National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon, all, and welcome to this Plenary meeting. The first item on the agenda this afternoon is questions to the Minister for Climate Change, and the first question is to be answered by the Deputy Minister, and to be asked by Siân Gwenllian.

Diolch. One of the aims of 'Llwybr Newydd', the Wales transport strategy, is to reduce the cost of sustainable travel for everyone in Wales, including young people. We are working towards an accessible transport system across the nation and have a number of initiatives aimed at younger travellers.

It's good to hear that there are plans in the pipeline, and, of course, we need to extend them and to bring new plans forward too. But in rural parts of my constituency, it's not the cost of travelling on buses that's the only problem. There's a lack of bus services in the first instance, with some communities without a way to travel at all at times, because there are no trains, metro, appropriate cycling routes, nor are there bus services at some times of the day. Now, Yr Orsaf in Penygroes is developing a project to support residents, including young people, who face barriers because of a lack of public transport in dyffryn Nantlle, with the support of the dyffryn Nantlle community transport partnership. Is community transport an area that you as a Deputy Minister want to see developing in the future, and, if this is a priority for you, how much funding has been earmarked for encouraging this kind of transport in the Government's draft budget for the next financial year?

Thank you. A number of points there. I'm familiar with the work of Partneriaeth Ogwen and have visited some of their schemes—they're an outstanding organisation. I was particularly struck by the scheme we've been funding them for to retrofit bicycles, to add a battery to them, which, particularly in rural areas, particularly hilly areas, is a really practical thing that we can do to help people who don't have easy access to a car or to public transport. We know that, for generations, we've been favouring investment into road schemes, for those people who have cars, and, over time, have been neglecting public transport, and we've seen usage decline, we've seen routes shrink and we've seen fares go up. So, that is one of the reasons why we're bringing forward our bus Bill, to redesign the service, and it's one of the reasons why we'll be publishing the roads review next Tuesday, to, over time, shift resource from car-based schemes to schemes for everyone.

In the meantime, we do have some really difficult financial challenges, and we are seeing bus schemes being withdrawn, which illustrates the problem we have with the privatised system, because there is no strategic overview to this—it's being done randomly by bus companies. And then, we have the further problem, particularly in rural Wales, where bus companies are struggling to keep their business model going, and the cost of energy is really stopping them being able to run routes, and they're not tendering for fresh services. So, we have a range of challenges facing us, but the fundamental problem is the lack of investment that we have. Because we have prioritised other things, including as part of the co-operation agreement. We could have chosen to prioritise public transport; we chose other things, and we have to do the best we can with what we've got. But, clearly, as part of our modal shift and the net-zero targets, we need to shift resource far more into public transport.

I just want to echo the comments raised by the Member for Arfon, and recognise that this important focus is required on public transport, especially for rural areas, in areas like Arfon and across north Wales—the region I represent, of course. Deputy Minister, I'm sure you are an avid reader of the Welsh Conservative manifesto, especially the one for the 2021 Senedd elections. In that, we as Conservatives called for free bus travel and discounted rail travel for 16 to 24-year-olds, to help our young people access education, training and employment. This of course could embed that modal shift that you and I are so keen to see, whilst also supporting our environment, so importantly. So, in light of this, Minister, what consideration have you and the Welsh Government given to this type of idea, to see that free access to buses for our young people, so we can see that modal shift whilst also supporting our environment? Thank you very much.

Well, there's no doubt that, if we had lower prices, we'd have higher use. There are schemes right across the world, including free bus use in Normandy and elsewhere, and free bus schemes in Wales, in Cardiff and Swansea and Newport, for short periods, which have shown an uptake in usage. So, we know that, when fares drop, people are more likely to use it. There's no shortage of opportunities and ideas to increase usage and to reduce fares, and incentivise people to use public transport. The challenge always is the resource. So, I'm not sure how the Conservatives plan to fund that initiative that they had in their manifesto, but there are no easy options that I'm aware of to do just that.

We do have an offer on buses where people aged between 16 and 21 have a third off an adult bus ticket, and we've been doing a lot of work, as part of our commitment to a fairer fares regime, to model what we could achieve if we had much lower bus fares. And the figures are all very encouraging; the resource is the challenge. 

Thank you, Janet. The Welsh Government is investing £293 million in reducing flood risk to coastal communities across Wales through our coastal risk management programme. This will reduce flood risk to over 15,000 properties, and includes, for example, more than £19 million of investment in Aberconwy. An interactive map showing our investment is published online.

Thank you, Minister. I'm sure you're aware that, in 2014, our lovely sandy beach, north shore, Llandudno, received, without any notice, the dumping of some 50,000 tonnes of freshly and dirty quarried rock. At the time, it was described as 'shingle'. The town was in uproar, with residents, visitors and business owners still angry to this day. I can recall our sea washing up a white, milky froth for around three weeks, whilst this was described at the time as 'clean and inert shingle.' 

Now, in 2023—well, sooner than that, actually—we're now aware of the several options that have been brought forward to you to bring forward a new sea water flood defence scheme. One of the options is to implement a scheme that would replace sand, and stage 1 was even supported. I cannot overemphasise my immense disappointment that this scheme now will not be supported, as you feel that the cost outweighs the aesthetic benefits of using sand renourishment. Llandudno is the queen of the Welsh resorts, and the jewel in the crown— 

I'm going to have to call you to ask your question now, because I'm about to ask you to ask your spokespeople questions, of which there are three. So, can you ask your question?

Okay. What steps, Minister, can you take? How do we move forward on this? What steps will you take to ensure that we have the right sea defences we need, but that, at some stage, we can see our sandy beach restored in Llandudno? Diolch. 

Yes, thank you, Janet. So, just to be really specific, the Welsh Government have recently awarded grant funding to Conwy County Borough Council to develop a full business case for Llandudno, based on maintaining and improving the existing cobble defence on the north shore. The alternative sand option provides no additional flood benefit, at a much greater cost to the coastal risk management programme, and that's the problem. So, whilst I completely understand what you're saying about the sandy beach, the coastal risk management programme is for coastal risk management; it's not for tourist attractions and other aesthetic value. I'm not denying the value of that; I'm just saying that's not what the programme is for. 

So, if Conwy County Borough Council want to get an alternative sand option at Llandudno north shore, they really need to look for alternative sources of funding. There are some other sources of funding available, but, in all conscience, I cannot take a coastal management programme that's specifically designed to protect places from flooding and use it for a completely different purpose. So, whilst I have some sympathy with what you're saying, this is not the right programme for it. And, you can tell from the amount of money that we've invested around the coast of Wales that we are really trying to get as many properties protected from actual flooding as possible. Clearly, we do try to do that in the most environmentally and aesthetically pleasing way possible, but, in the end, it's down to how many properties we protect. So, I'm sure you'll be able to work with the council to get a better option, but not through this funding model.

Questions now from party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson, Janet Finch-Saunders. 

Diolch, Llywydd, and thank you, Minister, Now, there is no denying that the UK Government is taking decisive action to tackle unsafe buildings. The Rt Hon Michael Gove MP has sent all developers legally binding contracts that will commit them to pay to repair these unsafe buildings. This contract will see developers commit an estimated £2 billion or more for repairs to buildings that they've developed or refurbished over the past 30 years, and protect thousands of leaseholders living in hundreds of buildings across England. In England, the UK Government is looking to prevent developers from operating freely in the housing market if they fail to sign and comply with the remediation contract. Will you do the same for those operating in Wales who either refuse to sign or breach the terms of the Welsh Government's developers pact?

Yes, Janet, I'm very well aware of Michael Gove's various pronouncements. I very recently met with the then Minister for housing, who's now the Minister for culture, media and sport, I believe—it's quite difficult to keep up—to talk about this. I have asked for a meeting with Michael Gove as well, but I haven't had one since his reincarnation. 

The programme here is virtually identical in every aspect that you just outlined. We have worked with the 11 major developers in Wales. They have all agreed to sign up to the pact. The legal documentation is with them at the moment. Clearly, they're looking to see what happens in England with the legal documentation there. Our documentation is different because the legal framework in Wales is different, but, nevertheless, the import is the same. Here in Wales, though, we're going slightly faster than that. We have two of the big developers already starting to remediate. We're very, very well on with our programme of surveys. We've only a few buildings left to go. The ones that are left to go that haven't been completed for the full intrusive survey are all because we needed a complex set of agreements from various freeholders and so on, which I won't go into, but there are complex management issues in some of the buildings. The others are where a whole main road has had to be closed in order to access the building to do it, and we've had to work with the local council to figure out a traffic management scheme to be able to do that. Other than that, they're all done. The reports are all pending. We'll be able to start the remediation works as soon as we can.

We're also working on a programme for what are called orphan buildings. There isn't, as far as I'm aware, a programme like this in England. We have 16 to 23 orphan buildings—it does slightly depend on what you call it. An orphan building is one where there is no responsible developer, insurer or managing agent who can be held responsible, and we'll be able to take forward a programme for actually doing the remediation for them.

But, I think this is the most important point here: I have always thought that the Government should step up to responsibility in this regard. We don't want to leave it to individual leaseholders to have to take legal action against the developers, which is what the English building Act does. I understand why they did that, but we don't think that's right. So, the contract here will be with us, and, if it isn't fulfilled, it will be down to us to take action against the developers. That's how it should be, in my view. I will also be exploring whether or not we can, for example, prevent builders from taking up planning consents that are existing and continuing on. That's a second phase of the work. But, I'm quite pleased that developers here have come along this journey with us.

And then the last thing I'll say on this point, and it's worth bearing this in mind, is some of the buildings, some of the loudest people in the campaign—and who can blame them for having a campaign; it's a horrible thing to live with—some of the loudest people are in buildings where there is extensive litigation under way in which we cannot interfere. So, we are hamstrung ourselves by some of the processes ongoing. But my heart continues to be absolutely with the people living with this. And the last thing I'd say to you, Janet, is if you know anyone who really is in dire straits with this, please recommend to them the buy-out scheme, because we haven't had as much interest in that as we'd have liked, and I'm hoping to get as much publicity to it as possible.

Thank you for that comprehensive answer, Minister, it's really appreciated. I'm sure you would agree with me that the longer it takes to resolve this crisis, the greater the mental and financial pressure for these vulnerable residents. I'm sure you'd agree with me too that we shouldn't be allowing other people to get on the back of this and actually benefit financially. The reason I'm mentioning this now is that individuals have written to me explaining, in some instances, that the service fee, since all this, for a three-bedroomed apartment has increased from £2,500 to around £5,000 a year. Alongside that, it's been alleged to me that as least one managing agent is charging an in-house brokerage fee for insurance, also serving section 20 notices, not carrying out the works, charging admin fees on top of the management fee, and that some have no corporate policy for proactive maintenance or for the regular checking of singular compartmentalisation of escape routes. That strikes me as an abhorrent management regime. Would you be prepared to look into this further by means of a review or some form of inquiry to establish how exactly each managing agent in Wales has responded to this cladding crisis and if there is any sign that some could actually be profiteering from this situation?

Yes, I'm very well aware of this as well. I've had one of the biggest managing agents in to see me very recently. I have a constituency full of people who have got this problem, so I'm dealing with it locally as well. It's sometimes difficult to separate the building safety from building structure issues, which can be complicated as well. So, we’re looking to see whether we can solve building structure issues, which are not necessarily building safety issues, simultaneously, as two lots of work obviously is nonsensical. But I also, in the conversation with Lucy Frazer, will be continuing this with the officials and I’ll obviously seek a meeting with the new housing Minister as soon as I know who that is. But we discussed with her and her officials the leasehold reform programme that the UK Government is taking forward.

You’ll know, Janet, that the complexity of the devolution settlement in this area is a difficulty. I know people hate me talking about how complex this is, but there’s no getting away from it. Whether or not the Welsh Government can in fact regulate managing agents is one of the things that we’re looking at and there are some complex legal issues there. But what’s really clear is that most of the big managing agents work across England and Wales, and so we need to make sure that we have a proper programme—I think you’ll agree with me there.

So, I very much hope, and we are working very much towards the UK Government legislating for managing agents and leasehold reform, and I hope they will add in estate agents at the point of sale, because various colleagues around this Chamber—Hefin David in particular comes to mind—have brought up the issue of estate management fees on a number of occasions, and they’re dealt with by the same body of people. So, the answer to your question simply is: yes, we’re very well aware of it. Yes, we’re getting the managing agents in to speak to us. I will be hosting a meeting for all of them in Wales, including the small ones, very soon. But really what we need is a system of regulation that sets out their professional qualifications and what they can charge for.

And, Llywydd, at the risk of trying your patience with the length of my answer—and I apologise; it’s a very complicated area—just to say that we also feel that there should be coverage for this in the building reform piece that we will be bringing in front of the Senedd, so that when we have new builds in future, it will be very clear who can and who can’t be a managing agent.

Thank you, again, Minister. I can't argue with that response at all.

Now, my final point: in the budget for 2023-24, building safety funding is set to receive a 37 per cent reduction in resource. Despite the indicative budget setting aside £9.5 million for 2023-24, the draft budget allocation has dropped to £6 million. I'm just a little baffled and maybe you could explain better. So, how can you on the one hand say that building safety is one of your top priorities, but you're cutting it at the same time?

So, it's a multi-angled programme, basically, and so, what we're having to do is calibrate the budget out to the point where we're doing the remedial work. So, you'll see that we're spending less at the beginning of the programme because we're doing surveys. We have done some remediation. We've obviously done remediation in social buildings that meet the criteria, for example. We're about to start the orphan building remediation that I discussed. Some of the buildings that are in private sector ownership will go into remediation. But it's quite clear that this programme will run over several years—four or five years for this kind of capital programme, generally speaking. So, you need to look at the budget in the round.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson now, Mabon ap Gwynfor, to ask his questions to the Deputy Minister. Mabon ap Gwynfor.

Thank you, Llywydd. I want to start by acknowledging that there's a great deal of work going on at the moment with public transport services in Wales. The recent report by the North Wales Transport Commission was very interesting, for example, with one particular interesting statistic, which stated that two-thirds of the journeys of people in north Wales were 15 km or less, but that data was heavily weighted towards the more populated areas obviously.

A number of metro schemes are also in the pipeline, and if we look again at north Wales, there is significant talk there about developing train links from Llandudno and Wrexham to Liverpool and Manchester. The Swansea bay metro in south-west Wales talks about the urban centres, again. But what is notable in all of this is the total absence of plans for rural Wales. Where are Ceredigion, Powys, most of Gwynedd, and the heartlands in these metro programmes? So, what are the Government's ambitions in ensuring that residents in rural Wales can access public transport?

Thank you very much for that important set of questions. In fact, the data published by the Burns commission for north Wales showed that, even in rural areas, the majority of journeys were relatively short and, in principle, many of them could be replaced by public transport and active travel if the services were there. I have been conducting a series of round-tables with local authorities and others across different parts of Wales, and what's striking is that when you map rural areas, there are rural areas in every county of Wales. It's not just a mid Wales issue, or a north-west Wales issue; rurality is everywhere, and the issue of accessibility and choice is a real challenge across the country.

We know from other countries that where different choices are made, you can have a viable public transport system in deep rural areas. If you look at Sweden, Germany or Switzerland, even the small villages have a bus service every hour. So, there's no reason in principle why we couldn't make a much better offer for rural areas. It's a question of resource and political choice. Now, if we are going to meet the climate change targets that we're all committed to, we clearly need to see modal shift, people moving from cars to sustainable transport in all parts of Wales. One of our foci is to say, 'How do we make what we know is the right thing to do the easiest thing to do?', because human nature is to do the easiest thing, and, at the moment, in many parts of Wales it simply isn't easy, or in many communities it's not possible at all after 5 or 6 o'clock at night to catch a bus. So, we know we're not starting from a great place, and we know that this is going to take some time to happen.

As part of the co-operation agreement, we are looking at transport corridors in west Wales. The designated Member Siân Gwenllian and I have agreed a programme of work with Transport for Wales to assess the possibilities for primarily bus corridors in west Wales, but also looking at how, in planning terms, we can preserve the old railway line between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen. But, at some point it's going to become a choice of where we put the scarce investment we have and where the priority is. That, I think, is our dilemma, because from a carbon point of view we're always going to want to achieve the quickest reductions and the largest reductions in carbon. Clearly, investments in rural areas will be more expensive and have a smaller carbon impact, and there's going to be that tension that we need to resolve. But I'm very clear that unless we address the rural issue, we're not going to be able to succeed in our overall vision.

I thank the Deputy Minister for that response and the warm words in supporting provision in rural areas, but further to that, it's been brought to my attention that the bus emergency scheme that was introduced during COVID is to be redirected to meet other requirements within Government, and that this funding will come to an end very suddenly indeed.

A number of bus providers have contacted Members on these benches over the past few days saying that this BES scheme, which was supposed to extend for another year, is to be dropped at the end of this financial year. This, of course, has destroyed the plans of these bus companies and means that they can't give necessary notice for bringing particular routes to an end. These are local and relatively small providers in the most part, that don't have great reserves to compensate for some of these routes. As a result, they warn us that this will mean that many routes will disappear, and some businesses may also go bust. Those bus providers are tuning in to this session today, listening in to hear whether the Deputy Minister can give them an assurance that the budget and grant will continue to support these bus routes. So, can I ask the Minister to give us an assurance that the funding for bus services in Wales, which means the bus emergency scheme, will not be cut, and that it will continue for the next financial year?

Well, it's more than just warm words. We have spent £150 million since the start of the pandemic in saving the bus industry in Wales. So, let's be very clear about that: without the help and intervention of the Welsh Government, the bus industry would have gone bankrupt; there wouldn't be any bus services. So, I think it's only fair to reflect that we have put our money where our mouth is.

Now, the whole point of the bus emergency scheme—the clue is in the title—it was for an emergency; it was never meant as a long-term piece of funding, and it was always intended to come to an end. Now, the challenge we have is that the patronage levels have not returned to the pre-pandemic levels. So, we are supporting a bus network that no longer has the same behaviours as the one that came before. So, in a sense, we're ossifying a bus network. Even the industry agrees that we do need to rationalise and re-look at the bus networks in Wales.

Now, we've been doing this far more generously than England has; we've sustained a far greater use of bus provision than has happened the other side of the border. I think any fair look would look at the cuts that are being made in England right now, where the bus industry has faced a cliff edge right across the UK because of this disconnect between the reality, the behaviours, and the economics of the use of public transport. So, we've got a genuine problem here, in that usage rates, particularly amongst pensioners, have not returned to the rates that we want to see. And we simply do not have the money to keep sustaining the bus emergency scheme at the levels that were true during the height of the pandemic. So, we have a problem.

We are working closely with the industry. Julie James and I met with the operators on Friday of last week. We've been meeting right throughout this week, and we'll be meeting again with them this Friday, because they've hit the deadline of when they have to give notice to the traffic commissioner for handing back these contracts. We've spoken to the traffic commissioner about offering some discretion about when that trigger point is reached, and they are certainly open to being pragmatic about that. And what we want is to taper off the scheme, not face a cliff edge. But we do have to end the support, sooner rather than later. So, we're trying our best to come up with a solution that does not see lots of routes being surrendered, but the financial position we're in—our budget—is very, very, very challenging, and we're working through this week to see what we can do.

Thank you, Natasha. In 2021, renewables projects in Wales generated the equivalent of 55 per cent of our electricity use. Evidence published alongside our review of energy targets shows there is a pipeline of projects in development to meet our 2030 target, an ambitious but credible route to our proposed 100 per cent target by 2035.

Thanks, Minister. I recently met and received a presentation from the developers behind a proposed solar energy farm at Craig Y Perthi near Uskmouth power station. Solar power, I'm sure you know better than anyone, is currently one of the cheapest forms of energy generation, and with schemes like Craig Y Perthi solar farm in the pipeline, there is a real potential for solar energy to address not just our energy demands, but also provide support for people suffering with high energy bills at present. So, Minister, can you advise us here in the Chamber today and beyond what progress is being made, specifically, on increasing the number of solar photovoltaic projects here in Wales? Thank you.

Thank you, Natasha. Obviously, I won't comment on individual projects because I'm the planning Minister as well, so I'll make some general remarks about that.

Quite clearly, we do want solar to come forward, alongside a raft of other things in the renewable energy market. What we want is to get as many different outcomes from energy projects as possible. So, we're particularly interested in solar that doesn't take up good agricultural land, solar that's placed on land that doesn't have high-grade agriculture. We are hoping that the solar farms will take into account potential for co-located biodiversity or tree planting. There are some excellent examples around Wales. The panels aren't necessarily fixed—they can be raised from the ground, they can be at different angels, they can even move and all the rest of it. So, in general, we're trying to encourage as much solar as possible in the right place. We're trying to discourage it from the wrong place, as we do with all other energy projects as well, and we're asking the developers to tell us a whole range of things as they bring the schemes forward, including how much energy they'll generate, obviously, how it would connect into the grid, or whether it's a closed-loop system.

There's a great one down in, I think, my colleague Rebecca Evans's constituency, or I might be wrong, as it might be in my colleague Mike Hedges’s constituency, but it powers Morriston Hospital, and that's a closed-loop system. Is it yours?

Yes.

I wasn't quite sure where the edge was there. It's an excellent project, and one of the things we discussed when we were there—I had the great privilege of opening it, so it's now powering the hospital, helping with their energy and carbon footprint—but one of the big things about it is that it has a hedges-and-edges project around the edge for trees, and it's underplanted with a biodiverse meadow. What's not to like?

So, the short answer is, 'The more things it can bring forward at the same time and the space it can occupy that can't be occupied by other beneficial uses, the better', and then we can get the projects consented.

In addition to the laudable target to achieve 70 per cent of Wales's electricity demand from renewable sources by 2030, of course by 2035 we're aiming for 100 per cent renewable generation. But we also have to find, and it's within your plans there, a fivefold increase in electricity generation from those renewable sources by 2050. It's an enormous challenge, but it's a great opportunity, particularly if we can make sure that communities have a stake in this, and also local government, our great municipalities, and also that the Welsh Government has a stake in this as well. Because there is the size of the challenge, but what an opportunity, finally, to get all of us involved in this as well. So, how are we going to take that forward, both at a community level but also at a Welsh Government and a national level?

Thank you, Huw. Llywydd, I'm in danger of needing to give an hour's lecture as the answer to every one of these questions. I won't try to your patience too much. Suffice to say, Huw, we've already announced that we'll make a state-owned energy development company. Part of the point of that is to build exemplar sites with a lot of community ownership and to exploit the resources we already have. We've worked very closely with the Crown Estate to bring forward the floating wind in the Celtic sea and the fixed wind off our north coast. That alone is a 2 GW opportunity immediately, with much more to come. The big issue for us is grid. We're having a discussion with the grid on the new holistic network design, which I think will bring forward the opportunity for a large number of small projects right across Wales, including the 'homes as power stations' type thing that we look forward to seeing. Great restraint there, Llywydd—I hope you agree.

