to look at packaging and tell whether the wet wipes include some element of plastic in them or not.

Amendment 23 would require Welsh Ministers to report on the number of prosecutions brought under section 5 of the Bill, and the number of persons found guilty of the offence. I do recognise that the intention of this amendment is to monitor the enforcement element of the Bill. However, I believe this approach will create an unnecessary administrative and reporting burden on Government and local authorities. The primary intention of this Bill, Llywydd, is not to criminalise people but to drive behavioural change. Prosecutions are very much a sanction of last resort. We have already committed to undertaking an implementation review of the Bill, and I anticipate that enforcement will be considered as part of this work. As such, I do not believe that there is any need for a separate requirement. I therefore support amendments 18, 19 and 21 and recommend that Members do the same, but, for the reasons I've just said, reject amendment 23. Diolch.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

Thank you, Minister, again. However, knowing the number of prosecutions, I believe, can help to see whether enforcement has been successful. You know I've raised concerns about local authorities and their ability to educate and play an advocacy role. However, there will be times where prosecutions are required, and it's only by knowing the numbers—. All of us can put FOIs in and find out how many fly-tipping offences have occurred and how many have been prosecuted for, and we know that that's too low, but in something like this, with new law coming forward, I honestly cannot see why we cannot support something that would actually record the number of prosecutions that have come forward, and they, in themselves, would help us to scrutinise this going forward. Thank you.

The question is that amendment 18 be agreed to. Does any Member object? There is no objection to amendment 18, and therefore amendment 18 is agreed.

Amendment 19.

Janet Finch-Saunders, is it being moved?

Moved.

The amendment is moved. If amendment 19 is agreed, amendments 7 and 20 will fall. The question is that amendment 19 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, amendment 19 is agreed.

Amendments 7 and 20 have fallen.

Which takes us to amendment 21. Is it being moved?

Yes.

Yes, it is, by Janet Finch-Saunders. The question is that amendment 21 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No objection to amendment 21, therefore amendment 21 is agreed.

Gwelliant 22, Janet Finch-Saunders.

I move.

The question is that amendment 22 be agreed to. [Objection.] There is an objection to amendment 22, so we'll have a vote on amendment 22. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 40 against, therefore amendment 22 is not agreed.

Amendment 23, Janet Finch-Saunders.

I move.

The question is that amendment 23 be agreed to. Is there objection? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection, therefore we'll have a vote on amendment 23. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against. Therefore, amendment 23 is not agreed.

Group 9 is the next group of amendments, and they relate to the oversight board and advisory panel. The lead amendment in this group is amendment 41, and I call on Delyth Jewell to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group.

Diolch, Llywydd. I rise to speak to amendments 41 and 55. Amendment 41 is an amalgamation of two separate amendments that I'd laid at Stage 2. It's also drafted to attempt to require the Government to do some of the things that it's indicated it would do in an explanatory memorandum. The amendment seeks to strengthen, that is, what the Government has indicated it would like to do; it would, I believe, strengthen the provision.

The amendment seeks to address two of the principal stumbling blocks to the effective implementation of this Bill, as I see it, namely, the relative unaffordability of more sustainable products and the lack of awareness about the bad effects that plastic litter has. My aim is to place a requirement in the Bill for the Welsh Government to establish the oversight project board and advisory panel, which is referenced in the explanatory memorandum. The amendment would require both the affordability of reusable products—those products that may replace those that are prohibited—and also to advise on education and promotion of the prohibition. It would, again, ensure that these things were on the face of the Bill.

To deal with the affordability issue firstly, we've talked in committee at great length when taking evidence on this Bill about how challenging it will be to compel households that are struggling financially to spend more money on products because they're more environmentally friendly. We all want to do the right thing, but in a cost-of-living crisis, the more expensive products will make that all the more difficult. So, I'd want to see these groups, the oversight board and the advisory panel, tackling this very difficult issue and trying to make progress.

Secondly, on the provision relating to education and promotion, this is an attempt to overcome yet another thorny issue—that is the lack of awareness about the impacts of plastic littering and the fact that ingrained habits are hard to kick. Compelling people to do things is one tool, but persuading them that they would want to be part of the solution as well, I think that's far more powerful—educating people, rather than only criminalising their actions is also a more socially just way of tackling the problem. Now, the Government has gone a long way to providing for these issues, and I recognise and acknowledge that, but these amendments would require these boards to be established, and for that requirement to be, again, on the face of the Bill, I think that's cleaner, I think that's a straightforward way of doing it, and I hope that that would help ensure that the very good intention does certainly come to fruition, and I hope that they will receive support. Diolch.