I appreciate it.

Thank you, Rhys. I have regular contact with the UK Government and other devolved administrations in respect of building safety. I engage with my counterparts in the UK Government and devolved nations through the inter-ministerial group meetings, in which I discuss matters including building safety.

Diolch yn fawr, Weinidog. I was disappointed in hearing your answer to my colleague Janet Finch-Saunders that you're yet to receive a response to your request to meet Michael Gove. I hope he will respond to you very soon. Minister, I read your article in Welsh Housing Quarterly, and in that you set out further action on building safety. I was pleased to see that some remediation work has happened with at least two developers. When do you expect the other developers—11 in total—will commence the remediation work, and how many developers are yet to engage or have refused to sign up to the pact? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you very much, Rhys. I met Lucy Frazer. Unfortunately, she changed jobs pretty immediately afterwards. I'm not going to take that personally. I'll have to look to meet the new housing Minister as soon as I know who that is. I do meet Michael Gove regularly at the higher level inter-ministerial group meetings, in which we discuss these matters as well, but I haven't had the opportunity to do that in the last month or so. We have 11 developers signed up to the pact, so we're really pleased that they've done that. We're in the process of agreeing the legal documentation that goes alongside that, and we've been working with them to make sure that they can commence in advance of that. Two of them, Persimmon and Bellway, have commenced work in developments in advance of the legal documentation. We're working with others to see if we can accelerate that. I would encourage them right now to start those works as soon as possible, but nevertheless we'd like them to sign up to the legal documentation.

Without giving too much up in the way of commercial confidentiality, the range of things we're discussing are, for example, whether the Government can help with cash flow problems by paying upfront and being repaid, whether the work can be shared in some way, and also what the supply chain and employment chains look like. Because with the best will in the world, we'll all be fighting over the same resource if we're not careful. So, we do need to make sure that it's calibrated. We also want to take into account the outcome of our surveys, including the intrusive surveys, so that we're looking at a 'worst fabric first' approach here in Wales. But as I said in response to Janet Finch-Saunders, I will also take a very dim view of any developers who don't sign up and get started as soon as they can.

I'd like to thank my colleague Rhys for raising this issue. Minister, I understand that PRP, the company instructed by the Welsh Government to complete site surveys of the 163 buildings in Wales registered as affected by cladding issues, will not release any reports until all of the surveys are completed. The timescale for completion was indicated as sometime in October, and we are now four months over that original completion date. As the Minister will no doubt agree, this issue is extremely important for many people who own flats, because they are unable to sell or remortgage properties until these site surveys have been completed and any potential work highlighted is undertaken. Therefore, Minister, can you provide a provisional date by which you expect PRP will have completed all site surveys and make available their reports? Thank you.

Thank you, Joel. As I said, we are very aware of what the position on each site is. We understand what the difficulties have been. The remaining sites, the ones that are not yet completed, all have either a complex management structure and it's taken us some time to get all of the consents in place for the intrusive surveys—I believe we've got all but two of those sorted now—and the others require the closure of a main thoroughfare or there is some other utility issue associated with actually commencing the work. So, it's not that we need to put an end date on it; we understand what the issue for each of the buildings is and we're working with them to make sure that we can overcome that, including speaking to local authorities and engaging in that way.

I'm very aware that this is taking longer than we'd thought. Unfortunately, it's even more complicated than I thought, and I get absolutely trolled on social media every time I say that, but it doesn't take away from the fact that it is complex. We will be bringing forward a building reform Bill, which makes it a lot less complex and makes people step up to their responsibilities. I hope that the Senedd will help us pass that when it comes forward. We are learning a lot from the complexity that we're encountering in doing this in terms of helping us craft the Bill and make sure that the system that we put in place for the future makes sure that this does not happen again.

Good afternoon, Minister. I firstly want to say I am sorry that you've had the experience of being trolled on social media; that's absolutely unacceptable, and I'm sorry to hear that. I just really wanted to ask two very short questions, one from your response to Janet Finch-Saunders. It was good to hear about the buy-out scheme. You said it was actually not being taken up, so, my first question is: I wonder what the communication process is, how you're advertising that. And the second is something, again, that you touched on: is there a pact or an agreement in place to engage with developers who are pursuing leaseholders in court? We all know that that's extremely stressful for people who have taken steps perhaps early in the process in order to try to seek remediation. Thank you. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

On the leaseholder support scheme, I said when we launched it in June last year that we'd continue to review it on a three-monthly basis, and we've continued to do that. We've reviewed and slackened the eligibility criteria each time in order to reach a wider range of people. Now, we've included the rising cost of energy in the hardship factors that are taken into account, and we've allowed displaced residents to be eligible. So, basically, if you're a pensioner couple and you've bought the flat as your pension income, then we're allowing you to take advantage of the scheme now, which wasn't the case when we started.

We've communicated it through the managing agents and through all of the various routes that we are aware of, including the leaseholder groups that we do engage with. Some of the leaseholder groups have refused to engage with us, unfortunately, but we still try to communicate with as wide a range of them as possible. And, Llywydd, anyone who has anybody in this situation in their constituency or region should definitely get in touch as soon as possible because we're anxious to help as many people as possible. But more importantly, we want to help all leaseholders.

I've taken the view that individual leaseholders should not have to sue individual developers for this, but that the Government should take responsibility for that, and that's the basis of the scheme we've taken forward. Unfortunately, where there is ongoing litigation, we cannot intervene in that. That's the problem. So, if there is ongoing litigation, my hands are completely tied. I wish that wasn't the case, but it is. We've already offered to pay for surveys that have been undertaken in the correct way retrospectively, and there are a number of other things that we can do. But where there is litigation ongoing, I'm afraid my hands are tied. 

I think you've seen just how much of a problem this is for very many of us representing constituencies. As the Minister is aware, I have two high-rise developments in Swansea East, Altamar and South Quay. In fact, the Minister might drive past them on her way in some mornings. There is serious concern being expressed to me by the residents in those blocks. In Altamar, they're concerned that Bellway are refusing to meet with them. They believe that implementing sections 116 to 125 of the Building Safety Act 2022 would get action taken. Why will the Welsh Government not put forward a legislative consent motion and allow the legislation to be used in Wales?

Thank you, Mike. I just don’t agree that it would allow action to be taken. We’re actually very well aware of those buildings. Both of them are in the intrusive survey stage; one of them is complete. One of the buildings has not asked us to pay for a survey that they’d already had done. I’m more than happy to discuss the detail with you if you want to meet with me about it. We'd like them to bring that forward. I hope that both buildings will go into remediation soon. If there is a problem with one of the developers not engaging, if you want to write to me, I’m very happy to intervene.

If a local planning authority refuses an application for planning permission, the applicant can appeal to the Welsh Ministers. Planning law requires planning appeals to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Minister, in 2017, the Welsh Government overturned Caerphilly council’s decision to reject an application to build 260 homes in Hendredenny. The application was opposed by residents, ward representatives, the local MS and MP, yet the Welsh Government overruled the local consensus. In the decision letter, the Minister at the time recommended a condition that the plan should include strategic drainage features and a scheme for disposal of surface water and land drainage flows, placing responsibility for approving the plans on the council. But six years later, we have NRW investigating reports of water run-off polluting a local resident’s land, with fears this may have also affected a nearby river, Nant yr Aber. In addition, fears about traffic chaos have been realised, and concerns about the ability of local services to cater for hundreds of new residents continue. I know you won’t be able to comment on an individual case, Minister, but could I ask if you understand the frustrations of local people when schemes like this are imposed against their wishes? What changes do you believe could be made to the planning system to give communities the power to make decisions that affect them without fears of being overruled by Cardiff?

Thank you, Delyth. I absolutely do understand the frustration of that, and it’s deeply felt in a number of communities. The difficulty is that this is—as I know you know—a quasi-judicial process. This isn’t about your best judgment; this is about following a quasi-judicial process. I’m not going to talk about an individual application; I don’t have the details in front of me. But in general, the frustrations are usually around that people haven’t understood that the local development plan allows a development of that sort and didn’t object at an early enough stage in the development plan, or that the development plan is now out of date to the point where it isn’t able to bite and speculative planning consents can come forward, or that there haven’t been sufficient objections of a number of statutory consultees in order to take it forward; there are a range of things of that sort. I’m not familiar with the one, off the top my head, I’m afraid, that you’re talking about, but Caerphilly would not be the only council that had had trouble getting its new LDP in place. So, it may well be that a range of those factors were in place.

The solution to it is to make sure—and we are making enormous efforts in this regard—that communities have a real opportunity to comment at LDP stage, so that they understand what kind of development could come forward in their community if they don’t make their wishes and views known at that stage. So, I think that’s the point: because it’s a plan-led system, if it’s not in the plan, it’s very much harder for an appeal to come forward. If it is in the plan, then obviously, the developer can be—. The whole point of the plan is to allow the developers to have some level of certainty about what might be permissible. So, that’s the point: to make sure that we make huge efforts at the early point of the planning process. We do fund Planning Aid Wales to help communities do that, and I’m more than happy to have a conversation—I’m sure a number of Members will have this problem—with you about how we can make sure that communities are engaged at that early stage.

Question 6, Cefin Campbell.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Minister, I welcome very much the Welsh Government's commitment to ensure—

You will need to ask the question on the paper.

Sorry, sorry.

Jumping the gun, Cefin Campbell.

After a year and a half, I forget.

Diolch, Cefin. We need a strategic solution to updating our grid infrastructure to achieve our net-zero commitments and give people access to clean heat and transport. National planning policy states our preferred position that new power lines should be underground where possible and expects public engagement to mitigate their impact elsewhere.

Thank you very much, Minister. Yes, I do welcome the Welsh Government's commitment to ensure that the electricity needs of Wales in the future will be met from renewable sources, and that by 2035. But my question is related to how we intend to transmit that electricity across rural areas. Now, as you said, in areas of outstanding natural beauty or national parks there is an expectation for these electric cables to be buried underground, but there is no commitment that that should happen in areas outwith those designated areas. Over the past few weeks, I have heard about plans for the construction of new pylons in the Tywi valley—and I have to declare an interest, I do live in that area—to carry cables from mid Wales down to Carmarthenshire. I do say that the area is one of historic significance and beauty, and there are examples in European countries where they have placed cables underground. So, my question, without sounding too much like a Nimby, is whether the Welsh Government will commit to develop and implement a new set, a wider set, of measures with regard to placing electricity cables underground?

Thank you, Cefin. The policy is that electricity transmission cables should be placed underground where possible, not just in designated landscapes, but where possible. Sometimes, it's not possible, even in a designated landscape. We don't anyone digging up our peatlands, for example. So we would expect developers to find the best route. Sometimes, that's not the shortest route, and then a conversation ensues about what the best route is, and by 'best', as I say, I don't mean shortest. The best route is the best environmental route; the best route for the communities that need the electricity. So, we expect the developers to undertake a series of public engagements, both with the communities affected and with the local authorities and with us, about what that best route is, and with the national grid about the connections, and we expect to come to a conclusion about the best route and the need for the electricity in that area. So, it's a complex interweb.

We're also working, and have been for some time, on this new holistic network design process, because we have long believed—for 40-odd years we have believed—that a planned grid is a better grid. So we also work right across Wales in designing a future energy plan, so that we can help the grid design where it needs to be, and then take into account things like where you could underground, what kind of cable, what voltage of cable, all the rest of it, where the sub-station should be, for example. There's a whole series of other things; it's not just about the transmission lines. And we believe, and, I think, probably everyone in here believes, that that plan is a far better way of doing it than each individual developer attempting to connect their particular development in the shortest possible way that they can, which, obviously, there's an economic imperative to do that. So, just to reiterate, therefore, we require the consultation at all levels, we need the grid to step up to the case on this to make sure that it complies with the plan, we need the communities to be involved, and we need to make sure that the electricity is actually the electricity that we need and in the right place for the right thing.

I personally have another goal. I don't want any community in Wales to be able to see a renewable energy facility and not be able to take advantage of it. So, I declare an interest myself here, Llywydd: I can look out of my window at home and see two windfarms, and I'm on off-grid oil. That's a situation that we really need to address. I think the communities are much more able to understand what's going on if they're benefiting directly from it. So, we also need to work on that. 

Question 7, Jane Dodds. Question 7, Jane Dodds, on Ffos-y-Fran. 

That's a no. 

I do apologise.  

Okay. 

Question 8, Ken Skates, finally. Ken Skates. 

Thank you. Engagement has been undertaken with local authorities to discuss the roads review and its implications. The tone of those discussions has been positive and pragmatic, with an emphasis on collaboration with local government on the development of schemes that support modal shift and the decarbonisation of transport.

Minister, that's very positive and good to hear. You'll have seen in the last 24 hours, of course, the chaos that's caused across the local road network in and around Wrexham, when the A483 is closed or when lanes are reduced, and it shows how reduced capacity on the trunk roads impacts on traffic volumes through adjoining towns and villages where there are local roads. So, will you work with local authorities in assessing the impact of not proceeding with trunk road improvements, in terms of traffic volumes, emissions and safety, adjoining local roads and communities, and will you commit to publishing such impact assessments?

Thank you. I was grateful to meet with Ken Skates yesterday to discuss his concern about air quality around the local roads in his constituency and the implications of what might come out of the roads review. We'll be publishing that next Tuesday, the fourteenth, along with the national transport delivery plan and a new roads policy in the future. Ken Skates will remember that when he and I both published the Wales transport strategy two years ago, we committed to putting tackling climate change at the heart of our transport policy, and we now need to follow through on that. That is often uncomfortable and involves doing things differently, and that clashes sometimes with local expectations, which have been built up over many years. But we now have a progressive policy on planning, 'Future Wales', we have 'Planning Policy Wales', we have Net Zero Wales and we have the Wales transport strategy all telling us that we need to move the dial, and that's what we intend to do through the publication of the review.

Clearly, there are transport problems that exist, and he's highlighted some in his own constituency. The situation in Wrexham was unfortunate, because of some overrunning maintenance work that was meant to have been done overnight, but dragged on. There are always going to be incidents like this, whatever capacity you have on the highway network, that are going to cause inconvenience and delays. We need to build a resilient transport network, for sure, but that is resilient not just against short-term pressures, but also against medium to long-term ones that the climate and nature emergencies present. But we will continue to work very closely with local authorities and with Members to make sure that we develop schemes that both help local people and put us in a position to withstand the challenges that are coming towards us.

I thank the Minister and Deputy Minister.

We have the questions to the Minister for Education and Welsh Language next, and the first question is from Adam Price.

Developing Welsh-medium education and improving the language outcomes of all our pupils as well as understanding better what lies behind the further decline in Welsh-speaking communities is a priority. Language use is at the heart of this. We will undertake further analysis when further data are available.

The Minister will have seen the figures, of course, and they are concerning, aren't they? It varies from a fall of a little under 3 per cent among the youngest cohort, 3 per cent of those between 16 and 64, but 9 per cent in those over 65. There are different factors, of course, driving those different statistics, but, certainly, they paint a picture that is worrying. I know that the Commission for Welsh-speaking Communities is going to be driving progress across communities and will make recommendations as to which areas should be designated as areas of linguistic sensitivity. But can the Minister tell us more now on the kinds of interventions you as a Government think would be appropriate for the situation that we're facing in Carmarthenshire? And as we await the commission's report, would you be willing to meet with myself and other elected members within the council and other stakeholders to discuss what can be done immediately to tackle the challenges we're facing in Carmarthenshire?

Thank you for those important questions. I met with the education director and the council leader of Carmarthenshire last week to discuss their strategic plan, and the message of the county council was clear, in that they see themselves that there is a need for action to be taken in a purposeful and deliberate way without delay. We have full faith that they will do so. The cabinet is unanimous in support of the plans that they have, which is very much to be welcomed.

As the Member said, the picture is a complex one in the sense that different cohorts in terms of age groups have been impacted in different ways. There is a geographical element too, with specific concern regarding the Amman valley, for example. So, understanding the data in its context is important. There are positive elements too in what the county is doing, specifically in terms of investment in immersion and the ambitious plans that they have to move 10 schools along the linguistic continuum to provide more increasingly through the medium of Welsh. I'd be willing to meet with him and others. I was intending to have a series of regional meetings in different parts of Wales to discuss with local stakeholders, and it would be very appropriate to do that in Carmarthenshire too, I think.

Minister, one of the best ways of increasing the use of the Welsh language is to encourage its use in informal settings. Working with organisations such as the Young Farmers across Carmarthenshire could be a key part of ensuring that we meet the target of Cymraeg 2050. I recently raised with the Minister for rural affairs the fact that the only financial support that the Young Farmers receive from the Welsh Government is through the language grant. Although this is to be welcomed, I do think that more could still be done to support other community groups to promote and use the Welsh language. So, how are you working with your Cabinet colleagues in order to ensure that financial support for organisations such as the Young Farmers and other groups can support their success and promote the Welsh language simultaneously? 

I thank Sam Kurtz for those questions. The contribution made by the YFC to youth work in our rural areas is priceless. I'm very pleased about the financial contribution of almost £125,000 that we provide to the Wales federation and the county federations to ensure that their important work can continue. The enthusiasm and commitment of young people in the world of agriculture and wider rural communities in Wales is inspirational.

We already provide a source of funding for other bodies in different sectors. I announced a fund last week, or the week before, increasing those this year as a result of the cost-of-living pressures and inflation on those budgets. As the Member will know, we are currently reviewing our grant programme to ensure that that aligns with the Cymraeg 2050 project. I know that he'll welcome that. 

For the first time ever, we have a unified system for supporting learners from nought to 25 with additional learning needs. We are making a new investment in the coming days of £2.1 million to further education colleges to support the roll-out of this system for young people.

Thank you, Minister. It was helpful to hear that. Minister, you will be aware from the case work that I have previously written to you about, which touches upon my original question—. The main issue that was raised with me was that there generally isn’t straightforward signposting available for young people with additional learning needs and their families who wish to attend post-16 education. I’m sure, Minister, that you’ll agree that there should be a process to ensure that a young person’s needs can be met. But, from what I understand, there are frustrations that this process isn’t as clear as it should be, and that there can be a lack of communication as to why certain decisions have been made.

I appreciate that the additional learning needs Act looks to improve the support that is on offer to young people with additional needs. But, can the Minister outline how the current reforms are being extended to better help young people with ALN and their families, with the transition into post-16 education, and to ensure that they can access consistent, straightforward advice and support, so that we can remove any unnecessary barriers and open as many doors as possible for young people with additional needs?

I thank the Member for that question. He has, as he said, corresponded with me in relation to particular issues on behalf of constituents. While I’m sure that the response wasn’t what he was hoping for, at least I hope that it was a clear explanation of the decision that was taken, and the impact of the appeal process, if that’s the reference that he’s making in his question. The ALN system is designed to strengthen young people’s rights and to ensure that their feelings and views, and those of their families, are listened to and taken fully into account. It’s designed to ensure that the right support is put in place quickly in a way that best reflects the needs of those young people.

In the context of post-16 reforms, we have adopted, as the Member may know, a flow-through approach to move young people from the SEN system through to the ALN system. So, those currently in year 11 and below will flow through into FE with their existing IDP at that point in time. The Welsh Government is, at the moment, working with local authorities to devolve the budgets to support local authorities making those judgments into the future, so that there’s a local connection between the needs of young people and the provision that is available. He makes an important point in relation to the communication of the availability of services to young people. It's an important principle of the code and the Act that that is, obviously, working effectively. Most recently, at the end of last year, we published a series of guidance documents for young people about the system and the code, and the ALN pathfinder website, which aims to help young people with ALN, should, I hope, be a useful tool, so that young people know what rights they have and what support there is available to them.

At the beginning of January, I raised the issue of a lack of Welsh-language assessments in a timely manner for children and young people who are neurodiverse. I have a few cases in my constituency of children who need Welsh-language assessments and are having to wait years for those assessments. One, for example, has been waiting for assessment since February, and an initial online assessment by the Healios company was conducted some weeks ago. The child's first language is Welsh, and it was decided by the assessor that the assessment should be held through the medium of Welsh in terms of fairness, but the only Welsh-medium assessor is on maternity leave. The case was referred to the local neurodevelopment service; the result of that is that they'll have to wait two or three years for a Welsh-medium face-to-face appointment. So, does the Minister believe that it's acceptable that people who have Welsh as their first language have to wait far longer for assessments, and what cross-departmental work is happening in order to improve the provision and ensure that this situation is improved?

Well, I don't think that it's acceptable that that happens, of course, and I'm sorry to hear the example that the Member brings to the Chamber today. One of my priorities, in terms of the reforms within the education system, is to ensure that we have expertise in this field in the Welsh language. We are commissioning resources to support that at the moment, but we haven't reached where we need to be—I accept that fully. But work is in train to commission more resources and to provide provision across Wales, so that there is leadership in the system to be able to respond to the kinds of challenges that the Member mentions. If the Member wishes to write to me about that specific example, I'm happy to look at that, but I can also work with Julie Morgan on how this works in the health system too and bring the example to the attention of the Welsh language lead that we have in the system already.

Questions now from party spokespeople. Conservative spokesperson, Laura Anne Jones.

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, since 2017, 40 per cent of school support staff registered with the Education Workforce Council have left. There's clearly a massive retention problem at the heart of Welsh education, which is causing the industry to lose experienced staff at this rate. Because of this, cash-strapped schools are having to put even more of a strain on their budgets, having to recruit and train more staff. Why have you allowed this issue to go on for nearly six years now, and just when will your Government fix this retention crisis, which has presented itself particularly under your watch?

Well, I recognise that we need to do everything we can to support in the system support staff, who deliver a very, very important service to our young people and are indispensable in our schools. The Member's question does not recognise the work that I've done since becoming Minister in relation to this matter. She will recall, because I made a statement in this Chamber last year, that I've commenced a programme of work to support the very people that she's referring to in her question. That involves a process of work led by teaching assistants in relation to the standardisation of roles and consistent deployment of TAs across local authorities and schools in Wales. It's also coupled with an entitlement, for the first time, for a programme of professional learning to teaching assistants. The professional learning grant will now be weighted to reflect the number of TAs in schools. Those are all new developments that have come into place over the course of the last year. I recognise that it's really important that we fully value the role that teaching assistants and other support staff play in our schools, and I absolutely am doing that.

Absolutely, Minister—it's an invaluable role, and it's better late than never, I suppose. It's not just a crisis with support staff though, is it? From my conversations with the Education Workforce Council and the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service, it's blindingly obvious that we have a crisis in recruiting and attracting core subject teachers. Last year, you hit under 50 per cent of your own target for mathematics teachers, and just under 30 per cent for physics and chemistry. You can't even attract Welsh-medium core teachers, fundamental to your roll-out of Welsh-medium education. Things aren't just adding up, are they? Since 2011, we've seen a 10 per cent drop in teachers' numbers, as they leave the profession in droves. Recruitment and retention of high-quality teachers is fundamental to ensuring that our children and young people in Wales receive the best education that they deserve. From these figures, it's blindingly obvious that you're failing miserably and worryingly in your objectives. Minister, just why have you and your Government allowed this persistent issue to turn into a full-blown crisis?

If the Member wants to know what a demoralised teaching profession that doesn't feel valued by its Government looks like, she just needs to look over the border at what's happening in England, which is cataclysmic in terms of retention and recruitment generally. So, that is what a Conservative education policy looks like. We can see it happening before our very eyes. 

What we have in Wales—[Interruption.] The Member is muttering; I'm happy to answer the question. What we are doing in Wales, as she will know—we've debated in this Chamber many times, and I know that she has strong, if sometimes perhaps not fully-informed, views on this—is we have a 10-year plan to recruit Welsh-medium teachers, working together with our partners across the system, and which is creative and tries new approaches to improve the numbers of Welsh-medium teachers coming into our profession.

We have financial incentives to encourage those in difficult subjects, where recruitment is a challenge not just in Wales, not just in the UK, but internationally. So, some of those are in maths, some of it is in some of the science subjects. We have arrangements in place to encourage young people into the profession to teach in those areas, because I want to make sure that, in the areas that I agree with her are key areas, we have a full complement of staff able to make sure that our young people get the education they need. 

Minister, education is devolved. You peddle out the same old excuses when you have levers at your own disposal. Even though the aims of the suggested new supply teacher central portal are the right ones—and I will credit you on that—even people like the Education Workforce Council have said, in practice, it's just not going to work, given there's no incentive, no driver, to make them move over to the central system, because they're not competitive financially with the private sector offerings, and it's purely dependent on local authorities and staff signing up for it; it's just not mandatory. It's yet another sticking-plaster solution, isn't it, that will not solve the critical problem of your own making that we're facing. 

Quite frankly, it stinks of 25 years of a stale old Government that has run out of ideas and is shooting in the dark and hoping for the best. You're not attracting core subject teachers. You are not retaining support staff, and your party, the party of the unions, can't even avert teaching strikes with levers at your own disposal.

Minister, I want to know what exactly you are doing to solve this urgent, self-made, teaching staff crisis.

Well, I'm not sure if the Member listened to the two previous answers that I've given, but I've outlined in great detail what we are doing. The question of retention and recruitment is a challenge in all parts of the world. What we are doing in Wales is specific to our needs in Wales. I've outlined a list of issues to her that she clearly has disregarded in her third question. What we are doing in Wales is making sure our teaching profession recognise that they are valued.

If we want to see how Conservatives treat this profession, we can look over our border. We are in the middle of a dispute with teachers in all parts of the UK. We will continue to work with our partners in a way that respects them rather than seeks to legislate to restrict their rights. If she thinks that's the right approach for encouraging teachers into the profession, I'm afraid I think she's very badly mistaken. 

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Heledd Fychan. 

Thank you, Llywydd. Minister, yesterday, during the debate on the draft budget, I asked the Minister for finance to consider the budget implications in terms of the target of a million Welsh speakers, and, specifically, whether there are any plans to support free entry for local families or low-income families to the Urdd Eisteddfod and the National Eisteddfod this year. Last year, you invested in free entry to the Urdd Eisteddfod for everyone in the organisation's centenary year, as well as 15,000 free tickets to the National Eisteddfod. Both schemes were a success, with the Urdd reporting an increase of 31 per cent in the number of attendees, with 20 per cent of visitors coming from 40 per cent of the most deprived areas in Denbighshire. Do you intend to continue with this investment, to ensure that local families on low incomes can continue to enjoy what both of these festivals have to offer, and to benefit from what they have to offer too as part of the target of reaching a million Welsh speakers?

Well, as the Member said, in 2022-23, we increased the core grant of the National Eisteddfod to ensure that it had the resources to stage future Eisteddfodau in a time of financial uncertainty. We are to allocate additional funding to the Eisteddfod in 2023-24 in the draft budget, in order to strengthen their community engagement structures, which are so important to their work as a festival. This will mean an allocation of £1 million to the Eisteddfod during the next financial year. We're also supporting a social inclusion pilot project to run alongside the next two Eisteddfodau in areas where we see great in-migration and great demand for second homes. 

In terms of our support to the Urdd, the Urdd does excellent work in the Eisteddfod and more broadly as an organisation. Officials across Government collaborate with the Urdd in order to ensure that the Eisteddfod continues to be accessible, to ensure that everyone can enjoy Europe's largest youth festival, and we support the Urdd in many different ways too.

Thank you, Minister. I'm still not sure whether that means there will be free entry for low-income families to the Urdd Eisteddfod and the National Eisteddfod this year. I would ask, if you're not sure of that yet, it would be good to have clarity as to whether that will be able to continue in any way. Because, as has been demonstrated, there is a whole host of benefits to the Welsh language from ensuring free entry, which means there's an opportunity for some people to enjoy a Welsh-medium event in their area for the very first time ever. That does encourage people to send their children to Welsh-medium provision in terms of their education. So, can I ask you to reconsider or look again at the question I asked?

Secondly, you'll be aware, I'm sure, of the proposed plans of some local authorities to close or scale back some cultural services, such as the Cardiff museum, and library services in various parts of Wales. A number of arts projects like this are under threat as a result of significant financial challenges. A key component of the new curriculum, of course, is the expressive arts, and the guidelines state that this is vitally important so that learners can gain an understanding and an appreciation of cultures and societies in Wales and in the world. With the future of a number of cultural and artistic venues at risk, are you concerned about what the impact will be on this element of the new curriculum, and have you asked local authorities to look at the impact that cuts of this kind will have on educational opportunities for our children and young people?

We encourage schools to look at all experiences available to our young people so that there is a diversity of experience, particularly through the medium of the Welsh language. As I mentioned earlier, we have a grant programme that supports, in terms of Welsh language policy, a number of organisations that provide a number of educational, interesting and attractive prospects for our young people. We are currently reviewing that grant, but I will refer her to the draft budget, which shows what we intend to do in this area.

Yes. [Laughter.] In September, all schools and settings will be working with the Curriculum for Wales as it rolls out through to the 2026-27 academic year. Our ongoing support to the profession is key to successful implementation, and my annual report each July is how we communicate widely on progress and priorities.

I'm very grateful to you, Minister, for that answer. Since the introduction of the Curriculum for Wales, the Welsh Government has emphasised that the purpose of pupil assessment is to inform the way that teachers support pupils. However, the lack of an identifiable and clear assessment framework has left one local headteacher in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire concerned about the pupil transition from primary to secondary education. To ensure a correct path for pupil progression and learning, a clear assessment framework is key to establishing distinct targets, yet some teachers are finding the CfW's progression code and six areas of learning and experience ambiguous. Given the concerns of this headteacher in my constituency, what is the Minister doing to reassure teachers over smooth pupil transitions to key stage 3, and how is the Welsh Government intending on levelling the new curriculum with the existing GCSE exam system? Diolch.

Well, I would encourage the headteacher in his constituency to engage with the Camau project, which we are funding through the University of Wales Trinity Saint David, which provides resources to support schools in their development of new assessment approaches. It's fundamental, really, that at the heart of the new curriculum is that assessment is there to support the progression of individual learners. It's not there for accountability. That's a very fundamental shift. It's crucial to the curriculum, but it does involve changes in pedagogy and in teaching and learning practice. I would encourage him as well to work with his cluster to make sure there's a consistent approach to assessment and progression across the cluster, and I'd also encourage him or her to engage with the national network conversations, which have been and will continue to be a source of further information and professional learning in relation to assessment.

Minister, I hope you enjoyed your visit to our excellent schools in Ffaldau and Llangynwyd last week.

When we were there we visited in Llangynwyd the arts lesson that was going on, and what struck me with the new curriculum was that they were using that art session to develop issues around identity, around mental health, as well as actually teaching very good skills in art. And then they were incorporating that into other aspects of the curriculum being taught in other lessons. It was, I think, quite a revelation in the way the school had really taken on board the new curriculum. So, partly in answer to Sam's question, but also partly to ask for your reflections on that, how do we make sure that the very best practice in developing the new curriculum, and integrating it with that flexibility across the school, is done, just as they were doing in Llangynwyd?

Well, I think that's a really important point and, as you say, it reflects one of the points that Sam Kurtz was making in his question as well. There is a balance to be struck, isn't there, as you're changing an entire system between central direction and the kind of flexibility and devolution, if you like, to schools of the ability to design and implement a curriculum that works for their communities and their learners. And, in a sense, there's an inherent tension there. 

I'm clear that it's a curriculum for Wales, and so the professional learning and resources available to teachers in any one part of Wales through their consortia, for example, should be available to those in any part of Wales. So, one of the initiatives that we've taken at the end of last year is to provide a common access point so that any practitioner in any part of Wales can access all of that professional learning and resources. I think that's an important part, but it's not the end of the story. The other aspect is to make sure that there's a consistent framework for accountability across the system, which is what we have with the new approach that Estyn is rolling out, either through the national network, as I mentioned earlier, or, crucially, through the work of clusters.

And I think we also saw, by the way, very effective cluster working in our visit to Llangynwyd, when we met with a primary school head as well. I thought that seemed to me to be a very strong set of working relationships, and that's what we need to see. If there's any head in any school in Wales that has reservations about whether their cluster is working in the way they would want to see, I would really encourage them to make that a priority, because I think it's pretty fundamental to the success of the reforms.

The Curriculum for Wales remains key to raising education standards for all learners. Our school improvement guidance aligns with the principles and practice of the curriculum, setting out a framework for the education system to support schools to provide the best possible learning experiences and outcomes to their learners.

Thank you for that response, Minister. Markham Primary School sits in the constituency of Islwyn, built over 110 years ago in 1913, serving the local community. It's a green but not a leafy suburb. Will you join me in congratulating Markham's headteacher, Mrs Lindsey Pritchard, her staff, governors and pupils for a glowing report from Estyn that extolled praise on the school in its recent inspection report? The school's motto is, aptly, 'Making the Most of Every Day'. Estyn observed Markham primary as a

'nurturing and vibrant place for pupils and staff',

which children felt 'proud to be a part of', and 'ambitious' staff help pupils make very good progress in their time at schools, and all classes have 

'a strong focus on developing literacy, numeracy and digital skills'.

Minister, what message, then, can you give to the community of Markham about their proud school? And will you make every endeavour to visit Markham primary during your busy schedule in 2023 to see for yourself how the partnership working of Welsh Government, local education authorities and proactive community schools can transform communities and change the lives and pathways of Welsh children forever? Diolch.

Yes, I'm very happy indeed to extend my congratulations to Mrs Pritchard and the staff and pupils of the school. I thought it was really telling, the phrase that the Member used, I think reflecting what Estyn said, which was the school had a focus on making children feel proud to be a part of it. And the reason that's so important is because it reflects how important the agency of young people is in our schools and in the new curriculum in particular. And what better mark of success of a school than that the pupils who the school is there to support and to serve feel proud of being part of that school community?

I also gather there is a very impressive digital education offer at Markham, including a fully equipped radio station, so I'll be very keen to come along and visit the school at some point later on this year. 

Minister, you've read a lot of reports; I've read a fair number of reports now on education, having had many questions with you over the past few years. Now, statistically, we all know that children growing up in poverty and disadvantaged areas are less likely to do well at school. Research from the Education Policy Institute into the impact of educational inequalities reveals that, sadly, Welsh schools suffer a wide disadvantage gap compared to English schools. They go on to say that progress is narrowing this disadvantage gap, and it has, indeed, been modest over the last 10 years, and that local authorities in Wales need to learn from deprived areas in England with similar demographics, such as Barnsley and Salford, which have managed to achieve smaller disadvantage gaps over time. So, Minister, what action are you taking now to address the disadvantage gap in Wales to raise educational standards for pupils in Islwyn, and, ultimately, throughout Wales? Thanks. 

The report to which she refers in her question is an important contribution to the discussion and to the debate, and it certainly reflected, at least in broad terms, our own understanding of the challenges that we face in parts of the system. She will recall, perhaps, in the many reports that she's read, the speech that I gave to the Bevan Foundation last year and the statement that I made in the Chamber, which outlined a very extensive programme of actions that we are taking to close the attainment gap in Wales. The most recent of those, she may have seen in the press a few weeks ago, was the announcement of our cohort attainment champions, of heads who've shown particular success in their schools in closing the attainment gap and making sure that every single young person in their school has the opportunity to flourish. They are now working with other heads to share that best practice in the way that we just heard earlier is so important. That is one of a range of interventions.

We are also, as she may know, commissioning research into mixed ability teaching, and also what more we can do to encourage teachers to some of those most disadvantaged areas so that we make sure that young people have the support that they need. I am, in fact, planning on making a statement to the Chamber in the coming weeks that will set out in detail progress against the whole range of items that I set out last year, and I'd be very happy to answer any further questions at that point. 

Discussions with the Minister for Economy have principally focused on how the education system supports the skills agenda and the young person's guarantee. Also just this week, Cabinet discussed the question of net-zero skills, including the role of education in achieving our ambitions in that important area. 

Thank you for your response, Minister. 

Recent work from the Construction Industry Training Board has shown that, over the next five years, Wales needs 9,100 additional new entrants into construction, with bricklaying, electrical roles and roofing being areas of particular high demand. With the draft budget, there is a chance here to build on how the education system supports people into these industries, but, as I referenced yesterday, conversations I've had with the sector highlight the challenges learners face during their education that may undermine their progress to a career in the industry. More often than not, these challenges lie within the ability of low-income students to fund their education, and what colleges are seeing is students leaving education to access more readily accessible jobs that pay higher wages initially, but don't ultimately fulfil the long-term needs of our communities. Retention will be key to ending those skills shortages. So, how does the Minister envisage addressing these very specific challenges, and does he think that increasing the educational maintenance allowance offers a potential solution? 

I look forward to the debate that we're going to have in the forthcoming weeks in relation to education maintenance allowance, in particular. He will know from my previous appearances at these questions and in the discussions we've had that the real pressure on budgets has meant that we've not been able to increase education maintenance allowance, but we are very happy to have been able to maintain it, which hasn't been the case across other parts of the UK, as he will know. I have also been very pleased to be able to increase the funding available to further education colleges in relation to the financial contingency fund, which, as he knows, is available to support students in further education who are facing particular pressures. I think it's very important that we do everything we can to support students in that position in the way that I know that he does as well. He will also recall that we have, over the last couple of years, sharply increased the funding available to further education colleges in order to be able to offer that broader range of skills that he sets out in his question, and which I agree with him are very, very important. 

Minister, it is tough to imagine what the workplace of tomorrow will be like. If someone had said this time last year that artificial intelligence would pass the interview for a level 3 programme engineer at Google, we would have thought them crazy, but that is exactly what ChatGPT did just a few days ago. The swift rise of artificial intelligence brings a whole new set of challenges for the future job market. However, it also brings a whole set of new opportunities for today’s learners. Minister, how will the education system adapt to ensure young people can embrace these new and emerging technologies and be prepared for whatever tomorrow throws at them? Thank you.

Altaf Hussain makes a very important point in relation to the changing nature of our economy and how difficult it can be sometimes to anticipate those changes. What that tells me is that we need to make sure our young people are equipped for any change in society, and that what we need to be imparting to them, as much as knowledge, are the skills and the experiences to be able to navigate a changing economy in a way that puts their interests at its heart and enables them to flourish.

I think he's right to highlight that there's a particular set of opportunities, and challenges also, in relation to the digital transformation of our society, and AI is one of those examples. He'll know that at the heart of our new curriculum is a set of digital competencies that are cross-cutting. He'll also know of the significant investment that we've made as a Government in recent years to ensure a very, very widespread level of access to computers, laptops, tablets and other devices, and the broadband connectivity that supports that. The challenge now is to make sure that, in our schools, the full functionality that that offers is able to be taken advantage of, and we are working with our profession to ensure that that is the case.

Good afternoon, Minister. I want to ask about personal learning accounts. These were developed by Kirsty Williams in the fifth Senedd to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to learn here in Wales. May I ask for an update on these? How are you working collaboratively with the Minister for Economy to ensure that young people here in Wales do develop the skills that they need, particularly for the green economy? Thank you very much.

Well, I thank Jane Dodds for that question. The accounts are something that I'm a great fan of personally, and I've increased the budget for them substantially. It is important that we continue to provide opportunities whereby people in work can renew and transform their skills. Two of the areas where we've focused funding on are digital skills, as Altaf Hussain mentioned, and also green skills. As we look at increasing the budget for PLAs, one of the greatest priorities is to ensure that we reflect the needs of the economy. So, discussions with the Minister for Economy are certainly moving in that direction.

In this financial year, I allocated almost £18 million for the PLA programme, and what we have seen happening—and this has happened during COVID too—is that we've been able to provide funding and then ensure that we support people in accessing new skills in a very short period of time. The ability to move quickly is so important in a changing economy.

Certainly. Community-focused schools are at the heart of our agenda to tackle the impact of poverty on attainment. In 2022-23—this financial year—we provided £3.84 million for family engagement officers, £660,000 for community-focused school manager posts, and £20 million for capital improvements to schools. We have also in recent weeks published two sets of guidance for schools as well.

My question was specifically about that £20 million of capital funding for community-focused schools. It was referenced in the Culture, Communications, Welsh Language, Sport, and International Relations Committee—if I've got that right—which looked into how that money should be spent. The 'Levelling the playing field' report is the one I'm thinking of. I also met recently with Dr Nicola Williams-Burnett of Cardiff Metropolitan University, who has got a great deal of research expertise in this area and is keen to see those community-focused aspirations realised. So, with that in mind, I'd like the Minister to provide more detail at this stage on the delivery of the capital programme and where that funding's being directed, and particularly what practical benefits have emerged and what evaluation will there be of those outcomes.

Well, it's very important, isn't it, as well as being able to allocate significant funding, that we make sure it's being spent in a way that is both effective and also provides good evidence to others of how to best spend that money. Of course, the funding is being made available in this financial year, so the assessment of impact clearly will follow from here. But the kinds of things that we've seen investment in include—this is the capital grant—improving external lighting in sports areas, providing storage for equipment for extra-curricular activities, outside shelters, security measures to segregate school and community-use areas, and then modifications to changing rooms, to toilets, and so on, to facilitate community use.

In relation to how that money has flowed through the system, obviously the responsibility for distribution lies in the hands of local authorities, but we expect them to focus the funding on small to medium-scale projects and to take full note of the guidance that we've issued in how they go about doing that. That, we think, is the best way of making sure that schools can adapt and effectively open their premises outside traditional hours. In terms of how it was funded to local authorities, it was distributed on a formulaic basis, dependent on schools and learners in each individual local authority and, as I mentioned at the start, we'll be evaluating the outcomes of that funding in due course.

Well, the cost-of-living crisis is having, and will continue to have, significant financial impacts on all public services, including our schools. School budgets are, of course, for local authorities to determine. They are best placed to work with their schools, as many are, in proposing reasonable cost-saving measures where they are appropriate.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. Powys County Council are looking at making education cost savings of over £1.7 million. Proposals for schools from the council include turning off laptops and ceasing photocopying. I'm not exactly sure how much of £1.7 million will be saved from stopping photocopying in schools, but this seems an inadequate way of treating our teachers and our children, and the cabinet just tinkering around the edges. Minister, to make efficiencies in schools we need to make sure that the buildings are as energy efficient as possible, so what support is the Welsh Government giving to schools to make them more energy efficient, so that can help school budgets?

Well, as he knows, we make available funding to local authorities in relation to the decarbonisation of the school estate—I'll have some more to say about that in the coming weeks, as it happens—as well as making sure that all new schools built using Welsh Government funding are net-zero schools, both in terms of embedded carbon, but also in terms of operation. I think it's really important that we can make sure our school estate is futureproofed in terms of its energy needs in the way the Member suggests.

Finally, question 8, Mark Isherwood.

We continue to support neurodiverse pupils. Both the additional learning needs system and the Curriculum for Wales put children and young people's needs at the centre through person-centred planning and supporting individuals' progression.

Thank you. I'm still contacted regularly by parents of pupils with diagnosed or suspected neurodiverse conditions, many of whom have diagnosed neurodiverse conditions themselves and most of whom live in Flintshire. In recent months alone, e-mails received from Flintshire parents include the following: 'We attach evidence showing behaviours that are autism related and are held in her education file, yet she's without a formal assessment and diagnosis of autism.' Another neurodiverse mother said, 'If anything, we're excluded from anything such as when social services recently went into my daughter's school. How is that an equal partnership when you live in fear and cannot trust?' Another wrote, 'My son is autistic and had complained of extreme bullying by pupils and a teaching assistant at his previous school. The council dismissed any request for support.' An advocate for an autistic mother wrote that her client's son came home from school with some bruising. The social worker that visited said that she could see no bruising despite his mother taking photographs of the bruising that day. And finally, only last week, a mother wrote that her autistic daughter's school had put many referrals in place for her daughter, only to be knocked back. How can you ensure effective implementation of Welsh legislation to prevent such clear and repeated breaches from happening?

Well, none of us want to hear the sorts of examples that Mark Isherwood has described in his question today, and if there are any of those that he wishes to write to me about specifically, I'd be happy to take that up.

In relation to ensuring the reforms are effective, we are making sure that there is additional funding in the system, both this year and for the next two years. We are now a little over a year into a three-year implementation period for the very significant additional learning needs reforms. He will also know that we have recently published significant new material, which is guidance for pupils and their parents about their rights and the services that they are entitled to. And in relation to supporting the workforce to understand the needs of pupils with additional learning needs, in both initial teacher education and now continuing professional learning for teachers in practice, obviously meeting those needs is a priority, and supporting learners with ALN is part of a student teacher's core studies. We've also developed an online ALN national professional learning programme, aimed specifically at additional learning needs co-ordinators, but also teachers and lecturers, so they can develop their own ability to support teachers with ALN. And in addition to our work to support all learners with ALN, we fund the national autism team to provide relevant support and resources to the education sector as well.

I thank the Minister.

The next item is item 3, which is the topical questions, and the first question is to be answered by the Minister for Social Justice and is to be asked by Jack Sargeant.

I've written twice in the last two weeks, urging UK Government to end the abhorrent practice of forced installation of prepayment meters. I call on them and energy suppliers to remove any meters installed by force this winter, and I'm urgently seeking a meeting with the Secretary of State.

Can I thank the Minister for that answer, and again thank her for her leadership on behalf of the Welsh Government in bringing these issues to the attention of the UK Government?