Turning to amendment 41 first, as amendment 55 is consequential to it, it does, as Delyth has just explained, require Welsh Ministers to establish an oversight project board and an advisory panel within 12 months of the Bill’s receiving Royal Assent. It provides a brief outline of each body’s purpose and proposes potential functions for each. The explanatory memorandum, as Delyth has acknowledged, which accompanies the Bill, already notes that I intend to establish an oversight project board and an advisory panel for single-use products. I have also committed to engaging with Senedd committees and stakeholders when it comes to establishing these bodies.

Amendment 41 does not contain enough detail to enable Welsh Ministers to know whether or not they would fulfil the duty or not. For example, it does not set out how many members should be appointed to these bodies, nor how many they should have. Without setting out such provisions on the face of the Act, it would be difficult for the Welsh Ministers to know whether they have fulfilled their duty to establish these bodies, and leaves the Welsh Ministers under an open-ended legal duty. However, I completely recognise the intention of the amendment, and will certainly consider this when determining the terms of reference for the two groups.

Amendment 55 is consequential to amendment 41, and would require that the duty to establish the board and panel come into force the day after the Bill receives Royal Assent. Llywydd, I therefore reject amendments 41 and 55 and urge Members to do the same. Diolch.

Delyth Jewell to reply.

Diolch, Llywydd. Diolch, Gweinidog. I do very much welcome what the Government has done in what's already in the explanatory memorandum on this point. I'll be pushing these to vote, but I don't anticipate from what's just been said that these are going to pass, but I am very grateful for what the Minister has said—that you're going to be taking into account these points when determining what the purview, almost, of this board and advisory panel will be. So, I look forward to hearing more about that, and I'm grateful. Thank you.

The question is that amendment 41 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. To remind you, if amendment 41 is not agreed, amendment 55 will fall. Amendment 41—I call for a vote. Open the vote. The vote is tied. In favour 27, no abstentions, and 27 against. Therefore, I will use my casting vote against amendment 41. So, to confirm the final result of the vote: in favour 27, no abstentions and 28 against. Therefore, amendment 41 is not agreed and amendment 55 also falls.

We'll move now to group 10. This group relates to the offence of supplying a prohibited single-use plastic product. The lead amendment is amendment 24, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the lead amendment and the other amendments in the group—Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment 24 does insert a provision to clarify the defence of a person facing proceedings for an offence of supplying single-use plastic to consumers in Wales. Now, I tabled this as I do think that it is important that businesses are protected from being wrongfully accused of supplying single-use plastic. Businesses have had a tough time during COVID and indeed, now, they're still feeling the effects of COVID and many other pressures, and the last thing that we want to be doing here is putting overburdensome—. And we need to make sure that protections are in place for them.

Now, I appreciate that in Stage 2, it was discussed that businesses will be made aware of this piece of legislation and, as such, will have time to use up their existing supply. I feel that the matter is more complicated than that. We have businesses with a physical store in Wales that will supply products internationally through online orders as well as in person to their Welsh customers. They will have stock on their premises that they are not selling in their physical store. If an authorised officer enters their premises, they'll see this stock; they'll see on the business's website that they are selling banned items. This amendment seeks to protect these businesses from wrongfully being found guilty of an offence. I think this is important to be on the face of the Bill.

Amendment 42, which was tabled by Delyth, inserts a provision that clarifies that, where more than one single-use plastic product is supplied together, it is treated as just one offence. I have taken this to mean that, where banned single-use plastic products are sold in a multipack, it counts for just one offence rather than somebody being charged with 100 offences for selling 100 plastic straws in a pack. I'd like to think that this is correct, though, if I'm wrong, please let me know, Delyth. Diolch.

Delyth Jewell.

Sorry, I nearly took that as me, before hearing from the Llywydd. Diolch, Llywydd. I'd like to speak to amendment 42 in this group, and I'd like to thank the Government team for their assistance in drafting this. This amendment would insert a new subsection into section 5. Section 5 sets out the offence of supplying prohibited single-use plastic products.