The UK Government, Ofgem and the courts have watched this national scandal develop for over a year, seemingly simply trusting energy suppliers and debt collection agents to do the right thing. Thousands of warrants for the forced installation of prepay meters have been passed without scrutiny; the only check being that the debt collection agents simply state that nobody impacted is vulnerable. We know that that is not true. Just last week, we all would have seen the footage of the results: vulnerable people's houses entered, often broken into, and prepay meters forcibly installed. The courts have now finally ordered a halt to this, but for me, it's far too late for the thousands that have already been switched.

Minister, we need meaningful compensation, we need a ban on the remote switching, and to allow those already switched—forcibly switched—to switch back free of charge. In your meetings with the UK Government, if they accept your invitation and your calls, will you express the importance and urgency of the calls I've said today? And will you also investigate whether the Welsh Government and this Senedd could support the development of rules similar to those put in place for water back in the 1990s—those rules that don't allow people, people right across our society in Wales and the United Kingdom, to be simply cut off and disconnected?

Well, I'd like to thank Jack Sargeant for his relentless and effective campaign on what are the prepayment meter scandals that have emerged over recent weeks. You have raised this consistently over the past year and helped to expose it, for us and for the Welsh Government to respond, and indeed the whole Senedd and our fuel poverty cross-party group, which Mark Isherwood chairs, and I assure you that this is at the forefront of my agenda at the moment as Minister for Social Justice, to address this shocking scandal.

So, in recent correspondence and contact with the UK Government and Ofgem, including a meeting that I held with the Ofgem board this morning that happened to be in Cardiff, I've stressed the need for energy suppliers to not only stop forced installation, but also to revert any prepayment meters that have been recently fitted, and I continue to seek that meeting with the Secretary of State to make clear the urgency of this call. I have had a response from the energy Minister, and I'm happy to share that with colleagues in the Chamber in the Senedd today.

The existing rules, of course, were intended to protect the most vulnerable in our society, but they have not worked. They're clearly not working as intended, and we have to look at that. So, I did ask that question of the Ofgem board today. They have got to regulate the industry effectively, and in my meeting with them, with the chair and board of Ofgem this morning, I did say to them: are they making effective use of their existing powers as regulator? Are they using those powers? Are they sufficient to effectively regulate the sector? Do we need strengthened legislation? What can we do in terms of further powers needed to regulate the sector? And also, in their response, I will share with the Senedd today that they said that they've launched a robust investigation into the activities of British Gas, the debt collector collecting agency that they were using, and they're looking internally at their compliance activities. They did say that they're using all their current powers to full force, but obviously we need to hear from them, and I think it's due within the next couple of weeks, the outcome of that investigation.

Just finally, on your point about water, heat and power are vital services for our households. As with water, energy supply companies should not be simply able to disconnect users, and I'm going to raise this particular point, as I did today with Ofgem, with the UK Government.

Last month, prior to your 31 January and 2 February letters to the UK Government and before The Times investigation revealed British Gas routinely sending debt collectors to break into customers' homes and force-fit prepayment meters, even when they're known to have extreme vulnerabilities, the then UK business Secretary Grant Shapps wrote to energy suppliers, stating that they should stop forcing vulnerable customers onto prepayment meters and that they should make greater efforts to help those struggling to pay their bills. He called for the urgent publication of the energy suppliers' recent investigation into vulnerable customers, and the release of data on applications suppliers had made to forcibly install meters. Last week, Ofgem asked energy companies to suspend the forced installation of prepayment meters, and on Monday, Lord Justice Edis ordered magistrates' courts in England and Wales to stop authorising warrants for energy firms to forcibly install prepayment meters with immediate effect. On the same day, the UK energy Minister, Graham Stuart, met the boss of Ofgem and told him that the UK Government expected strong and immediate action where suppliers fall short of their obligations.

In light of your call for an outright ban, what consideration have you given to concerns of a consequent increase in bailiff action, which I believe is the only thing that's held the UK Government back? And how will you work with British Gas to promote their ring-fenced prepayment customer support fund, targeted to help prepayment and vulnerable customers, who must apply, nonetheless, for this? Thank you.

Thank you, Mark Isherwood, for your questions, and I hope you will back my call for a meeting with the Secretary of State. Of course, I have written to the Secretary of State and I have had a response from the energy Minister. I think what is very clear is that we've got to recognise the scale of this: 200,000 households in Wales use prepayment meters for their mains gas and electricity; 15 per cent of all households, 24 per cent of tenants in the private rented sector, and almost half of social housing tenants use prepayment meters, and they're on the lowest incomes. We are talking about those who are most vulnerable.

What I've said to the UK Government is that, yes, we're pleased to see energy suppliers halting the practice of forced installation, but what did it take? It took the investigation of The Times, and politicians like Jack Sargeant, and indeed Ed Miliband, I would say, to expose what was going on. Enforcement didn't work. The UK Government isn't acting enough to look at the new legislation that probably needs to come forward. There is a lack of Ofgem safeguards in place. I said to Ofgem, 'We will support you if you need more regulatory power; we need to support you to do this.'

We have to await the outcome of that investigation into British Gas. I've met with energy suppliers on a number of occasions. They've given me assurances about the way they're treating and supporting vulnerable customers. I find it very hard to actually take on board some of the assurances they've given me when we hear particularly of their use of these unscrupulous debt collection agencies. I am meeting the Enforcement Conduct Board next week, and I will be able to report back on that, because we need to look at their work. I was glad that that was raised yesterday by Peredur in terms of their use and in terms of looking at how accredited enforcement agents are key to this. I will certainly be responding to and updating the Senedd on these issues. 

In the cross-party group on consumer rights, which I chair, we heard on Monday from Which?. Their latest report, published this week, showed that 92 per cent of Welsh consumers are worried about energy prices higher than in England and Scotland, and that consumers are engaging in cost-saving behaviours that may be detrimental to their health. We know it's detrimental to their health: 78 per cent putting the heating on less, 18 per cent having fewer cooked meals. The Welsh Government must take action to do what it can to safeguard its citizens. Citizens Advice Cymru in that same cross-party group shared the frustration. Their graphs were showing plainly what was happening as regards prepayment meters, and they were completely frustrated that it took The Times to be able to get some action from the UK Government on this.

The distribution and supply of electricity and the supply of gas are, of course, both reserved to Westminster under the Government of Wales Act 2006. Consumer protection is also a reserved matter. Given this, what representations has the Welsh Government made to get these powers devolved, so we can ensure that the ban we need is implemented and maintained? Will the Minister call on the UK Government to devolve these powers? Also, we've heard, I think it was just yesterday, on the news that the take-up of vouchers available for prepay customers under the UK Government's energy bills support scheme is well below what was expected. Has the Welsh Government approached the UK Government to ensure any unspent or unredeemed money is used to support those vulnerable households here in Wales who are in fuel poverty and on prepayment meters? 

Thank you very much, Sioned Williams, for reporting on that CPG on consumer rights. I'm shortly meeting with National Energy Action and Citizens Advice, who are key to inform us, and inform us regularly, of the evidence and also of the policy moves that we need to take. I think this is time when we do look to what powers we've got, the ways in which we can intervene when so much is reserved, which is why we have to press the UK Government on these issues. I think this is about the most vulnerable people. I've mentioned the numbers who are on prepayment meters. We have intervened in ways that we can, not just with our winter fuel support scheme, but with our partnership with the Fuel Bank Foundation, to make sure that people can access fuel vouchers through these difficult months.

Again, I said to Ofgem today—they were meeting in Cardiff—'You have got to show to us what the impact of your investigation into British Gas will be' in terms of their use of those debt enforcement agents, which is so shocking and appalling. My colleague the Counsel General is questioning the courts and the ways in which the courts have forced through these warrants. Worryingly, as he identified, over the past three years, over 22,000 warrants have been issued through Swansea magistrates' court, not just for people in Wales, we understand. This actually makes a strong case for the devolution of justice, doesn't it, in terms of the way forward.

But I finally want to say, and it is important, that I raised the issue about how can citizens on prepayment meters redeem their vouchers. Citizens Advice has said that all of the efforts to reach those customers are still not effective, as you've identified. I did get a response from the UK Government and, indeed, from energy suppliers saying that vouchers can be reissued, and we expect them to continue to do that even if the 90 days have expired. But, again, we will use this opportunity to promote the ways in which people—the suppliers and indeed customers—can access those vouchers. 

This scandalous exploitation of individuals who have the least and who need to keep warm, like everybody else, really exposes that we have a completely broken system. So, if you ever get the chance to talk to the UK Government about their failure to act on this—. It's been over three months that Jack Sargeant has been raising this in the Senedd. And what have the magistrates been doing when they issue these licences? Have they been asking whether these individuals are vulnerable and are able to get to the shop in order to top up their credit? It seems to me that what we need, Minister, is a complete overhaul of the regulatory system—Ofgem has been exposed as a paper tiger—and we also need to put a stop to this business of charging those on prepayment meters more than those who are paying by direct debit. It's absolutely scandalous, given that there is no service. You don't have to go and look at the meter to see how much people have used in the way of energy, they know that. So, it seems to be absolutely—. So, will you have discussions (a) with the Ministry of Justice, as to how they're going to increase the awareness of the magistrates of how ordinary people live; and (b) will you urge the UK Government to completely overhaul the regulatory system, otherwise known as Ofgem?

Certainly I will follow up all of those points, Jenny Rathbone, Chair of the Equality and Social Justice Committee, with the UK Government and, indeed, with Ofgem. I said, 'You need a complete overhaul of regulations' to Ofgem, and we'll see what impact their enforcement powers have in terms of their investigations in terms of British Gas.

Yes, it did take Lord Justice Edis, as Mark Isherwood said, to stop those applications for warrants for prepayment meters in magistrates' and district judges' courts, so that's what the Counsel General is following up as well. They've ceased to be listed, but when you hear of the way that they were going through the back rooms of courts, people with no representation—£22, I think the Counsel General has been saying; the money that was made by the courts out of this—we need a review of the legislation. In fact, that is actually something that Lord Justice Edis said himself. 

I think the point is, finally, that it is the most vulnerable and the poorest in society who are on prepayment meters. They should be scrapped. Yes, it is a choice for some, but one of the questions that has been asked, and I'm sure it has been asked in your cross-party groups, is: has remote installation stopped? No, I don't believe it has. Enforced installation has stopped, but remote installation is still going on. 

Finally, I have asked for suppliers not to be making standing charges. They're the highest in north Wales in the whole of the UK, and very high in south Wales. And even if people cannot even feed their meters, they're still subject to the standing charges, so when they get their fuel vouchers, perhaps via us, they actually are paying off the standing charges. Isn't that an absolutely shocking situation, which we've got to address?

And finally, Mike Hedges.

The Minister has answered part of what I was going to raise, because the Minister is quite used to me talking about the problem of people having standing charges. I understand from The Observer last Sunday that standing charges can be up to 50p a day. Most of us don't consider having to spend a day without putting on any lights, without putting on any television, without putting on any heating. That is the life of a number of my constituents, where they have to not use any energy, and then when they do—. As one constituent told me—I've mentioned this to the Minister before and I'm going to keep on mentioning it—she had not used any energy for four days, she heated or warmed a tin of soup, and her energy costs went over £2 because she hadn't used any energy for four days. Does the Minister agree that we've got to get standing charges ended and that we need to get them ended now? Because what is happening is the poorest are paying more and more for less and less. It is a scandal; it is a scandal that should not have been allowed, and certainly one we need to bring to an end.

Can I thank the Llywydd for enabling more Members to make the points and ask the questions today to this topical question? Yes, the standing charges are an outrage in terms of the impact they have on people's lives.

Can I just go back to the point that was raised by Jack Sargeant in his supplementary question? We need the sort of legislation we've got in the water industry to prevent customers being disconnected even if they are in arrears, and we need to get Ofgem to take on those powers to safeguard vulnerable customers. But I will continue to press for the end of those standing charges, which energy suppliers, with all the profits that are being made, can afford to cut and cover. 

Just one more—Andrew R.T. Davies.

Thank you, Presiding Officer, for allowing the question. Minister, I’m grateful to you for your answers so far today on the abhorrent practices that we saw last week. I do not absolve the UK Government from responsibility in this; they do have responsibility. They’re ultimately the Government that sets the legislative framework. But one thing I do think is a fundamental weakness here is the point that Jenny Rathbone made and others have made: Ofgem is completely not fit to purpose. I speak from a business point of view, and I declare an interest in that I’ve had interaction with Ofgem. I’ve raised it with the First Minister himself here on several occasions in First Minister’s questions about Wales having its own place on the board of Ofgem—a dedicated board member, so that Welsh interests can be truly represented.

I understand the Welsh Government meet periodically with them, as you’ve done today. Did you pose the question to those board members today? Do they consider, in light of the evidence over the last 12 months, that they themselves are fit for purpose, given the blight that we’ve seen on people’s lives with the revelations that came out last week, but also the impotency they seem to have in face of what’s gone on in the electric and energy market over the last 12 months in particular, where businesses and consumers have felt helpless at the hands of many large companies who’ve shown no respect for the wishes and concerns of people and the situations they find themselves in? 

Thank you very much, Andrew R.T. Davies. I was standing in for the First Minister today at the Ofgem board. They were meeting in the UK Government offices in Central Square, where they actually have an Ofgem office, which actually, they told me, is being expanded in terms of their presence here in Wales. The chair of the Ofgem board is actually representing Welsh interests. They’ve been here for two days making visits to Tata and to local energy initiatives as well. I think your points are very well made. We have to see now whether or not they are using their powers, which they say they have got, in terms of a root-and-branch review of what is happening, what the scandal is, and then question what their role is. Diolch.

I thank the Minister. The next question is to the Minister of health. Russell George.

Thanks very much. A written statement has literally just been issued on this topic, but I’m happy to set out some aspects of the offer to NHS workers in order to stave off industrial action, if that is helpful.

Thank you, Minister, for your answer this afternoon. I do hope, of course, that a solution is found and agreed that can lead to further industrial action not taking place in Wales. I have asked my topical question this afternoon because I had further questions following your written statement on Friday. Of course, in the last 10 minutes, a further written statement has landed in the inbox of Senedd Members. I'm glad that the topical question has brought forward this written statement, which perhaps answers some of the questions that I had, but also perhaps provides some more questions that I have as well, given this opportunity now, Minister.

But can I first of all ask: do you believe that the source of funding for this proposal is sustainable? And the reason I ask that question is that the finance Minister told the BBC that it was being funded from reserves. But what about future years, and how will the year-on-year pay settlement be funded? I looked very quickly, Minister, through your written statement over the last 10 minutes. With regard to working hours, you talked about a working group that's being set up and reporting by the autumn. That sounds positive, but perhaps you can outline what the remit of that working group is. 'Flexible working'—that was another headline I was pleased to see, Minister. Perhaps you can say a little bit more about your retire and return strategy that you've outlined in your statement this afternoon. I was very pleased to see the headline of 'Reduction in use of agency'. I suppose the question there is: how? There wasn't a great deal of detail in the statement, so perhaps you can expand further on that. And I was particularly interested in your point in your statement this afternoon, Minister, on pay restoration, and you're talking about influencing the UK Government, the pay review body. But can I ask: what about the influencing that you might have on your own pay review body in that regard as well? Thank you, Minister.

Thanks very much. And as you know, we've been negotiating very diligently over a very long period of time, very intense negotiations, and I'm really pleased that we were able to come to a conclusion on Thursday night. That was put, certainly to the officials within those unions, and the vast majority of them, I'm delighted to say, called off their industrial action, which is not insignificant—and we're talking about the RCN, the RCM, Unison, CSP, GMB, BMA, BAOT, and SOR. They all agreed not to continue with industrial action whilst they put this package to their members. So I'm really pleased that we were able to do that. I think that there's a lesson here for other Governments across the United Kingdom that, actually, sitting down and discussing can lead to some positive conclusions.

Now, what I'm absolutely clear about is that this is not over. The decisions on this will ultimately be for the rank-and-file members of those trade unions, who will now need to determine whether they want to pick up that package that has been so carefully worked out. It's not been an easy process; it's been a very challenging process. And just in terms of some of the points that you made—. And you're quite right, it is literally this minute that this has come through. That's not actually because of the topical question but because, literally, we have just finished negotiating with the trade unions, so it was absolutely down to the wire, and I'm glad that it's coincided with your question, Russell.

But, just in terms of the sources of funding, I just think it's really important that people understand that we've said, the whole time during this process, that there is an amount of money for this financial year, and what we've done is we've raided our reserves to get the money to pay for this financial year. Next financial year—and the unions were very clear with us—there are some red lines, and their red line, in relation to health unions, was that they wanted to see at least an element of this being consolidated into future years. So, the truth is that we've gone at risk on this. And you asked about agency nurses, and I know this is something we're all keen to see, but now, through working with the trade unions, I think it will be much easier for us to try and deliver on making efficiencies in relation to agency workers next year. But the truth is that we're going at risk to the tune of about £60 million next year. So, if we're not able to find those savings, then I am going to have a very difficult decision as health Minister to find cuts from other areas. But, we have looked at this in quite a lot of detail, we think we can do it, it will be much easier to deliver this if we do it with the trade unions, and, obviously, with the health board managers.

The other thing you talked about is working hours. As you say, yes, we'll be establishing this working group, and that group will be reporting by the autumn. The retire and return—there's an element of this, obviously, which is in the hands, effectively, of the UK Government, because some of it is about pensions. So, again, I have already written to the UK Government, just to ask them to consider issues in relation to pensions for those who are ready to retire. 

And pay restoration, just as a principle, I think we all acknowledge that there has been an erosion over the years, and, of course, in an ideal world, we'd like to see a move towards pay restoration. 

May I first of all comment on the proposed salary increase of 1.5 per cent, because it's only that that's being considered as a pay rise, not the bonus, of course? I am convinced that it isn't enough to make up for many years of pay cuts in real terms, and it's quite right that the union members themselves will now decide whether to accept it or reject it. 

In terms of this issue of pay restoration, it's good to hear a commitment in principle; what I would like to hear from the Minister is a plan to tackle the fact that we have seen a decade and more of pay cuts. 

We've just seen the proposals in terms of the issues not related to salaries. It's very important indeed that we have more detail on what's been offered, because a failure to deal with so many of those elements is a large part of what's driven more and more people to work for agencies, of course. I just want to focus on agency working. I have a copy here of a contract between NHS Cymru and all of the agencies providing health staff in Wales. Nursing—148 agencies have signed this agreement. Some of them are specialist, but what we have here is proof of the scale of the privatisation that has happened of the workforce within the NHS—148 companies making profits on the back of nurses and the NHS in Wales. And the contract states clearly how much they're paid—between £30 and £48 an hour, plus VAT, for band D nursing staff. The nurses themselves are paid from £20 upwards, so that's 30 per cent and more of a cut going to the agency. So, when will we see real movement away from this kind of contract, which sucks money out of our health service in Wales? How much money, and within what timescale do you need to spend that money in order to fund the small pay increase that you've offered now?

We need to ensure that the national nursing bank is something that is made a reality for the benefit of nurses, patients and the NHS, and in order to deliver higher and fair salaries in years to come. 

Thanks very much. This hasn't been an easy offer to negotiate, and what we have managed to do is to get a situation where, on top of the £1,400, which was the recommendation by the independent pay review body, what we've done now is we've found an additional 3 per cent—1.5 per cent of which will be consolidated and 1.5 per cent that will be non-consolidated. And what that actually means in practice is that, if this package is not accepted—and I think it's really important that I'm absolutely clear that this is the only deal in town—if this offer is rejected, we will be unable to make any higher pay offer for 2022-23. That is the reality or the situation. So, it's this or nothing. It's really important that people understand that that is what we're talking about here. 

So, just in terms of the reality of what that means, those on the bottom of band 5, which includes nurses and other healthcare professionals just starting their careers in the NHS, they will have received a total pay increase of 8.62 per cent for this financial year. And our lowest paid staff will have received a pay increase of 14.15 per cent. So, I think it's really important that people hear those figures, because that is not an unreasonable place to settle. 

Now, in terms of the agency, look, I think we're all committed to cutting down on the amount of money that we spend on agency workers. We've been firefighting for a very long time; I don't think anybody can deny that. We are going to have an absolute focus on this now. That's why you will see some of the detail that we want to do set out in the workforce implementation strategy that I announced last week, and that all-Wales bank will, of course, be a part of that.

Thank you, Minister, for your statement and also the update on questions that you've taken this afternoon. I notice from the unions listed that Unite aren't listed there as party to the discussions, but I understand that on Sunday, you did have discussions with their national general secretary. Are you able to update us on what was involved with those discussions? Given that they're not party to this statement and the organisations contained in this statement, how do you see yourself being able to resolve the dispute with Unite, because obviously that is a continuing dispute across the health estate?

Thanks very much. I did carry out some very informal discussions with the general secretary of Unite who happened to be in Wales on the weekend. I think it's really important that I emphasise that these were informal discussions because Unite, by not calling off their industrial action, have excluded themselves now from the negotiating table. So, everything that's been negotiated this afternoon in relation to the non-pay aspects of what we're talking about, Unite were not in the room when that was being negotiated. I think that's really important. Obviously, we are very keen to get to a situation where we see no more industrial action in relation to health in Wales, but we will work with the coalition of the willing to make sure that we can move ahead where that is practical.

I thank the Minister.

Item 4 this afternoon is the 90-second statements. The first speaker is Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. We all recognise the health and well-being benefits of getting out into the great outdoors, and walking is a great way to do that. But, we're not all going to head up Pen y Fan or Eryri, and nor should we have to. What if there was a way to work with people right across Wales to improve nature and access to walking in their local areas? That's a great idea, and it's well under way.

Throughout 2022 and 2023, the Paths to Wellbeing project has given 18 communities across Wales the tools and training to improve nature and access to walking in their local areas. Ramblers Cymru's flagship £1.2 million project is improving access to local green spaces, working on the ground with volunteers to give the tools and the free training needed to identify and design new routes and to enhance and upgrade existing ones. They're also working alongside the 22 local authorities, Wildlife Trust Wales, Coed Cadw, the Woodland Trust in Wales, and others to enhance the local environment for nature to thrive. With activities such as tree planting, wildflower sowing and wildlife activity days, there are plenty of activities for all ages and backgrounds to get involved with. It is led by the community for the community. By investing in local volunteers to manage and undertake practical path and habitat maintenance and improvements, community engagement, paths and green spaces will be strengthened, and the health and well-being benefits of nature and outdoor physical activity realised too. So, my thanks to Ramblers Cymru, of which I'm the proud vice president, and to all partners for this groundbreaking project right here in Wales.

Next Monday is the hundredth anniversary of radio broadcasting from Wales. It was launched in Cardiff from a room above a music shop on Castle Street and it was the first broadcasting venture outside London. Astonishingly, people from Pontypridd, Rhymney, Newport and Gwent all managed to tune into radio 5WA's inaugural broadcast. Astonishing, because, unless you could afford the equivalent of two weeks' wages to buy a wireless, you had to rely on some polymath amateur who'd mastered adapting upside down telephone microphones to build a crystal wireless, or perhaps you could have attended a listening party, such as the one that was held in City Hall in Cardiff. 

The wireless orchestra, all seven of them, had a repertoire that included contemporary favourites like Ivor Novello's My Life Belongs to You and Dafydd y Garreg Wen. The latter, sung by Mostyn Thomas from Blaenau Gwent, fresh from his 1922 Eisteddfod win, was historic because it was the first time ever that the Welsh language had ever been broadcast.

Now, these amateurs—they were all amateurs initially—burnt through five station managers in the first six weeks on air. The pioneer uncle Fred lasted all of two days. Uncle Arthur, on the other hand, had staying power. Arthur Corbett-Smith was very keen to ensure that the BBC for Wales and the west country was going to have a much more relaxed tone than what was broadcast from London. Though he fully subscribed to the Reithian principles of 'educate, entertain and inform,' he wanted them to take place in the same programme, not in silos. So, talks were billed as chats; London had Children's Hour, but Wales had The Hour of the 'Kiddiewinks'. If you want to learn more about this, hear the concert that's going to be broadcast on Monday, which I attended last Sunday when it was recorded. Equally, you can listen to the BBC's The Ministry of Happiness, a sitcom that's being broadcast at the moment that was launched in memory of these pioneering broadcasters.

I would like to take this opportunity to raise awareness of National Apprenticeship Week, which aims to celebrate and promote apprenticeships in Wales as a valuable pathway into work and the benefits that they bring to both individuals and employers. I would particularly like to highlight the work of ColegauCymru, which co-ordinates the network of 13 further education colleges to deliver high-quality apprenticeship programmes in a wide range of vocational areas, from junior to foundation level and higher apprenticeships. Wales's colleges have strong links to industry and highly established support systems for learners, including dedicated employment and enterprise bureaux that are now in every college in Wales. The FE sector is well placed to help deliver the skills necessary for learners to embark on successful careers and produce and retain a skilled workforce to help meet current and future demand for businesses and the Welsh economy.

I also want to take this opportunity to highlight two success stories from colleges in my region. Arjundeep Singh, a BTEC mechanical and electrical engineering student at Coleg y Cymoedd, has been awarded the student of the year and best work awards, as well as apprentice of the year at the Caerphilly Business Forum Awards. He is now due to start a full-time job at British Airways. Ffion Llewellyn, who is doing her A-levels at Cardiff and Vale College became their Welsh language ambassador, setting up weekly coffee mornings for the college's Welsh learners club, took a lead on the college's Learn Welsh TikTok account and has taken part in Welsh language well-being podcasts as part of Jason Mohammad's media academy. Ffion is now doing a Welsh language production apprenticeship with the BBC.

The apprenticeship programme is an essential element of the FE vocational offer, supporting college-based learning and delivery of support for skills and employability within the community. It is vital that we continue to work together to raise the profile and make clear that different pathways exist to accessing apprenticeships and allow our students access to the wide variety of roles that are available to them. Thank you.

Thank you to the three contributors.

Item 5 this afternoon is a debate on the Children, Young People, and Education Committee’s report, 'Pupil absence'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion—Jayne Bryant.

Diolch, Deputy Llywydd. I'm very pleased to open this debate on the Children, Young People, and Education Committee’s report on pupil absence. We undertook a short, focused inquiry last summer to try to understand the impact of the pandemic on school attendance.

We knew that, prior to the pandemic, there had been a strong focus, both at school and national levels, to tackle school absence. We wanted to build on the Welsh Government-commissioned report on school absence, done by Meilyr Rowlands. Our findings very much chimed with the findings of his report, and we hope they're very helpful to Welsh Government.

I'd like to thank my fellow committee members for their diligence in undertaking this work, as well as those who gave oral and written evidence. In particular, I'd like to thank those families and young people who came to our focus groups to discuss their experiences. Our strategic plan places a huge emphasis on the importance of hearing directly from children and young people, and we remain committed to hearing and placing these voices at the forefront. Please be assured your voices really helped to shape our work. I'd also like to thank the Minister for his positive engagement with our work on this issue.

We made seven recommendations in total, all of which were accepted or accepted in principle. We know the Welsh Government are currently reviewing their attendance guidance, and we're glad to see the Minister commit to this review, encompassing the exclusions and behaviour guidance, as these issues are so closely linked. We also welcome the commitment that the revised guidance will be child-centric and underpinned by trauma-informed practice and evidence of what actually works.

We heard very clear evidence that everybody has a role to play in promoting and supporting sustained attendance. Therefore, it is good to hear from the Minister that this guidance will set out the roles that all partners can play, going beyond just the school staff, but also encompassing local authorities, governors and, of course, parents and carers.

During the pandemic, the type of attendance data that was collected and published changed, which makes it difficult to compare the data on attendance available pre pandemic and the data that’s available now. But the broad trends indicate that attendance has decreased since the pandemic-related school closures. When we published the report, the average attendance for the current academic year was 91.4 per cent. As of the most recent Welsh Government data, published this morning, the average attendance for this academic year had declined to 89.3 per cent. The data also shows that the attendance rate is lower for those learners who are eligible for free school meals than those learners who are not.

We heard anecdotal evidence that the cost-of-living crisis was creating an additional barrier to children and young people attending school. While this was anecdotal, it builds on long-standing concerns about the impact of the cost of the school day and the barriers it can create. It was also anecdotal evidence that all stakeholders seemed to agree with. And we're very clear that no child should be missing out on school because their family cannot afford for them to attend. This is baking in already existing disadvantages, and fundamentally unfair.

We therefore made recommendation 2, which called for an urgent study into how the current cost-of-living crisis is impacting on school attendance. We were concerned that, because this evidence is currently anecdotal, it's making it more difficult to create effective solutions and policy interventions. We called for this to be done within two months of the Welsh Government’s response to the report, and for it to be supported by an action plan.

In responding to this recommendation, the Welsh Government said it was challenging to meet the timescale outlined. They said that they are in informal discussions with a local authority about a research proposal, which would take an in-depth look at attendance in secondary schools, with a focus on which approaches and interventions have the most impact on lower-income families. Now, while this sounds like a promising piece of work, it does not meet the ambition of our recommendation. We set a really challenging timescale for this recommendation because we felt the urgent need to understand how the current crisis is affecting school attendance right now and to identify what actions can be taken quickly to address that issue. We're concerned that, if children and young people start missing school because they can’t afford to attend, this will make it more difficult to re-engage them in schooling the longer they are absent.

We also note that this research proposal would only be looking at secondary school attendance. It's also unclear if this proposal would look at the picture across Wales. Perhaps the Minister can outline what work he plans to do to look at the evidence in primary settings. And, Minister, can you also confirm if the research proposal would cover all of Wales, and perhaps, if you're unable to support the research proposal cited in the Welsh Government's response, what work could take its place?

Closely linked to the cost-of-living issues was recommendation 3, on learner travel. Both from our work on this committee but also as individual Members—which we did debate yesterday as well in the budget debate—we're acutely aware of the barriers that some children and young people face in accessing appropriate and affordable travel to school. We called for a pupil-first approach to learner travel decisions, where the needs of the individual pupil are the most important factor, and not cost. We acknowledge that this is a big ask of local authorities in difficult financial times, so we called on the Welsh Government to ensure local authorities have sufficient funding to deliver on this approach. We also called for the current review to be radical in looking for innovative solutions to this long-standing issue. Children’s attendance at school should not be hindered because they do not have affordable or safe transport options.

In responding, the Minister outlines the current review and the forthcoming changes to bus service delivery. However, we are concerned that, as with the previous recommendation, this does not reflect the urgent need to tackle this issue in the here and now. So, when will the review of the Learner Travel Measure (Wales) 2008 be completed, and when can we expect to see the actions from the review being implemented?

Finally, I'd like to seek some more clarity from the Minister on the response to recommendation 1, which called for a national campaign focusing on the positive impacts of regular school attendance. We believe that this should be delivered in conjunction with more tailored local campaigns at local authority and school level, which would complement a national campaign. In responding to this recommendation, the Minister said that Welsh Government will be increasing communications to emphasise the importance of going to school. Please can he provide us with more detail on what format these communications will take, and will it be the national campaign that the committee wants to see?

So, in closing, Deputy Llywydd, I would like to thank all those who contributed to our inquiry once again, including those who provided written and oral evidence, my fellow committee members, and the Minister and his officials for engaging positively with our work. I look forward to hearing what colleagues and the Minister have to say. Diolch.

I'd like to start off by giving thanks to our excellent Chair, Jayne Bryant, and also my fellow committee members, of course, and the clerks, staff and people who gave evidence and who made this vital report a reality—and, of course, the Minister for his co-operation as well. It is critical that we address soaring pupil absence, the problem having been exacerbated, as we’ve already heard, by the pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis. The report, I believe, is a thorough one and I’d like to focus on just a few key issues from it today.

We have seen that additional learning needs pupils often do not get the right, timely support, which results in persistent school absence. The National Autistic Society Cymru found that 43 per cent of autistic students were persistently absent, which is a worrying statistic. We also see that students in poverty, as has already been said, make up a high proportion of those absent from school, and this was very, very clear throughout the report.

The annual child and family poverty survey 2021 found that 94 per cent of practitioners in Wales said that poverty had an impact on a child’s school experience, which of course has now been exacerbated by the cost-of-living crisis and the pandemic. Current trends are a cause for alarm, and we need to ensure that we make it as easy as possible for students to attend school, and that we are as supportive as possible to individual learners for their individual needs, to ensure that they don’t miss out on the education that they all deserve.

It’s clear from the recommendations that we need a multi-pronged approach to ensure that we stop this worrying trend. Recommendation 3 of the report says that Welsh Government should ensure that local authorities have sufficient funding, as our Chair has already outlined, to ensure that children and young people have that access to appropriate school transport options to get them to school safely. This is absolutely vital, particularly when local authority budgets are so tight in the current climate.

However, the Welsh Government’s approach is only to accept this in principle, and bundle it in with the ‘One Network, One Timetable, One Ticket’ White Paper, which in my view diminishes the importance of this issue and only delays real action being taken. As I said in committee—and I see these issues in my own region, as we all do, far too regularly—we need this pupil-first approach that has been put forward by the committee. It needs wholesale reform, and not just tweaks.

But we must remember that there are children now who need help with school transport, and we cannot wait for the White Paper to turn into implementation years down the line. We need to see immediate action in expanding the offer of school transport, whilst reducing the cost for parents, as, for now, many can’t afford school transport, and they can’t afford to drive their children to school either. This creates a situation of despair for parents, and of course affects the learners and affects the level of absence that we are seeing. I completely agree with Jayne Bryant that this should not be a barrier to learning in this day and age.

Recommendation 4 looks to address the students who are most likely to absent, and why. As we know from the report, it can vary from ALN needs to mental health issues, and mental health issues that are not being addressed adequately and supporting learners to be able to stay in school. Whilst I'm pleased that the Welsh Government has accepted this recommendation, and that they'll consider absence and exclusion data to inform the support of the well-being of learners, it is essential that, where the support is needed, it’s urgently delivered on the ground to where it is needed. The data is meaningless without the proper support following it, and I’m disappointed that Welsh Government have committed to this without accepting the recommendation.

We also need to know how the Welsh Government will monitor the delivery and its success or failure. I’d also like the Minister to address how the Welsh Government will ensure that this generation of students are able to access school transport, not just focus on the next generation, and explain how he’s ensuring that home-schoolers aren’t being conflated and bundled in with school absence, as it’s crucial we ensure this medium of education is kept open and untarnished. But it is important that Welsh Government—. We do need to understand why there has been such a significant rise in home schooling since the pandemic began.

The report before us highlights the urgency in addressing this, as our Chair has outlined, so I’d like to hear from the Minister how he is working now with local authorities and school leaders to ensure that we reverse this worrying trend of pupil absence. Yes, it’s come down slightly, but the figures are still far too high. Thank you.

I too would like to thank the Chair of the committee and my fellow Members, the clerks and everyone who contributed, as well as the Minister. This was a very important inquiry.

As has already been outlined, we are all aware of the importance of attendance in terms of pupils’ development at school, not just in terms of their academic attainment, but their social, cognitive and emotional development. But the fact is, across Wales, too many learners are missing out on important opportunities due to absence, and what we as a committee were eager to understand  better was why this was the case.

As mentioned previously, this was a problem before COVID, but certainly the situation has deteriorated since then. And if the situation doesn’t improve soon, then a number of learners will have missed out on a whole host of opportunities, which will then have an impact on them for decades to come. That is why this report is so vitally important.

I welcome specifically the Government’s response to the second recommendation, and the agreement to commission research to understand better the impact of the cost-of-living crisis on pupils’ ability to attend school. Certainly the children’s commissioner was clear about the link between absence and poverty, and with child poverty increasing here in Wales, we must gain a better understanding of why this is happening and what we can do to ensure the very best start for every learner who attends school.

One matter raised with us as a committee, which has been raised already today—and it's been raised with me a number of times as a regional Member for South Wales Central—is the barriers related to transport costs, and that is the thrust of the committee’s third recommendation. I am pleased to see that the Minister has accepted this recommendation in principle, but again, it is a cause for concern for me that it is taking so long to resolve this issue.

I have raised several times with the Minister and the Deputy Minister for Climate Change a case in my constituency at Llanishen High School, which has been raised by Ruben Kelman, Member of the Welsh Youth Parliament. There is clear evidence from the school that the cost of bus travel is preventing some pupils from attending the school regularly. Despite this, the situation remains unresolved. How many more young people are affected like this? And why haven't councils such as Cardiff Council responded immediately to provide a solution to these situations, when we receive evidence that children can't afford to attend school?

I’d also like to focus on one other key area that came to light during our inquiry, and that was staffing capacity, or rather lack of, and how it is one of the biggest barriers to tackling pupil absence. As we heard, it is a problem that was made worse because of COVID-19 related staff absences, and difficulties in securing supply staff to cover, but there are other challenges too, linked to the draft budget, which we discussed yesterday. We’ve already been warned by teaching unions that school budgets are going to be under strain, with heads warning that they will have to look at cutting back on teachers and teaching assistants, as well as additional support for pupils and their families.

However, our report concludes that there are already significant concerns about staffing capacity and resilience to support pupil attendance. Some of this was specifically in reference to supporting blended and flexible learning as well. Ultimately, there are specific groups of children and young people who face additional barriers to attending school, many of which they do not have control over. Blended learning, an innovation developed during the pandemic, may provide an effective option to help these groups of learners maintain attendance. A return to normal simply isn’t going to work in this situation, and being able to use these innovative practices may help support those learners.

Finally, I welcome the Minister’s acceptance of the need to improve data collection as well as the publication and analysis of pupil absence data. The need for disaggregated data is crucial in identifying trends of absence for particular groups of learners. We need to send a clear message to all that, for pupils who attend school, attendance isn't optional, and if there are barriers that are affecting attendance, especially costs, then we need to urgently act. Education is a right and no child or young person should be losing even a day of school because their families can't afford for them to attend.

I very much look forward to seeing the recommendations being implemented, and once again ask all who can help turn these into reality to urgently put them into action. Every day lost in school by a learner is a day that widens the attainment gap. We need to act now.

I'd like to start by offering my thanks to the committee, its clerking team and the witnesses for what I think is a very robust piece of work. For my contribution, I'll be focusing on a couple of the key recommendations.

Firstly, recommendation 1 around promoting the importance of school attendance. We all know that it's important that children and young people attend school, and it's key that we get that positive message out there, especially after all the disruption and uncertainty that has been experienced over the past few years. I welcome the response from Welsh Government, saying that it will increase communications to parents and carers, both to address concerns and emphasise that positive rhetoric on the importance of going to school. I'm pleased at the mention of family engagement officers within the Minister's response, and their role in creating strong partnerships and offering bespoke support. I know these officers are doing really great work in Rhondda Cynon Taf, and I just want to pay tribute to the significant impact that they have.

Secondly, I want to touch on recommendation 3 regarding learner travel. I endorse the committee's call for a learner-centred approach. Perhaps in this context it's worth briefly paying tribute to RCT council's offer for free transport. This applies if a child in primary school lives 1.5 miles from their nearest suitable provision, or 2 miles if attending secondary school. So, RCT already goes beyond what is set out in the Measure, focusing on the individual and trying to remove barriers to attending school.

I understand the Welsh Government's comments around active travel as being important, but this will not be suitable for all children and also it would not be the choice for all parents and guardians. The comment in the Welsh Government's response that the proposed bus Bill offers a chance to also look again at school transport is a very important commitment. I hope this consideration will include a pilot study around free bus travel for children and young people, although I appreciate that it's something that the Minister might not be able to give today. There is lots to support this, and breaking down any barriers to attend school is, for me, a key factor. I appreciate the work Welsh Government already does to make transport more affordable for children and young people, but the Bill is a perfect chance to find out if taking this next step is feasible and desirable. That's a call that I know I and others have made before, but it is also one that both the previous Children's Commissioner for Wales and the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales have also supported.

Thirdly, recommendations 4 and 7, and these relate to the use of data and how it triggers interventions and offers a call for greater consistency. I'm really pleased by the responsive comments from the Minister in relation to these. From my own experience of holding a pastoral role in a secondary school, I know how important it is to track and monitor attendance, so that any issues can be picked up, resolved by support with early interventions, and thereby preventing many problems from spiralling. Attendance data is perhaps the most valuable tool that schools have to identify pupils in need of support for things like mental health, and I completely agree with the quote from Professor Ann John in the report, that 'what gets counted matters'. And I endorse the children's commissioner's view of persistent absence as a red flag, suggestive of both symptom and cause, and I welcome the commitment to a consistent approach in any revised framework. I really would like to see a gold standard embedded across Wales.

Finally, recommendation 5 on publishing information on the links between attainment and absence. I do have sympathy with this, but I feel it must be approached in a sensible way so that lessons are learned from previous approaches. Anecdotally, based on my own experiences, I'm thinking of previous systems where just a 4 per cent margin on attendance could see schools categorised at the extreme ends of the scale as either green or red. Sometimes the raw data doesn't quite tell the whole story, and I note the evidence given by NASUWT Cymru to the committee that while schools have a role to play, it is relative to the role that other organisations must play.

I'd like to close by thanking the committee again for this piece of work. It's a really important subject to ensure that our children and young people get the best start, and problems are identified. But I'd also like to thank the Minister for his positive response, and I look forward to following the next steps as this work is taken forward.

Can I join Vikki Howells and other colleagues by commending the committee on a really thorough piece of work, I think, into what is a very ingrained problem and one that was definitely here before COVID-19? But what's clear from the committee report is the added impact of COVID and lockdowns on pupil absence. So, it's deeply concerning to see evidence that shows that the mental health of children and young people has been severely affected by the pandemic, to the point that they are not attending school.

I see that the Minister is looking at a communication strategy to encourage children and young people back into school, and that this messaging could be localised. So, I'd be interested to see what updates the Minister has on this, and whether he's taken on board the committee's point that there needs to be a baseline for children across Wales to be supported back into school, so there won't be detrimental differences in local responses.

It's also notable from the Minister's reply to the committee that he's placing an emphasis on community-focused schools and family engagement officers to respond to the issue. So, I'm keen to know how the Minister is intending to use them, and what their role will be in spreading this particular message. 

Clearly, there are many, many factors at play when it comes to pupil absence, from those with additional learning needs not getting the right support to the impact of poverty, to being a young carer, which the Minister himself said was a hidden issue. It's a complex problem, and schools, local authorities and families need to have all of the tools available at their disposal to support children back into school. Education should be a right and not an added benefit. 

It should also be of no surprise to any of us in the Chamber today that the impact of absenteeism on pupil learning is devastating. We're already the country with the highest rate of school days lost during the pandemic in the UK, and, sadly, it looks like pupils are set to miss out on even more due to industrial action, which is entirely within the Welsh Government's gift to prevent. However, as the committee report shows, it's not just attainment and employability that are affected, it's socialisation, building friendships and access to mental health support at school. Without these basic interactions, a lack of schooling will lead to poor behaviour and, later on, as ASCL Cymru noted to the committee, criminal or anti-social behaviour even within the community, as well as the potential for increased youth violence.

I'm really curious about the statement the Minister made last May about Welsh Government action on pupil absence, which included national communication to families about the importance of attending school; nearly £4 million in funding for the family engagement officers and the reintroduction of fixed-penalty notices as a last resort. However, not only does it look like the Minister rowed back on the use of fixed-penalty notices by saying that they're being considered as part of a broader review of an all-Wales attendance framework, but the guidance he's been giving to local authorities when reintroducing them has been ambiguous, and I quote, 'has weakened the position of local authority interventions'. How can local authorities use those powers at their disposal without clear guidance on when they're able to intervene? 

It's very interesting to see as well in the part of the world that we both represent, Minister, Neath Port Talbot has the highest average rates of unauthorised absences in the academic year to date, running at over 5 per cent, nearly double the Welsh average and almost triple the rates in Powys and Monmouthshire. Neath Port Talbot also has the highest average percentage of sessions of absence, running at over 12 per cent in the 2022-23 academic year so far. Therefore, I want to know what urgent action the Minister is taking to ensure local authorities, particularly Neath Port Talbot, are able to take the necessary action to stop entrenched and persistent absenteeism, which has only been exacerbated by the pandemic.

And finally, I was struck by a statistic outlined recently by Bridgend County Borough Council that said that even with a 90 per cent attendance rate over an academic year, a pupil would miss out on 100 lessons—100 lessons. That's 100 lessons of maths, English, Welsh, science, physical education and so on over a single year. We should be pushing really hard on this. Of course, lockdowns have affected our children's education severely, and we can't afford to have them further impacted after COVID restrictions have now ended. If we do continue down this road, then we're facing a potential lost generation, and the fault will have been ours. Diolch. 

Thank you very much indeed for your interesting report on a very important subject. I think too often in the past the primary purpose of the school system was to maximise the numbers of people who achieved five A to Cs, including English and Maths. I think it's called the capped score in the jargon. But this takes no account of the complexity and challenge of pupils' lives and their ability to learn. Many of you have already mentioned some of these and you've captured them in your report. I think, in particular, it's important to think about parental influence and families with complex and multiple needs.

Today, I had the privilege to meet a young man who's now in year 13, but he started his school career aged 6 as an asylum seeker who spoke absolutely no English and had ADHD. Had he not had some really good support through his school life, I'm sure that he might well have misbehaved and got himself excluded. In addition, his mother was a teacher, so she was able to give him the sort of support to follow the curriculum in primary school that he was struggling to understand and absorb. Imagine if that child's parent had not been a teacher, didn't understand how you support young people's learning—you can see how that person could have fallen behind in their learning. 