The subsection that's new, if it's accepted, would mean that, when two or more prohibited single-use plastic products are supplied together, that would be treated as a single act of supply. Stakeholders giving evidence to the committee before Stage 2 had expressed concern about whether the definition of 'single-use' in the Bill had the right effect when it came to products sold in a multipack, and this amendment would address that concern, it would help to clarify it. Its purpose is to tackle the multipack issue and to provide that, when a number of products are supplied to be consumed together, like a cup that's supplied with a lid and with a stirrer, or food that's supplied with cutlery, those products do fall under the scope of the Bill. That is the amendment—it will clarify that products contained in multipacks are covered by the offence in the Bill. And the amendment, it's hoped, would provide greater clarity to businesses so that they can have a fuller understanding of what amounts to a single, criminal act when they're supplying one or more prohibited product to a consumer at the same time. Diolch.

The Minister.

Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment 24 was tabled by Janet Finch-Saunders, and it seeks to provide a defence regarding the lack of intention to supply where a person is in possession of a prohibited single-use product. I confirm that a similar amendment was tabled and considered at Stage 2.

I'd just like to reiterate at this point that possession of a single-use plastic product covered by the Bill is not in itself an offence and therefore, there is no need for a defence to it. The offence is committed only where the products are supplied to a consumer in Wales or are offered for supply on premises in Wales. Where a business does supply or offers to supply those products to a consumer in Wales, we believe that the requisite degree of intention can be inferred. It is obviously incumbent on businesses to know and comply with the law in Wales. Consequently, the proposed amendment is unnecessary and, on this basis, I will not be supporting it.

Turning now to amendment 42, which was tabled by Delyth Jewell, at Stage 2, the Member sought to provide clarity that the definition of 'single-use' would apply to the prohibited single-use plastic products when supplied in multipacks as well as when those products are supplied individually. At Stage 2, I was supportive of the amendment in principle and offered to work with Delyth Jewell on producing an amendment that achieved her intention and was also technically sound. I'm very delighted to have been able to do that.

As a result, amendment 42 was developed collaboratively with the Member. The amendment now inserts a new subsection into section 5 and provides that, where two or more prohibited single-use plastic products are supplied together, this is to be treated as a single act of supply.

This clarifies the operation of section 5(1) in cases where a person supplies a number of products to a consumer together—for example, where products are contained in a multipack, or otherwise form part of a sales unit, such as a cup supplied with a lid and stirrer, or a food container supplied with cutlery.

Amendment 42 has been tabled to clarify a point of law, and I am very happy to support the passing of it. Diolch, Delyth. Diolch, Llywydd.

Janet Finch-Saunders to respond.

Let's move to the vote.

The question is that amendment 24 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 24. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, 40 against. Therefore, amendment 24 is not agreed.

Amendment 42 is next. Delyth Jewell. 

Move.

It's moved, yes. The question is that amendment 42 be agreed to. Does any Member object? There is no objection. Therefore, amendment 42 is agreed.

We move now to amendment 43, debated as part of group 4. Delyth Jewell, is amendment 43 moved?

Move.

It is. The question is that amendment 43 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There is objection. And if amendment 43 is not agreed, amendments 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and 56 will fall. We therefore move to a vote on amendment 43. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 13, no abstentions, 41 against. And therefore amendment 43 is not agreed and all of the amendments that I listed a moment ago also fall.

We will therefore move to group 11 next. The amendments in group 11 relate to enforcement action by local authorities. The lead amendment is amendment 25, and I call on Janet Finch-Saunders to move and speak to the other amendments in the group. Janet Finch-Saunders.

Diolch, Llywydd. Amendment 25 inserts a new section onto the face of the Bill. This amendment requires Welsh Ministers to ensure that local authorities receive sufficient funding to carry out actions required as a result of this Bill. Many of us here in the Senedd know that, quite often, when laws are passed here, the implications that are passed down to local authorities to enforce, educate—. Often, no extra resources are provided. When I speak to council leaders or their finance chiefs, it is a fact that they are sometimes concerned about laws that are made here, because of the financial implications and pressures it puts on our already overstretched local authorities.

Now, in Stage 2, the Minister claimed she was unable to accept this amendment as the Welsh Government would try to reduce costs as much as possible. The Minister stated that enforcement, to begin with, would focus on education. Now, I appreciate that response, although I don't think it squashes any concerns local authorities have around funding. To me, it basically said, 'We will fund our guidance and we hope this will be enough to change the behaviour of businesses.' Local authorities need commitment from you, Minister, and I would even ask you to—. I'm sort of getting my begging bowl out now on behalf of all of those local authorities who are going to see this come down. They're going to want to make sure that their local authority is able to educate, is able to enforce, but we only need to look at our planning departments, animal welfare, food standards, planning. Those kinds of departments are really overstretched—regulatories. And so, really, we need some commitment from you. The local authorities need commitment from you that they will not be left to cover the cost of enforcing this Bill. They are strained enough as it is. If you want enforcement to be sufficient, you need to ensure the funding is there, otherwise I worry this will count for nothing. 