The National Autistic Society evidence lists, I think, nine reasons why young people who are autistic would struggle with learning. But I would suggest that that is something that all children could struggle with, not necessarily on the scale that autistic people have. If people are not reflective of the impact of their behaviour on others, then it can lead to terrible consequences. My own granddaughter had her first detention yesterday, because she and five other six-year-olds had been unkind. One of them had written an unkind note to another child in the class, which happily the primary school was able to pick up on, and I hope that will enable them to see the consequences of unkind actions. 

I think that nurturing environments can be created much more easily in primary schools, because everybody knows everybody else, and they have the same class teacher, who obviously will get to know those 30 children intimately and all their needs. It's a much bigger challenge in secondary schools, which are noisier, bigger, more challenging places, less likely that the people you sit next to are also living in exactly the same community. Mental health issues, particularly in adolescence, when there are such huge challenges on young people—. We all make mistakes. If we're not making mistakes when we're adolescents, we're not learning how we're going to navigate our way in the world.

What I would like to see from this debate is that we have trauma-informed approaches to all our pupils. We have the wonderful new curriculum, with its emphasis on well-being, and I want to see that being used by school leaders to revisit their responsibilities to develop enterprising and creative contributors, healthy, confident individuals, ambitious, capable learners and ethical, informed citizens, because we cannot have schools that simply exclude people because they can't be bothered to deal with their problems. That still exists in Wales, not in every school, but we need to ensure that all schools have responsibility towards the pupils who enter their school, particularly aged 11, and to ensure that they are with them until they are 16, and that the curriculum accommodates them, rather than the child having to be strait-laced into this particular curriculum. That is the way we will ensure that every child has the right to an education. That, it seems to me, is very important, as well as all the other issues around school transport that are also very important. But I just wanted to put that on the record. I'd like to challenge the Minister as to whether school leaders are expected never to exclude pupils on a permanent basis unless there were very, very special circumstances, which would have to be decided elsewhere, other than by the headteacher.

I call on the Minister for Education and Welsh Language, Jeremy Miles.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to thank the members of the Children, Young People and Education Committee for this important report. What's clear to me in considering the recommendations is the importance of considering attendance along with other influences and factors, as we've already heard, such as socioeconomic status, well-being and broader systemic issues.

Tackling the impact of poverty on educational attainment is at the heart of our national mission in getting high standards and ambitious targets for everyone. Only through taking action in all parts of the system can this agenda work, starting with preschool education and extending through to post-16 and lifelong education. I was pleased to appoint new attainment champions recently who will assist schools in tackling the impacts of poverty on attainment.

We know that the cost of transport is a barrier for some children attending schools. We've heard more about that today. The situation has been exacerbated for many as a result of the current cost-of-living crisis. The Welsh Government has published a White Paper, 'One network, one timetable, one ticket', which sets an ambitious target to transform the bus service in Wales. The proposals will be an opportunity to look anew at the way that bus services are provided across the country, including school transportation. In response to Jayne Bryant's point in her contribution, I think everyone is agreed on the scale of the issue and how important it is to take action, but we must also look at this in the broader context in considering the financial impact as well as looking at this in the context of wider bus reform.

It's important to understand how other pressures could impact on children's ability to attend schools. So, we have funded research to look at the reasons for school absences, and the research will also note the best ways of assisting children to attend school, particularly those children from low-income families across Wales.

The link between attendance and educational attainment is, of course, clear. Missing sustained periods of school presents a real risk to a child's attainment, and can also lead to them feeling more disengaged from their education. Monitoring educational outcomes and the links with attendance rates are crucial considerations as part of the development of the new data ecosystem. Simply put, the ecosystem will ensure that schools have the information they need to support learning and improve outcomes and to be able to link questions of attendance with questions of outcome.

We know that schools provide so much more than education. For some children, school is a haven, a place where they feel safe, where they feel seen and heard. School provides an opportunity for children to see positive values in action, a place where bonds and friendships are created that can last a lifetime, as well as a place to develop the social skills that we know are so important. Schools can't do this alone, of course. Success is dependent on partnership with parents, carers and the community. We know that greater engagement with families has been shown to have a positive impact on tackling the impact of poverty on attainment and on improving attendance. I was at a school last week talking to the head about how they engage with families around attendance, and he said to me that if you talk to families about 90 per cent attendance, for many that feels like a very high level of achievement, but when you describe the number of days lost that that involves, that paints a very much starker picture.

We want all schools in Wales to be community-focused schools, which means responding to the needs of their community, building strong partnerships with families and carers, and collaborating effectively with other services. Our family engagement officers play a critical role in our community-focused school model. Family engagement ensures that families feel listened to and valued. Their needs, and those of their children, are understood and catered for. They are encouraged to play an active role in their child's learning. Schools should encourage the involvement of all families in the work that they do, but should have a particular focus on supporting families from lower income households. I thank Jenny Rathbone for the visit to the school in her constituency today where we heard some very innovative approaches in relation to just that.

We'll continue to invest in family engagement officers this year by providing funding of over £6.5 million. We are also looking, as has been referred to in the debate, at what we can do nationally to support schools in engaging with parents and carers and around communications to address any concerns they still have, and emphasising the importance of children going to school. Some local authorities have already been running local campaigns, and we will consider what lessons we can learn to share nationally across Wales in the way that Jayne Bryant was asking for me to confirm.

Local authoritiy education welfare services have a vital role to play, not only in driving up attendance, but also in ensuring all children receive the education they deserve and have the right to expect. I'll be investing £2.5 million into these services this year to provide much-needed additional capacity. This will enable the service to provide earlier support before issues escalate, and also provide more intensive support to learners with high levels of absence.

We know there has been an increase in the numbers of families choosing to home educate since the pandemic. For some, this has been an active choice, but I acknowledge this is not likely to have been the case for all. No parent should be deregistering their child due to a lack of appropriate support. Understanding the decisions that lie behind parents choosing to home educate is therefore important. We are working with Data Cymru to improve the quality and level of data we currently capture in relation to deregistration and the key demographics of this cohort, including the reasons for deregistration.

As we've discussed already in the debate today, poor mental health has been linked to poor school attendance, with anxiety often described as a key factor. Our framework on embedding a whole-school approach to emotional and mental well-being highlights the need for schools to use the data sources available to them when considering the well-being needs of their community. We'll be considering how attendance data can be used to help inform how schools support the well-being of learners to prevent persistent absence. Ensuring that every young person has the opportunity to reach their potential is my priority, and working with partners to increase learner attendance is fundamental to this.

I call on Jayne Bryant to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Deputy Llywydd. Thank you to all Members who've contributed to the debate today and for the Minister's response. I'd also like to put on record my grateful thanks to our excellent clerking team, our researchers and outreach team who've really supported us as a committee.

There really is clearly a shared ambition here to ensure that children and young people are able to attend school and engage in school activity as much as possible. The impact absence from school has on young people can't be underestimated. We've heard today as well not only does is effect educational attainment, it can also have an impact on mental health and well-being. We've heard from Members today, including Tom Giffard, who said about the pandemic and how that has impacted children and young people in many ways following school closures and changing work patterns for parents, and we've also heard how it's changed attitudes towards attendance at school.

Saying this, I do want to acknowledge that there will be some children and young people for whom sustaining regular school attendance is particularly challenging, and that might be for a myriad of reasons, some of which are out of their control, such as illness. In these instances we should be doing everything we can to help children and young people engage as fully as possible in a supportive manner. But as Laura Jones said earlier, we must make it as easy as possible for children and young people to attend school.

Members have touched on a number of topics. I think one of the key points was around the learner travel issues. I think Laura, Heledd and Vikki in particular touched on that. That was our recommendation 3—that we want to see that learner travel moving away from cost-driven decisions to a learner-first approach. We're very aware of the financial pressures that local authorities are under, which is why the committee recommended that the Welsh Government ensure local authorities have sufficient funding to deliver on this. But we do want to see the Welsh Government being radical in its approach on this issue, and to look for innovative solutions to this really long-standing, sticky issue.

Just for Members to note, outside of this inquiry, the committee has recently written to the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, asking for an update on the learner travel review. The Deputy Minister said that work is currently under way on planning the wider learner travel review, and that a timetable will be shared with the committee when it's available. Obviously, I'm sure, Minister, you will know that committee members and other Members in this Chamber are really keen for that to come to light, so we'll be eagerly awaiting that, and we will be monitoring that very closely.

Another issue was around data, and Vikki Howells mentioned, I think, Professor Ann John's quote, which is, 'What gets counted matters', and that is a really key point. I think Heledd and Vikki—well, Vikki shared her experience in a pastoral role in her previous work. That was really helpful to hear. And I think even the Minister's response, talking about some people feeling that 90 per cent of attendance was a good statistic. You know when you're at school, you hear '90 per cent', and some people think that is good, and you can understand. So, I think how we look at this data is really important, and behind that, as well, which I think Vikki had mentioned too.

We'd also heard around the importance of family engagement officers and the incredible work that they do. Many Members mentioned that, as well as the Minister touching on the importance of community-focused schools. And we do know that schools can't solve all the problems, which is what Professor Ann John told us, but it is about the school climate, and there are some things that we can do and affect.

I'd just like to touch on Jenny's point around the nurturing environments that schools can be. It is so important, and it is easier to attain in a primary school setting than a secondary school setting, but we have to work really hard to make sure that those nurturing environments are there for our young people.

Heledd mentioned how every day lost widens the attainment gap, and that is so important, and that's why we as a committee felt that this report was so important and this piece of work is so important, and we will be monitoring this as we go on.

So, I think, Deputy Llywydd, just to say that I believe we all have a role to play—not just schools, local authorities or the Welsh Government, but all of us here as elected politicians and active citizens in our communities—to reinforce those positive benefits of school attendance. It was really clear to us in our evidence that the carrot will be far more useful than the stick in terms of improving school attendance. And as a committee, we will continue to monitor progress on this important issue, and we look forward to seeing the outcome of the Welsh Government's review of attendance policy and guidance later this year, and I'd just like to say, once again, thank you to everybody who has contributed to this inquiry and for the debate today. Diolch.

The proposal is to note the committee's report. Does any Member object? There is no objection, and therefore the motion is agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Item 6 is next, and it's the Welsh Conservatives debate on free ports. I call on Paul Davies to move the motion.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I move the motion tabled in the name of my colleague, Darren Millar. It gives me great pleasure to lead a debate on the benefits of free ports and to again highlight the excellent bids that have been submitted from all parts of Wales. We will be voting against the two amendments tabled, and I am disappointed that they have been tabled in the first place, as they seek to delete our original motion. I was hoping to get cross-party support on this matter.

Now, Members will know that applications have closed for bidders interested in establishing a free port in Wales, and a decision is due shortly on the winning site. Indeed, I hope that more than one bid is successful and that Wales will enjoy multiple free ports across the country. Now, the UK Government's free-port programme is a key component of its levelling-up agenda and it's part of the Government's efforts to help to build back better and drive economic growth, post pandemic. I give way to the Member for Ogmore. 

Thank you for giving way so early in your contribution. I just wanted to pick up on the issue of cross-party support. As you know, there are Members like myself, David Rees and others, who have spoken very much in favour of developing the potential of these. I think the challenge here is that you can't get away from the fact that there are some real difficulties with the principle of free ports and everything that comes with them, and the impact of that on other areas. There are disadvantages to free ports as well. So, whilst we support strongly what we can now get out of this and want to work with you on this, don't mistake that for cross-party support for the idea of free ports, per se. It is something that your party is firmly behind; I would say that there's a more strategic way that we could do the same thing. 

Well, the Member needs to read our motion, because the original motion recognises that free ports are an important aspect of developing our economy. And the Member surely recognises that the original motion is not controversial in any sense and merely seeks to demonstrate support for the free-port programme from this Senedd. It certainly doesn't warrant an attempt to delete any part of it. 

From the outset, the UK Government has made it clear that the free-port model has three distinct objectives. The first of those is for free ports to be established as national hubs for global trade and investment, and we know that, from the free-ports programme annual report last year, there is evidence of new investment in free-port areas. For example, free-port status in Humber has enabled the company Pensana to secure a multimillion-pound investment to establish Europe's first rare earth processing hub at Saltend, which is expected to represent around 5 per cent of the world market by 2025. That hub will produce critical components for electric vehicles and offshore equipment. Indeed, that hub has a crucial role in helping establish an independent magnet metal supply chain for the UK and beyond.

Now, Members are aware that free ports are economic areas where tax relief is available for businesses, and there are plenty of other economic incentives for businesses in these areas. Businesses in free-port areas can enjoy enhanced capital allowances, in addition to employer national insurance contributions rates relief and business rates relief. There are also a range of customs benefits for free-port areas that includes simplified declarations and duty deferment on imported goods. And so there are a range of economic benefits for businesses in free-port areas to help them become thriving trade and investment hubs.

Now, the second objective of the free-port programme is to create hotbeds for innovation by focusing on private and public sector investment in research and development. Free ports have developed ambitious plans to innovate, and many are playing an integral role in supporting the UK Government's target to reach net zero by 2050. Indeed, in the east midlands, the free port is using part of its £25 million of seed capital funding to establish a hydrogen skills academy. The academy, which is backed by several universities, is due to open later this year and will be the UK's first practical industry-based training centre, putting the east midlands at the forefront of the UK's net-zero ambition. Free ports, by their design, are environments that help bring innovators together to collaborate in new ways and develop and trial new ideas and technologies, and it's exactly that sort of collaboration and innovation that I'm excited to see at Wales's free ports in the future. 

I've long referred to my own constituency of Preseli Pembrokeshire as being the energy capital of Wales, and should the Celtic free-port bid be successful, I have no doubt that we'll see some very exciting innovation taking place along the south Wales coast. One such area is floating offshore wind, and we know from the consortium's vision that a successful bid for a Celtic free port will accelerate inward investment in new manufacturing facilities to support the roll-out of floating offshore wind in the Celtic sea. We recently debated just how important offshore renewable energy, and particularly floating offshore wind, can be in generating low-cost, clean energy, and so I hope Members will support this important campaign. And in north Wales, let us not forget the excellent campaign for a Welsh free port in Ynys Môn, again with a vision to develop a hub for sustainable energy, which would also support the UK on its net-zero journey.

The third objective of a free-port programme is to promote regeneration through the creation of high-skilled jobs. Free ports have the potential to create widespread opportunities in terms of job creation, and according to free-port estimates, over 41,000 direct jobs would be created in Teeside, over 28,000 jobs in the East Midlands, and over 10,000 jobs in the Liverpool City Region. Some of these job estimates were made in early 2022, and of course, each area is different, but I just wanted to give Members an idea of the significant level of job creation that could be seen in Wales if any of the bids are successful. Of course, the regeneration of an area is largely dependent on ensuring that local people have the skills to access the opportunities provided by the free port, and that's why free ports have skills and workforce strategies as part of their business cases; strategies that are updated regularly to ensure that they're effective and delivering as intended.

Dirprwy Lywydd, it's my hope that the upcoming announcement from UK Government and the Welsh Government confirms that multiple Welsh free ports are successful, so that the benefits of free ports can be felt throughout the country. Free ports have the ability to transform our communities, and I know that Members will want to set out their stalls for why bids in their areas should be successful. The discussions I've had with key stakeholders involved in the Celtic free-port bid continue to be positive and enthusiastic, and I know from my conversations with Members representing other parts of Wales that they, too, have been enthused by the work that has gone on in developing these bids.

Of course, key to the success of any free port is the level of support provided by the UK Government and the Welsh Government. The UK Government has already provided a support package to raise awareness of British free ports with investors, and to highlight the opportunities that there are for investment into British free ports. My understanding is that, once a free port is established, the Department for International Trade will support it with access to its investment and export support services, and that is very welcome. Of course, if a Welsh free-port bid is successful, then it would also have access to these investment and export support services; and more than that, I hope that they'd have access to Welsh Government after-care support too. Therefore, perhaps in responding to this debate, the Minister can tell us what plans the Welsh Government has to support Welsh free ports once they are up and running, and how it intends to work with the Department for International Trade in relation to after-care support.

In the longer term, free ports should be in a position to attract investment and grow international trade independently, but in the very short term, the Welsh Government has a role here, alongside the Department for International Trade, to promote free-port opportunities to global investors.

Now, I appreciate that the Minister is not going to give much away about which site or sites are successful, and so, today's debate really is for us to hear more about the three Welsh bids that are currently being considered and learn more about the role that the Welsh Government will be taking in promoting any Welsh free ports in the future. I've already mentioned the Anglesey bid and the Celtic free-port bid, but there is also a regional bid for south-east Wales too.

And so, on that note, I welcome Members' views on the development of a Welsh free port, as well as hearing more about the bids in their constituencies and regions. We can see the success of free ports in other parts of the UK, and it's important that Wales is not left behind. Free ports can help provide opportunities for generations to come, and so, on that note, I ask Members to support our motion today and show their support for the free-port programme and the opportunities that it presents for Wales. Diolch.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on Luke Fletcher to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd, and I'm afraid my natural cynical and sceptical way of viewing the world might bring down the jovial contribution by the economy spokesperson for the Conservative Party, but I don't think it will surprise Members to learn that I'm not a supporter of the free-port concept. There are a number of ways that we can achieve what my colleague set out, and I am taking a lot of what we're being told about the bids with handfuls of salt. When people are bidding for support, they often fall into the trap of telling people what they want to hear, and I think we all need to be aware of that, and we all need to scrutinise what we hear.

The whole free-port concept is yet another policy that we've tried before, and which has had little success. Let's be clear: the free-port concept is trickle-down economics; something that many Members in this Chamber lambasted Liz Truss for just a few months ago; something that every group, bar one, in the Senedd attributes as a failure of Thatcherism. 

Now, turning to some of the arguments in favour, one of the key arguments is the creation of jobs and, on the face it, great, but I do think the numbers touted are incredibly optimistic at best and I would ask how many of those would be new jobs and not jobs displaced from elsewhere. To be fair, the bids have recognised this risk and have said that they will focus on new job creation, but I've yet to receive anything other than a verbal reassurance that guarantees that displacement won't happen. The reality will be that it will happen, and it will be to the economic detriment of areas outside of any designated free-port zone. We only need to look at enterprise zones. Forty-one per cent of jobs in enterprise zones, established in the 1980s, were jobs relocated from elsewhere in the UK. And, by the way, I was told to think of free ports as enterprise zones rather than traditional free ports, which only emphasises the risks of displacement in my view.

Now, I note that the terms of any bid here in Wales will be different to England. There are requirements for bids to recognise trade unions and the principles of social partnership, collective bargaining and the rights of the worker. Again, it looks good on paper, but it's easy to say that all this will be respected in a bid. The proof will be once a bid is successful. Every time I've asked this question related to this element, be it to the Government or the bids themselves, all I get back is a verbal guarantee. When asked about mechanisms to deal with employers who breach these requirements and the mechanisms for monitoring them, the answers are far too vague to provide any comfort. The best I've had was that the benefits of being a part of that free-port area will be taken away from companies in breach. But let's think of the practicalities of this. The reason these companies are coming in the first place is so that they can benefit from the tax breaks. Remove these benefits and they'll no doubt threaten to leave—a story almost as old as time—taking all those jobs that we've been told they'll create with them. I'm not confident that any Government would be willing to lose that, especially if the company in question has a large workforce. So, in essence, the true power, yet again, will be with companies. When your support is based on job creation, of course you don't want to lose those jobs. That would be the reality and the Government, local authorities and free-port authority would be placed in an impossible situation.

I'll close, Llywydd, by referring to something that all of us here in this Senedd, cross-party in this Chamber, support, or at least say we support, and that is retaining wealth within Wales. Wealth won't be retained in Wales through free ports; quite the opposite: it will flow out via its usual means and there will be no means of taxing the profits of those businesses operating within them—profits that Welsh workers will have made for those companies. We talk about building the Welsh economy through supporting Welsh enterprise, supporting local businesses, co-operatives—that's where investment and focus should be. Our way may take a while, but it's the more sustainable way and the way that will bring the most benefit to Welsh workers.

I think the question we should all ask ourselves is whether or not we believe businesses should pay taxes and contribute to public services like everyone else, especially during a cost-of-living crisis. If your answer is 'yes', then, in my view, you have no business supporting free ports.

I call on the Minister for Economy to move formally amendment 2, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths.

Formally.

Thank you so much to my colleague, Darren Millar, for bringing this important debate forward. Having spoken on the subject on quite a few occasions, I sincerely don't hold the same view as you, Luke Fletcher. In fact, I think free ports present a fantastic opportunity for Wales, energising the economy, creating high-quality jobs, and will drive investment forward, something I would have thought that everyone in this Chamber would have wanted to see in Wales, going forward. 

Now, whatever your view is on Brexit, there's no denying that this new trade opportunity simply wouldn't have been an option if we were still part of the European Union. Now, free ports have a reputation of ultimately regenerating communities, providing economic growth and creating much-needed high-skilled jobs for many people—

Will the Member give way?

No. [Laughter.] And since being a Member, I've had an immeasurable number of meetings and attended incalculable events with individuals, groups and organisations across Wales on their plight to get their bid approved and I must say that they've all been very impressive.

I was delighted to hear that three exceptional Welsh free-port bids have been submitted and it's fantastic news for the country, with each presenting major benefits. It might sound a bit biased, but, as a regional Member for South Wales East, I'm sure no-one here will be surprised to know that I do have a soft spot for Newport's bid. Intricate details have been kept under wraps, but, from what I know, Newport's bid encompasses a string of underdeveloped employment sites across the region, including the Welsh Government-owned Cardiff Airport. Well, let's be honest, it needs all the help it can get. The bid, being led by Newport City Council, would, if successful, help entice more national and international business to the area, which will, in turn, mean thousands more jobs and training opportunities, not just for Newport residents, but people all across south-east Wales.

I know my colleagues Samuel Kurtz and Paul Davies have the same level of enthusiasm and dedication for the Celtic free-port bid in their patch, which would create some 16,000 high-quality jobs—green jobs, in fact—and see some £5.5 billion-worth of new investment. Having met with the group behind the Celtic free-port bid, and having seen their presentation, it was clear to me within minutes that they have some truly wonderful plans in place that will greatly benefit local residents and enterprise.

I've also had countless conversations and worked with my colleague Virginia Crosbie, MP for Ynys Môn, who has been singing from the rooftops for the Anglesey free-port bid from day one—now, more than anyone else I've seen, particularly on this subject. I would say that the Anglesey free-port bid would attract £1 billion in investment and create up to 13,000 new highly paid jobs on the island, so, believe me when I say I know only too well just how passionate all of my colleagues are when it comes to creating free ports in their areas.

In this post-Brexit era, free ports can play a pivotal role for the UK, as our Prime Minister Rishi Sunak outlined recently. He actually said, and I quote:

'Foreign Trade Zones are flourishing all around the world—except in the EU. Post-Brexit they could play an important role in signalling Britain’s openness to the world, as well as reconnecting the nation with its proud maritime history.'

The Prime Minister has gone on to say also what my colleague Paul Davies had said in his opening, that free ports would come with numerous benefits such as 'simpler planning',

'cheaper customs—with favourable tariffs, VAT or duties',

and lower taxes as well, and, I quote,

'tax breaks to encourage construction, private investment and job creation',

something that we all want in Wales. There's no denying that all three bids are impressive and would deliver truly remarkable benefits to Wales.

The UK Government has committed £26 million to create a free port in Wales, and I am pleased to see that Ministers here in Wales and in London are not just talking the talk, but they're also walking the walk, by working together to actually make this a reality. I am particularly pleased to hear that a second free port could be on the cards if a truly exceptional proposal is put forward, something emphasised to me when I met with the then levelling-up Secretary Michael Gove, and it's a message I've shared with all bidders that I've met to date.

Personally, I'll continue to beat the drum for two free ports to be created in Wales, because they will no doubt be a real shot in the arm for the Welsh economy and bring countless benefits to us all. I sincerely hope the Welsh Government will continue to work closely with the UK Government and collaborate effectively to deliver these exciting proposals, which will undoubtedly bring outstanding economic benefits to Wales. Deputy Presiding Officer, I am genuinely keeping both of my fingers crossed for two free ports here in Wales, and, just like all of my colleagues from all corners of Wales, look forward to hearing the free-port announcement being made soon.

Yes, well, there we are. That was that version; this is going to be this version. The point here is quite clearly that I am extremely sceptical of free ports. I don't uphold this idea of free trade in the way that you're describing, and I would ask people to think about who is wholesale behind this. I'm sure that some of us can remember Liz Truss, I'm sure some can remember Kwasi Kwarteng, and I'm sure they can remember the crash to the economy, because those are the types of people who are behind this libertarian right-wing think tank and this disastrous mini budget that we're still now footing the bill for. I'm sure you can remember the sterling crisis, the turmoil on the bond market, the pension funds, the central bank intervention, the mortgage rate hikes. Those are the sorts of people that support this type of bid.

So, it doesn't matter how you package it up, and I'm sure that we've heard some and we'll hear more, free ports represent low tax, low regulation, limited Government ideology and a race to the bottom stuff. So, it's wrong, the wrong answer, of course—and we did hear Brexit, amazingly—it's the wrong answer to the Brexit problem that was created by this right-wing Government. 

Will you take an intervention?

The latest estimate suggests that the UK economy is already around 4 per cent smaller as a result of leaving the EU. It's been explained to me how the UK model for free ports offer robust protections—we've heard those before—against the criminality and the corruption that they have facilitated elsewhere in the world.

Joyce, will you take an intervention?

In a minute. But at a time when the national debt is £2.5 trillion—digest that one—thanks to years of Tory mismanagement, free ports still deprive central Government of vital income via a wide range of customs privileges and tax breaks.

Thanks, Joyce, for giving way, and it's an interesting speech. Can you just clarify that you are saying that you don't want to invest or create jobs in your own region of Mid and West Wales?

I knew you'd sink to the lowest denominator. So, the answer, clearly, to that question is 'no'. You're trying to mix things up here, quite deliberately, and that's why you've tabled this debate. Because you, ideologically, think it's a good idea to give free tax breaks to the very wealthy to take money out of our country and hand it to wherever.

There's another debate that's going on, and that is: do we want the investment in our areas that actually helps people to have really good jobs with very good wages that are protected by that income generation, which could also help, actually—if you weren't allowing all that leeching of taxpayers' money—to invest in all the things that you ask here, week by week? Where's the money? Well, there it is.

So, let's be clear about this. We need to also remember that people are actually striking for more pay at the moment. You've asked us to settle—quite rightly, and we are going in that direction—good terms and conditions for workers. So, you know, let's keep the taxpayers here. These aren't all my thoughts, either. Two thirds of respondents to the free-port policy also agreed with everything that I've just said. So, my question is: how is the Welsh Government going to deliver its promise, via the workers' consultative forum, of fair work and social partnerships that are part of our ideology on this side?

That said, our ports are a gateway to growth and levelling up, but as centres of cleaner energy, not as a free-market free for all. That is the ambition for the Milford Haven future energy cluster that I want to see. Our ports can drive change. They will drive change. They will enable the decarbonisation of green energy. They will bring in industry and transport and logistics, and they are, indeed, ideally located to serve as generation, storage and distribution sites for emerging technologies like green hydrogen and floating offshore wind in the Celtic sea. That's the future I want to see for our ports, and that should be the political focus going on.

I heard a whole list of, 'This is what they'll do for people.' So, if you look at 2.1.13 in the document about free ports, it says that they

'could include commitments in relation to the real living wage and trade union engagement.'

The word 'could' is actually vital here, and it's not in the Tories' ideology to enable workers' rights, as they have clearly demonstrated in their very recent drive against trade unions and fair play. 

After listening to Luke Fletcher and Joyce Watson, all I can say is that the anti-growth coalition is alive and well in the Senedd Chamber here today. I welcome today's debate because not only does it give me a chance— [Interruption.] You can intervene later on, Huw; don't worry. It gives me a chance to say how beneficial free ports will be to the Welsh economy, but I can also tell you how brilliant Port Talbot will be in supporting a Celtic free port, as the Dirprwy Lywydd knows only too well.

I hoped—I wrote 'hope' here but that hope is lost now—I hoped that everyone here could see the benefits of an area with tax and customs incentives, not only for the jobs they create, but also the huge investment opportunities they'll bring to the areas that really need it. A free port for Wales will no doubt be a big factor in our economic recovery after COVID-19, and will be a real driver in creating future markets for UK products across the globe.

The Welsh economy, under this Welsh Labour Government, has been centred too much around the city of Cardiff, so it's a fantastic chance for us to spread the wealth away from just one corner of our country. It's evident too that a free port can promote regeneration in a surrounding area, and that will deliver for communities that need it the most in Wales, and those disproportionately tend to be our coastal communities.

Free ports work. I was really struck by the fact that just a small public investment into free ports is likely to deliver huge economic returns. For example, the two free ports in Scotland were given £52 million in UK Government investment and are set to bring forward £10.8 billion in public and private investment to these areas. That’s a two-hundredfold return.

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Could I just point him back towards the pre-2020 Government, which invested £16 million in the north-east area coast? It didn’t require a free port—it was just investment, which then enabled Siemens to develop its capacity for offshore wind. It doesn’t need to be free ports to do this. What it needs to be is strategic Government investment. Now I, of course, will always welcome investment in my area and the potential for jobs. In fact, that’s why I will back this going forward. But don’t pretend that it’s free ports that do it. It’s actually the opportunities in renewables, and the ports and the skills within south Wales. Free ports is just an ideology.

Free ports are not an ideology, and they’ve changed, as I’ve just said, the economy there in Scotland, where they’ve been invested. He talked about the north-east—look at the impact it’s had in Teesside. It’s had a huge impact on a community that’s previously been deprived.

In the south-west of Wales the Celtic free port is projected to create 16,000 jobs and £5.5 billion of inward investment for green energy projects. That’s 16,000 high-quality, well-paid green energy jobs with a real opportunity to unlock part of the £54 billion floating offshore wind industry. Linking two of our deep-sea ports in Milford Haven and Port Talbot is a great use of the resources that we already have, and should make us more attractive to the offshore wind sector, given that it would cover a large part of the Welsh coast.

I have no doubt that it will also help support the proposed Gwynt Glas offshore windfarm near the coast of Pembrokeshire. We already have the infrastructure in Port Talbot to support this cutting edge industry’s innovation in the Celtic sea and make Wales a world leader in green energy. Not only do we have a deep-sea port, but we already have ready-made steelworks to support the manufacturing side of an offshore floating wind industry. It’s also clear we have great transport links, so we can easily reach other parts of the UK and beyond.

Finally, the area of Neath Port Talbot is also part of the NPTC Group of Colleges, which already has an excellent reputation in furthering education and works with industry leaders and universities, so we also have the potential to provide the right skills mix, which will help underpin and deliver this project far into the future.

I cannot say enough that investment of this type is sorely needed to be spread beyond the usual places. It should be uncomfortable to learn—particularly for Luke Fletcher, who represents Neath Port Talbot in the same way that I do—that the average GVA per head in Neath Port Talbot, less than an hour down the road, is less than half of the GVA per head in Cardiff. Sadly, a 2022 prosperity score for Neath Port Talbot puts it nineteenth out of the 22 local authorities in Wales, and at 337 out of 374 authorities in the UK in terms of economic and social well-being. So, free ports are an opportunity to change the narrative, and that, I think, is the point that Luke Fletcher and Plaid Cymru and the anti-growth coalition seem to miss.

So, despite this real potential in the area, we’re not creating the economic output, we’re not getting the right incomes, and we’re not harnessing the potential and the skills that we have. A free port can change that situation, and I think the Celtic free port has limitless potential in Pembrokeshire and Neath Port Talbot. A green energy innovation corridor, underpinned by this investment, can really make a difference and showcase the talent we have in Wales to the world.

Let’s also hope this will have a knock-on effect in town centres in places like Port Talbot, as well as on small businesses in and around the area, which depend on customer footfall. I’m hearing a lot that this project will be transformational for the region. Working with a huge array of partners across south Wales, I think we can make this part of Wales a brilliant example of what free ports can offer, and I wholeheartedly say that I back the bid for a Celtic free port in south-west Wales. Thank you.

Before I call the next person, I’d better put on record and remind Members that I do represent Port Talbot, even though it’s been mentioned I do not know how many times in the last contribution.  [Laughter.] Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you very much. It’s good to have the opportunity to talk again about the bid that has been prepared and put forward by Isle of Anglesey County Council and Stena Line to designate Holyhead and Anglesey a free port on behalf of the whole of north Wales. I’ll say as a supporter of that bid, and one that’s collaborated with the authors, that we need some honesty in terms of this debate, and we need a dose of reality rather than political ideology on the benches opposite, too.

It isn’t clear to everyone what a free port is. It’s fair to say that many have doubts about them, and we’ve heard some of those doubts today. And it is important to take those doubts seriously, and to challenge constantly—and I have done plenty of that myself—because we know from history that free ports that don't follow clear and rigorous guidelines can bring negative side effects. And we have to remember that there are other ways of making investments that can avoid those kinds of negative effects. So, that's the honesty that I am seeking here.

But, for me, what's important is that this bid, within the framework that we have, is a bid that has been put together on the island, led by partners who are used to working together—Stena and the county council; a bid that reflects our ambitions and our interests as a community, whilst at the same time bringing wider economic benefits. But it's also a bid that reflects our values as communities, with its authors, and me as a supporter, having insisted on operating within a set of clear principles. [Interruption.]

If I may continue for a moment. So, yes, we did have to demand and secure a number of concessions and assurance on a number of issues before starting the initiative. There was a financial battle to be won in the first place. Originally, the United Kingdom Government proposed £26 million for every free port in England and £8 million for every one in Wales. I drew attention to how unfair that was; everyone could see that that was entirely unacceptable, and those discussions took place. I was pleased to see that the Welsh Government saw eye to eye with me on this. There was a victory on that call for a level playing field and financial fair play, with £26 million now on the table for Wales too.

But there was more than that. There was also a need to know that workers' rights would be safeguarded more, as well as the environment. And through discussion, we had more assurance in that regard in a new Welsh prospectus. But, again, ongoing monitoring will be needed—it will be vital in order to be aware of the potential negative effects—and I'm pleased to hear the Welsh Government also making comments in that regard too.

So, on those new foundations, Anglesey council was free to team up with Stena to put a bid together. They had my full support. The bid itself is about bringing investment, job opportunities, encouraging entrepreneurship on the island and across the north, and it's important that councils across the north are all supporting it. So, across the region, across party lines too, this new made-in-Wales prospectus has been able to bring people together.

Skills are vital: Bangor University, Coleg Llandrillo Menai are very much a part of it. It's also mitigation on the Brexit front. It won't undo the damage of Brexit, but by creating new economic activity in the port of Holyhead, it can be a means to address the post-Brexit downturn in trade through the ports. And there are wider benefits to investing in encouraging traffic to return to the land bridge, including in environmental terms.

And the environment of course is at the heart of the bid. I want the port of Holyhead to be the hub for the next generation of Irish sea wind generation. This could be a boost for that, done well. And I look beyond the north too. There is a chance here to elevate Wales's ambitions in renewables as a whole, in a more joined-up way. I've reflected on a number of occasions in this Senedd on the potential benefits of having two free ports, looking along the same green energy lines. But I do think the Holyhead, Ynys Môn, north Wales bid does stand out.

There is no single silver bullet when it comes to economic regeneration. Anybody suggesting that free ports are the answer to all our ills are wrong, and I'm hearing far too much of that, frankly, this afternoon. Of course the Conservatives are branding this as a key part of the levelling-up agenda. I know they're desperate to hide the fact that Conservative economic policy does nothing other than to level down for everybody. And we have to put the £26 million too in the context of the hundreds of millions that have been lost to communities like mine, and the rest of the UK, because of the Conservatives' misguided policies and their Brexit lies.

But I believe that by working carefully, we can benefit from using all the variety of economic tools at our disposal. The recent announcement of the 2 Sisters Food Group closure consultation is yet another stark reminder of the challenges we face, and that's why I'm wishing Anglesey council and Stena all the best with their bid on our behalf.

I'm always very grateful to bang the drum for something that I'm passionate about in this Chamber, and I've rewritten this speech about four or five times in my head, having listened to contributions this afternoon, and knowing the glare that the Deputy Presiding Officer gave me only a few weeks ago, I will be conscious to keep my contribution positive and upbeat this afternoon.

But it will be no surprise to Members of this Chamber that I will be advocating for one free port in particular, for the Celtic free port in my constituency of Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire. We've heard the statistics from Tom Giffard, who represents the region that this free port represents, as it's over two geographical locations, and it brings together a whole region of organisations, be they Associated British Ports, Pembrokeshire County Council, Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, the Port of Milford Haven, Tata Steel, RWE, the University of South Wales or Pembrokeshire College. These are trust ports, private ports, local authorities and higher education colleges, coming together, seeing the benefits that this free-port bid can bring, and that's something that I think is incredibly positive.

But the point I'm trying to make, Dirprwy Lywydd, is that the Celtic free-port bid is not just confined to one community. It gives an entire region an opportunity to release the shackles a little, breathe new life into these communities right across south and west Wales. And we've heard from Tom Giffard regarding the £5.5 billion-worth of new investment and 16,000 new high-quality jobs. And the point that Luke Fletcher was making in terms of jobs being reallocated or redistributed from one area to another, I understand those concerns, but that's what's so important with this Celtic free-port bid: these are new jobs because of the renewable opportunities that are afforded to us with floating offshore wind. These are new jobs in industries that have survived by working in the hydrocarbon industries that have been in the area. I'll most happily take an intervention from my Mid and West Wales colleague.

I thank you for taking the intervention. You're just doing this mixing up again. We could have all that investment, the Tory Government could be very generous and give us all this money that they're promising, but we wouldn't have to lose the tax take from the advantages that you've described, that I want to see as well as you—I've represented this area since 1995, so I want to see that investment. What I don't want to see is the leeching of the taxes that belong in this country, and the advantage is only, as it was described, to the very top tier of those people who will probably move that money on again.

I thank the Member for her intervention, and it's in a similar vein to the Member in front of me for Ogmore's interventions—'Why do we need these? These things can be done anyway.' But I think that's missing the point in terms of what this does. It's a catalyst. Yes, it's potentially possible that these industries can thrive and survive without a free-port bid and without the benefits that a free port brings. But what it does is it catalysts it at one precise moment, so that these opportunities aren't lost. We are able to see local businesses and industries at the forefront of technology and industries, and I think that's what's really important is that if we don't take these opportunities, it's quite likely that companies outside of Wales, outside of the United Kingdom, can be at the forefront exploiting the opportunities that are afforded to local companies and local businesses. And that's why I think there isn't going to be that dispersal of jobs in Wales through a free-port bid, especially the Celtic free-port bid. I think that's really apparent and needs to be really clear, because there is real opportunity. 

But the Celtic free port isn't just about bringing economic investment. It's critical to the component in securing the UK's energy security, with the added benefit of decarbonising existing industries, keeping employment whilst granting us the ability to meet our net-zero ambitions. I too take optimism from the fact that the UK and Welsh Governments have worked together on this, making sure that the free-port policy in Wales is right for Wales. And as Paul Davies, my constituency neighbour in Preseli Pembrokeshire, has rightly highlighted in his opening remarks, Wales's potential is second to none. And while I may disagree with him on Preseli Pembrokeshire being the energy capital, with RWE power station and Valero oil refinery in my constituency, that's an argument he and I can have on another day.

But it's really important that we can see the ability that's here, so while I take that optimism—and I see the Minister in front of me smiling—from this collaboration, I look up the M4 and urge all key decision makers to ensure that Wales's potential can be unleashed through two successful free-port bids. This can ensure that the opportunities unlocked via free-port status can be applied right across Wales from one corner to the other. We can work cross-party on this, with the UK Government and Welsh Government working hand in hand, supercharging Wales's green economy, ensuring that Wales can become the beating heart of the United Kingdom's energy security, with all corners of Wales playing their part. It's with that that I urge Members to support not only our motion here today, but also the Celtic free-port bid. Diolch yn fawr.

I'm pleased to be taking part in this debate today as a firm backer of the Celtic free-port bid. The opportunities offered by the Celtic free port to my region and the wider south-west Wales area are immense. That is why the bid has support from across the political spectrum and across the region. Should the UK and Welsh Governments back the bid, the establishment of a free port covering Port Talbot and Milford Haven docks could see upward of £5.5 billion of inward investment into the region. But this is just the tip of the iceberg, which is why Neath Port Talbot Council and Pembrokeshire County Council are key players in the bid consortium.

The establishment of the Celtic free port will lead to an explosion of green jobs as the region moves to harness the potential of the Celtic sea and exploit green hydrogen. Floating offshore wind will be transformative, not only in helping to decarbonise and secure our future energy supply, but the £54 billion industry will be a key driver in transforming the ports at Port Talbot and Milford Haven into modern green energy hubs, ports that will build upon our past industrial expertise whilst delivering a brighter, greener future for Wales. Building on the extensive regional specialist skill base, transmission and pipelines, natural capital and distribution facilities, the Celtic free port will provide the skills, services and spaces for industry to thrive—industries such as Tata steel in Port Talbot, one of my region's largest employers and one of our nation's strategic industries.

The opportunities the Celtic free port present to the Port Talbot steelworks are many, but first and foremost is the opportunity to play a key role in the manufacture of floating offshore wind components for the Celtic sea, and then to build upon those opportunities to export to the wider UK and across the globe. Tata, working alongside the Celtic free port, has the potential to become one of the world's first green steel producers and to develop the expertise in manufacturing the next generation of renewables. We are in a race to decarbonise our industries, our energy sectors and our infrastructure. If we can get these there first, we can not only lead the way, but cash in on the wider economic opportunities.

South Wales led the first industrial revolution, and if we play our cards right, we can lead the next. My region is home to the most people working in manufacturing compared to anywhere else in Wales, and whilst we have seen the decline of manufacturing and heavy industry in recent decades, the potential to build upon those skills is immeasurable. With the right plan in place, we can transform the region and create new highly skilled, highly sought after jobs, green jobs in everything, from welding to data science. I believe the Celtic free-port bid is the right plan, and I urge the Welsh Government, together with the UK Government, to support the Celtic free-port bid. I would also ask colleagues to support our motion today in order to deliver a clear message to both Governments that this Senedd supports the Welsh free-port bid. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on the Minister for Economy, Vaughan Gething. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'm grateful for this opportunity to update the Senedd on the free-ports programme in Wales. The Government is content to support the motion, subject to amendment 2. We want to be clear that we're not tied into a particular number of free ports, and I'll talk later on about that as well. I acknowledge Plaid Cymru's focus on the challenges faced by coastal communities in their amendment. The Government won't support amendment 1. Apart from anything else, it wouldn't get to our amendment, but it's a debate more broadly that I think is raised in their amendment that I'm happy to have and one that we will undoubtedly revisit at another time.

The focus of the motion tabled today is free ports, and the free-ports model has been designed to apply to every type of port—sea ports, airports and rail ports. I recognise there are different views in the room—some of nuance, some of others—on the pragmatic approach to free ports and some of the broader ideological positions about where people start from and may well end up.

Welsh ports, of course, have a long history and have helped to shape the economic, social and cultural fabric of Wales. Today, they remain a central feature in establishing new trading links across the globe and in growing the UK as well as Wales’s international trade and investment potential. The free-port programme is a compromise between the UK and Welsh Governments. It has the potential to support our economic priorities across Wales to stimulate a net growth in jobs, create high-quality employment opportunities, and support decarbonisation as part of our journey to net zero. I have been very clear that we are looking to grow not displace economic activity, and I have been very clear that fair work is an essential part of what any free-port bid must deliver.

Will the Minister give way on that point?

I will.

Minister, thank you for giving way, because there's a danger that this debate can get polarised into you're either pro free ports entirely or against them entirely. But, actually, the pragmatic approach of working with the deck of cards that we are dealt and dealing with that in a pragmatic way, Government to Government and so on, is right, it's the right way to go, but we really have to guard against an idea that everybody becomes a beneficiary here. Because the worst thing for me in that big Bridgend manufacturing belt that you've talked about is that we actually see some of that sucked away into a free-port area and actually losing jobs from walk-to-work areas, part of the foundational economy, jobs in the Valleys and so on. So, if this is going to work, the Welsh Government need to be right in there, actually, and saying to the UK Government, 'The way this will work, to keep jobs in areas, will be this way and not just a free-for-all.'  

I think it's fair to say that if you look at the free-ports programme in England, it's different to the one we have in Wales. The parameters for the bids are different—that's because we did eventually have a sensible conversation between the two Governments. I welcome what Samuel Kurtz said earlier about the fact that the Welsh and the UK Government have worked together. That wasn't without some difficulty. We eventually secured the same UK Treasury offer. You'll recall at one point we were being told that Wales would have half the money of other free ports. We also secured agreement on our priorities—a commitment to a bid needing to meet the requirements of the goals of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, and needing to meet our requirements on fair work as well. Those things would not have been in there if the Welsh Government had not been part of reaching a pragmatic agreement on a compromise we can live with.

We are now looking to make sure that the competition reaches an end. The closing date for the bids was 24 November last year. Three bids, as has been noted, have been received. My officials are in the process of assessing those bids jointly with UK Government officials. So, as I anticipated in moving this debate, I'm therefore unable to comment on the specific details of any one proposal, to the surprise of no-one. We hope to announce the outcome this spring. So, it should not take much longer.

I should say, though, and this goes to part of the reason why there is a Government amendment seeking to change point 3, that if there is to be more than one free port, then the UK Treasury will need to make financial resources available. It should still be the case that there should not be a Welsh free port delivered with devolved powers and us needing to forgo devolved taxes with a lesser settlement from the UK Treasury than any other free port anywhere else. And so there's a challenge there about the bids themselves. And if there is more than one outstanding bid, then the UK Treasury will need to act to make that a reality.