Amendment 26 is a technical amendment that clarifies the purpose of the provision:

'premises used wholly or mainly as a dwelling'

would be amended to 'residential premises'. Amendment 27 inserts a definition for 'residential premises' to ensure it is understood as intended, with 'residential premises' defined as

'premises, or any part of premises, used wholly or mainly as a dwelling.'

In other words, the business could be operating quite merrily away on the ground floor and you could have residents living above who could then be impacted by enforcers going into that part of the premises.

Amendments 28 and 29 are technical amendments that clarify the purpose of their provisions. I thank the Minister for working with me on this. I do think it's important that we clarify where authorised officers can and cannot enter, and I do appreciate, Minister, that you've recognised this as well. Diolch. 

Just turning first to consider amendment 25, proposed by Janet Finch- Saunders, this would, as she said, place Welsh Ministers under a duty to provide local authorities with sufficient funding to enable them to undertake their enforcement functions under the Bill. I believe this is similar to a change proposed during Stage 2. I've listened again to the points made and, while I understand the Member’s concerns, I just do not agree with her. As I said during Stage 2, the Welsh Government is seeking to reduce the financial burden on local authorities with regard to this legislation as much as possible. We intend to raise awareness and develop guidance to help ensure people understand how the bans affect them. Again, the purpose of this legislation is behaviour change; it is not to increase the number of prosecutions. 

Previous experience of enforcing environmental legislation, for example the carrier bag charge, has shown that effective communications surrounding the introduction can help reduce the need for enforcement activities. We anticipate enforcement activities will be intelligence led and undertaken with an initial focus on bringing rogue businesses into compliance. Many businesses, of course, have already taken steps to remove single-use plastic products from their stock. That said, I appreciate the Member's concerns during this period of very high inflation. I am aware the current budget for local authorities was set when inflation levels were far lower and that authorities continue to face significant pressures. The Minister for Finance and Local Government continues to work closely with Welsh Local Government Association leaders through the finance sub-group and regular meetings as we prepare for the next budget. This will help to understand the pressures and determine if there is any way of further supporting local authorities through flexibility with current sources of funding. I believe this is the correct forum for such discussions to take place. On this basis, I am unable to support amendment 25.

Turning to amendment 26, I am very grateful to Janet Finch-Saunders for raising this important issue during Stage 2 and for agreeing to collaborate with me to hone the legal text of this amendment. Together with the consequential amendments 27, 28 and 29, these work together to clarify what the Bill means when it refers to residential premises and what the powers of entry are for the places where people live. The amendments introduce the label 'residential premises' to describe any premises, or part of a premises, used wholly or mainly as a dwelling. They limit the power of entry in section 9 so that residential premises may not be entered without a warrant issued by a justice of the peace under section 10. For example, in the case of a flat above a shop, the flat could not be entered without a warrant, although the shop could. This makes it clear to enforcement officers that a warrant is required to enter places in which people live. It also protects them against making inadvertently unlawful searches of those parts of a premises that are not dwellings and are used for business purposes.

The amendments to sections 10 and 11 are corresponding and consequential to the amendments to section 9. I therefore do support, Llywydd, amendments 26, 27, 28 and 29 and recommend that Members do the same. Diolch.

Janet Finch-Saunders, do you want to respond?

Diolch, Llywydd, and I thank the Minister once again. It's getting to be quite a habit, this. And just—we'll move to the vote. 

The question is that amendment 25 be agreed to. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes, there is objection. We will therefore move to a vote on amendment 25. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 28 against. And therefore amendment 25 is not agreed.

We'll move now to amendment 26.

Janet Finch-Saunders, is it being moved?

I move.

The question is that amendment 26 be agreed. Does any Member object? There is no objection. And therefore amendment 26 is agreed.

We now move to amendment 27.

Is it being moved, Janet Finch-Saunders?

I move.

Yes.

The question is that amendment 27 be agreed to. Does any Member object? No, there is no objection. Amendment 27 is therefore agreed.