I should also make this point clear: free ports are not the sum total of investment opportunities for good, sustainable jobs based around our ports in Wales. Members will recall that only a few weeks ago I updated the Senedd, providing an oral statement on our economic priorities and some of our joint projects with UK Government. There are real benefits where the Welsh Government and UK Government work together, with a partnership founded on mutual respect, where the UK Government discharges its responsibilities in accordance with, not over, the devolution settlement. It's regrettable that this approach has not been extended to other programmes and policies, such as the shared prosperity fund and the levelling-up fund.

In my previous oral statement, I set out our long-term plan for stable, future-focused economic growth against a worsening overall economic outlook, the key causes of which are a toxic combination of Brexit, underinvestment and the damage caused by last autumn's mini budget. I was grateful to Tom Giffard for his comedy interlude. I don't share Liz Truss's view on the anti-growth coalition, nor indeed that she fell foul of a left-wing plot, rather than a disastrous market reaction, and the men in grey suits from the 1922 committee visiting her to tell her that her time was up.

Her brief time, though, has caused real and lasting harm to mortgage holders, potential house buyers, and business investment. We're still living with the consequences of her choices. The IMF has recently reforecast that the UK will be the only major economy to shrink in 2023—a very similar UK forecast to the Bank of England's. As concerning is the bank's bleak assessment that the UK economy cannot grow at more than 1 per cent a year without generating inflation. 

In responding to the motion today, I want to reiterate that what is really needed to energise the UK economy as a whole is a coherent economic direction for recovery and growth, one that is founded on the strengths and strategic choices of each constituent nation, and one that respects devolution and the direct mandate of this Parliament and the Welsh Government. In Wales, we have a plan, and our economic mission remains our focus for a greener, more prosperous and more equal nation. I ask Members to support the Welsh Government amendment in today's debate.

I call on Sam Rowlands to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Can I say what a pleasure it is to be able to close today's Welsh Conservatives debate on free ports, submitted in the name of my colleague Darren Millar? As outlined by Paul Davies in opening today's debate and outlined in point 1 of our motion, free ports have a role in really energising the Welsh economy. As the Minister just mentioned there, they're certainly not the be-all and end-all, but have a significant role in helping our economy move forward. We've been clear from our benches here today as Conservatives that we recognise the significant opportunities that come from free ports, and this includes the investment, high-quality jobs, and regeneration. I was disappointed to hear not a similar level of recognition from other benches in the Chamber here today, because as outlined by Paul Davies in opening, a free-port policy brings investment, trade and more jobs right across Wales, to make sure those industries of yesterday are being replaced by green and innovative, fast-growing, new businesses.

In the debate today, we heard from Luke Fletcher a certain amount of cynicism and suspicion of free ports, which did seem at odds to the bid from Anglesey county council, a Plaid Cymru council there, and of course from Plaid Cymru colleagues in north Wales, who are enthusiastically supporting some of the bids. We also heard from Natasha Asghar about the real status that free ports have to attract new trade and manufacturing activity, which Sam Kurtz was keen to outline as new trade, new businesses and new jobs that can be created through these. A number of Members highlighted where there are already agreed free ports taking place in the UK. We're seeing thousands of those new, high-skilled jobs being set up, both with public and private sector investment. 

What's been highlighted today, of course, is Members certainly seeking to highlight the free ports in their patch. Of course, I'll be very keen to highlight and remind Members of the free-port bid in Anglesey, but we'll talk about that a little bit more in a moment, because colleagues—Samuel Kurtz, Paul Davies, Tom Giffard and Altaf Hussain—highlighted the Celtic free-port bid, proposing to create a green innovation and investment corridor with sites at Port Talbot and Milford Haven, with Pembrokeshire council believing that the proposed clean energy developments, fuel terminals, power station and hydrogen fuel innovation will all thrive. There are some tongue-twister words there. But sadly, Joyce Watson didn't seem to be able to have the same level of enthusiasm for that bid, which was disappointing to hear from that contribution. Natasha Asghar pointed out, also, the Newport City Council bid, launching the free-port bid for Cardiff Airport, which would result in multisite free ports in south-east Wales covering a number of underdeveloped employment sites across the Cardiff capital region.

And the third free-port bid that was highlighted, Rhun ap Iorwerth said he was in full support of the Port of Holyhead free-port bid, which has also seen great support from Isle of Anglesey County Council, Stena Line, other businesses and, of course, consistent and clear support from the MP for Ynys Môn, Virginia Crosbie. As we know, Ynys Môn has unique characteristics and opportunities that make it an extremely attractive place for the establishment of a new free port. The area's proud trading history is underpinned by world-leading port infrastructure and the potential to become a green energy superpower. [Interruption.] Is that an intervention there, Mike?

No, I'm not allowed—[Inaudible.] I only asked if the MP for Ynys Môn—

Is that an intervention, Deputy Presiding Officer? [Laughter.]

I think we will continue. Sam, continue. 

Thank you very much. In addition to this, analysis conducted by the Centre for Economics and Business Research indicates that Anglesey free port could bring up to 13,000 jobs to north Wales over a 15-year period. It could also increase GDP across the UK by a significant amount by 2030. Along with this, Stena Line, as already mentioned, states that free-port status would simplify the passing of lorries through the port there as well. 

The final point of my contribution today, with which I'd like to finish, Dirprwy Lywydd, is a reminder that the benefits of a free port cannot be underestimated, bringing much-needed jobs and investment into some of the areas of Wales that need to see that growth the most. That's something that Tom Giffard was keen to point out. For the areas of Wales that need that growth the most, free ports will be able to bring it forward [Interruption.] Sorry?

Would you give way?

Yes, certainly.

It's only a brief point, because the differences I've been expressing today are not to do with one of the single bids, it's the disadvantages that case studies have shown over free ports and enterprise zones—that's actually in your amendment. So, you've not acknowledged at all that there are disadvantages or addressed how we avoid them. 

I think with every proposal, there are difficult things to deal with, but the opportunities here aren't being acknowledged by the benches on the other side of the Chamber either—the opportunities for jobs being created are not being acknowledged, the new jobs, new business and new innovation are not being acknowledged at the same level or enthusiastically grasped a hold of. The risk, I suppose, is that if we don't do that here in Wales, those jobs will go elsewhere across the United Kingdom or elsewhere outside of the United Kingdom altogether.

As expressed eloquently and passionately by Members across the Chamber, and indeed everywhere across Wales, these bids will help to transform our local communities, and I appreciate the Minister's response outlining his role in providing pragmatic support where possible through this. And it's essential, of course, that that support continues, with both UK and Welsh Government working together as well as possible to deliver those free ports for us here in Wales, maximising the opportunities that these bids have to offer. So, I thank all Members and the Minister for responding to today's debate, and I call on all Members to support the Welsh Conservatives' motion unamended. Diolch yn fawr iawn.  

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I hear an objection, so I'll defer voting under this item until voting time. 

Item 7 today is the Plaid Cymru debate on income tax devolution, and I call on Adam Price to move the motion. 

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Our motion today seeks to ensure that we in Wales have the power to set bands for income tax as well as rates. Now, it sounds like a fairly dry and technical debate, but actually it goes really to some pretty fundamental questions—two fundamental questions that every nation needs to answer through its democratic process. The first is: what should the size of the state be, i.e. what proportion of GDP should be alloted to public expenditure? And the second is how progressive the tax system we use to fund that public expenditure should be. And the question for us in this debate is where those powers should lie. Are we content for those decisions to be made in Westminster, or should we take them for ourselves here in Wales?

Now, clearly, as a party that has as its central goal Wales becoming an independent nation, we clearly want those powers here and want those decisions made by the democratically elected representatives of the people of Wales. But, we would argue that progressives who support the principle of Welsh democratic self-government, even in the context of a continuing UK, should support the devolution of income tax bands, and I hope, in the course of my remarks, Dirprwy Lywydd, to outline why. 

There are two principal reasons, really. One, it would enable us to raise additional revenue for public expenditure to create the kind of decent society we want to be, and to do so in a fairer way by creating a more progressive tax structure here in Wales. So, take that first point—raising more revenue. The problem with the current system of tax devolution that we have is that it makes it very difficult for us to raise additional revenue. We saw an example of why didn't we in the debate yesterday on the income tax rates; we have to stick, at the moment, to the tax bands and thresholds set by the UK Government. And because the lion’s share of the Welsh rates of income tax are raised through the basic rate, we have to use that basic rate to raise the more significant sums, and there is resistance to doing so, because there's no way of directly cushioning the lowest paid. This is why those income tax powers have never been used here since we secured them; that's why Scotland didn't use those income tax powers before 2016, when it was at last given the power to vary income tax bands and thresholds. There was no use of the original right to vary the basic rate by 3p that the Scottish Parliament was given in 1999; no use of the right to vary each band by up to 10p, which they were given following the Calman commission report in 2012—essentially the same power as we have now.

Now, some people have said that the income tax powers that we have now and they had then were unusable. Now, we don't accept that in Plaid Cymru, as we argued yesterday; it's a matter of political will. And at a time of crisis, even given the constraints and the deficiencies, there comes a time where you have to use those powers, for the reasons that we’ve outlined, to defend public services in an age of austerity. But there are barriers, clearly, which make it more difficult than it should be for us to use the powers currently, and you have to ask the Government, if they’re not prepared to use the existing powers—even under these circumstances—what's the point of having them? What's the point of sustaining the cost and the institutional architecture of these powers if they will never be used? And, the consequence of us not using them is that our fiscal capacity, our ability to do what is necessary for our people, will be decided not by us, but for us by a Parliament in another place. That's not a great place for us to be, is it? It will limit our ability to do our work, to deliver on the task of improving the lives of the people of Wales with which we've been charged, because we'll be at the mercy of a Westminster consensus that believes that a Nordic level of public service is somehow compatible with North American levels of tax.

Because Scotland is free to set income tax bands and thresholds, it has been able to use those tax powers; it's got a starter rate, an intermediate rate, which allows it to increase the basic rate in a fair and proportionate way. The Scottish Government's increasing that basic rate: that was the first time that any Government in the UK has increased the basic rate since 1975—a historic moment—because of this flexibility. At the upper end of the income scale, it's been able to increase rates and set thresholds in a way that reflects the income tax structure of Scotland, rather than the UK, and according to the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the divergence between Scottish rates of income tax and the UK tax policy since 2017 is now generating £1 billion extra in revenue for public services in Scotland, and that will rise to £1.5 billion in 2026. These are substantial sums, and the Scottish Trades Union Congress has suggested some additional changes recently: some new bands, and moving the top rate to 48 per cent, as we suggested in our amendment yesterday, which would raise an additional £900 million on top of that existing £1 billion. And if that was applied to Wales, equivalent in terms of our tax base, we'd be looking at an additional £400 million to £500 million next year available to us. So, it raises additional revenue.

Secondly, it creates a more progressive tax structure. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has concluded that Scotland has the most progressive tax structure in the UK, more progressive than here in Wales, and it's done that through a whole series of interventions, consistently now over the last five years, the first in 2017, it diverged there by introducing a lower threshold for the higher rate. In 2019, it didn't increase the higher rate threshold in line with the rest of the UK. Thresholds for the higher and top rate payers were frozen in 2021, et cetera, et cetera. So, over the last five years, the Scottish Government has consistently, at every juncture, created a more progressive tax structure than England and Wales.

The STUC has pointed out ways in which they could go further along this path by increasing the top rate further, as I said, and creating a lower threshold for its payment, plus the introduction of a new sixth rate in between the higher and top rate. It's because Scotland has this flexibility that you can have this kind of progressive innovation. The Institute for Public Policy Research have suggested that you could go even further; you could actually scrap tax bands altogether and replace them with, effectively, a constant gradual increase in the marginal rate of tax. That would be the most progressive system of all, similar to the kind of system that, actually, is available in many European countries. That's what we could do in Wales if we had these powers, and so the rewards there, in policy terms, are very, very clear: substantial additional revenue, plus the ability to create a much more progressive tax structure, and all that that means in terms of socioeconomic impact in a country that, sadly, is blighted by deep, deep poverty. 

Now, the rewards are there. I'm sure that the Minister, when she shares the Welsh Government view, will talk, as she did in committee recently, about the risks. Well, let's look at some of those risks that the finance Minister referred to in committee. In the short run, greater volatility and unpredictability of revenue. Well, let's look at the current system. The Welsh Government—you yourself said that the budget that you now have is worth up to £1 billion less next year compared with when it was originally announced, and up to £3 billion less over the three-year spending review period from 2022-23 to 2024-25. That's the existing system that you're defending, Minister, which actually is volatile and unpredictable. So, that's the system that we have. The system in Scotland allows us to buffer unpredictability, because of their ability to generate substantial additional revenue.

The other risk that was referred to is the long-term revenue risk, the risk of the Welsh tax base growing more slowly. Of course, the flipside to that is that the Welsh tax base could grow faster. In fact, that's what happened, of late, isn't it? The revenues from the Welsh rate in 2021 exceeded the associated block grant adjustment, providing an additional £62 million to fund public services in Wales. But you can mitigate—

Are you taking an intervention?

—you can mitigate the risk, as well. I have limited time, I'm afraid.

You can mitigate the risk, as well, because the block grant adjustment approach allows for those kinds of risks to be mitigated. We mitigate currently through the fiscal agreement already in place in terms of the budgetary risks that arise from the different distribution of taxpayers that we have in Wales, and that block grant adjustment mitigation policy could be adjusted further to provide mitigation in the way that the Northern Ireland Fiscal Commission has suggested if income tax bands are also devolved there.

So, there are things that we can do to mitigate the risks, but there are great opportunities here, based on the Scottish experience, not only to generate additional revenue, but also to create a far more progressive tax structure than we're currently given by Westminster.

I have selected the amendment to the motion, and I call on the Minister for Finance to move formally amendment 1.

Formally.

It has been moved. Peter Fox.

I understand that there is an important discussion to be had about how we fund services here in Wales and that varying tax levels is the go-to for politicians when looking to raise additional revenue, but we shouldn’t forget just how much of the Welsh budget, some £4 billion, is already raised through devolved tax levers; about £2.8 billion is raised through Welsh rates of income tax alone, as we know. These are substantial sources of funding and, before we look to gain more powers over taxation policy and inevitably look at increasing tax revenue, then we need to assess the tax base here in Wales, because what is missing from the motion is what impact that having full income tax-setting and tax-varying powers like Scotland could have on people’s incomes. We already know that, generally, a larger proportion of the Welsh tax base—over 90 per cent of the tax base—pay the basic rate. This is higher than the UK average. Whereas, in Wales, the basic rate accounts for 59.3 per cent of total income tax, it is just 34.9 per cent in the rest of the UK, excluding Scotland.

Now, the argument could be that a new, lower rate of income tax could be established in Wales if we had the powers to do so, and that is true. If we look at Scotland, we know that not all that shines is gold. The starter rate only accounts for people earning between £12,571 and £14,732, and the rate set is just 1 per cent lower than the basic rate. Meanwhile those in the Scottish intermediate rate band pay more than those within the UK basic rate. Indeed, someone earning £43,600 in Scotland is subject to an income tax rate that is an eye-watering 22 per cent higher than the equivalent person elsewhere in the UK.

So, there could be political promises that additional powers would result in fairer tax bands, but the political reality is often different. We know that Plaid’s current plans, as we heard yesterday, would be to raise Welsh income tax by 1p, hitting the pockets of the majority of Welsh taxpayers, and in particular those who can least afford to pay more. In fairness to the Minister, she has taken a clear position on this issue, though I do have questions about what the pledge to not raise income tax levels for as long as the effects of the pandemic continue actually means, and what threshold the Government is using to determine this.

However, the issue with the Welsh Government’s amendment is that it refers to its future tax plans, which include things like a tourism tax. The industry has made it clear that it sees such an idea as an unhelpful tool at a time of great difficulty for the tourism industry in Wales. There is a risk that it becomes a blunt tool, with businesses in areas that do not introduce the tax gaining an advantage over those in areas that do introduce a levy.

For both income tax and tourism tax, we need to view this with regard to the porous borders between Wales and the rest of England. Would raising income tax in Wales persuade people to move elsewhere, and we lose their tax revenue? Would a tourism tax encourage people to stay in accommodation in England and avoid paying, and then travel into Wales for holiday activities?

I know that the Welsh Government wishes to introduce other taxes as well, but we must consider what the possible disadvantages of these may be on the economy and communities as well, because, when a Government believes it needs a new tax, often the argument becomes one-dimensional, much like what we are seeing with the tourism tax.

To conclude, I believe that we need to make sure that we're doing all that we can with our existing budgets, and that we're spending it on priority areas before we start looking at introducing taxes. As I've said in this Chamber before, it, sadly, seems the default position for Plaid and for Labour is to just tax, tax, tax. We need to think about innovation and how we use the levers we have far better. Thank you.  

Conversations around tax are always difficult. I don't think that any of us in this Chamber would deny that. But it is a conversation that we have to have nonetheless. There's certainly a conversation to be had around the effectiveness of taxes, such as: what are we trying to do? To what level do we want to redistribute wealth?

But it is important for us also to remember that tax isn't the be-all and end-all of effective policy delivery. It certainly plays its part, and in the current devolved context is one of the few fiscal levers at Welsh Government's disposal. Now, effective policy delivery is dependent flexible fiscal levers that are truly responsive to the communities on which the policy outcomes impact. The inflexibility of the block grant model, for example, has created a discrepancy between the scope of policy design and that of policy delivery in Wales, which compromises far-reaching and long-term strategies for dealing with issues in our society, especially in terms of capital investment in infrastructure. The example of HS2, whereby Wales was deprived of Barnett consequential funding, even though not one inch of the track is being laid in Wales, underlines the inequities of the block grant model. The experience of the pandemic also exposed this discrepancy—for example, the UK Government refusing to extend furlough to accommodate Wales's firebreak lockdown in November 2021 despite the fact, of course, that Welsh Government's decision was fully consistent with its devolved competence over health policy.

In fact, the pandemic showed us all the need for greater fiscal powers here in Wales, particularly when it comes to Welsh Government's ability to borrow. I was and still am an avid reader of the reports published by Wales Fiscal Analysis, and during the pandemic the work they undertook in scrutinising the budget in relation to COVID-19 money was invaluable and set out clearly the restrictions on Welsh Government fiscally. We all remember the criticism that was made of Welsh Government in this Chamber for holding back spending the full amount of what was coming down from UK Government. There was, of course, significant unallocated spend within the budget. The Tories were the biggest critics, but it was precisely the inability of Welsh Government to flex any meaningful fiscal power that forced the Government into that position. Then, of course, there's the loss of the Welsh Government's access to EU funding, and the shortcomings of replacement funding from the UK Government. 'Not a penny less', we were told. Really, they should have just been upfront and told us to forget about the penny altogether. 

Now, to conclude, Llywydd, enhancing the Senedd's power over devolved taxes does not only make sense from a practical perspective, but it would also increase the accountability of the Welsh Government for its own policy decisions, something that I'm sure every Member in this Chamber would agree is an imperative if we are to have a well-functioning democracy in Wales. Devolution was about bringing power closer to people in Wales. Devolution of taxes was to bring responsibility for raising the funds, rather than just spending, closer to the people. There's still, of course, some way to go before we can do anything meaningful to actually raise said funds. 

I think it's always good to discuss taxation, especially when it's being discussed not as part of the budget-setting process. I think if we could perhaps repeat this sort of debate again, well away from the budget, because I think it's got far deeper meaning than this year's budget, and I think that to come back to it in six months' time would be incredibly helpful, either brought here by the Minister or brought here by one of the political parties, to give us a chance to talk about it again. 

My view on devolution is well documented; I support devo max. I also support devolution from the Senedd to the regions and councils of Wales. On devolution I have a pragmatic approach: what works best for the people of Wales is what I support. 

The motion today is a continuation of Plaid Cymru's policy of independence by instalments, or salami-slicing powers from Westminster until we eventually find ourselves independent. The Conservatives are consistent: they oppose any additional devolution at any time. What is more surprising, of course, is that in 2016 and 2007 they wanted a coalition with Plaid Cymru. I think perhaps they need to reconsider. 

Where I do agree with Plaid Cymru is you cannot continue with asymmetric devolution. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and English cities such as London have different powers being devolved. This cannot continue. It makes no sense whatsoever, and everybody's saying, 'They've got it—can we have it?' without actually having it set out. Germany doesn't have that problem. The United States of America doesn't have that problem. And America's probably even better to look at because you've got, in America, tiny states with populations smaller than West Glamorgan, and you've got California and New York. So, it can be done. It's not about size; it's about actually saying, 'This is your state responsibility.' With this asymmetric devolution, it will always cause problems. It's got to be resolved. It's got to be resolved in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, but the biggest question is the English question, which people don't seem to be looking at.

Peter Fox criticised the Government on raising tax too much. Plaid Cymru attacked them on not raising tax too much. There's got to be something somewhere in there. Wales has done well out of devolving income tax, but that is due to a freezing of tax thresholds that means more people come into taxation and move into the second band, rather than improving relative tax. There are problems with income tax. It is meant to be a progressive tax, but there are so many ways of reducing individual tax liabilities to zero. Let's look at taxation of somebody earning £30,000 a year. If they run to retirement age, they pay income tax and national insurance. When they reach retirement age, they cease to pay national insurance. A graduate on the same income will pay back a student loan, income tax and national insurance. Some level of fairness is needed in there.

Someone who receives income via dividend, which is a lot of what self-employed people do to avoid income tax, will pay substantially less. Dividends are taxed substantially lower than income tax, so it's a great way of avoiding paying tax. I'll use the word 'avoiding', because, if I use the word' evading' I'd get into trouble, but it's a way of avoiding paying tax because you have been paid by dividend, and that's very easy. You create a company, search the company's name, enter your business and personal details, receive your limited company certificate and your business bank account at the same time, arrange for all payments to go into the business and then receive your income as a dividend, thus paying substantially less tax. And more importantly for us, we don't get any of the dividend income. I think something that we do need to start arguing about is that dividend income should come to us as well, and we should also be arguing that any dividends that come from a company that people have set up and of which they are the sole recipient is effectively income, rather than dividend. That's the sort of thing that I think we need to start discussing. I do not believe that this is fair. We need a less complicated system that ensures that everybody their fair share, with dividend rates taxed the same as income tax.

Then, the tax benefits exist—this only works for relatively well-off people—the travel expenses you can claim, what you're entitled to if you work from home, clothes for work count as expenses, how donating to charity can be good for your tax bill, pensions' relief. And finally there is the elephant in the room—non-domiciled status, used by the wealthy to avoid paying any income tax in Britain whatsoever. UK residents who have their permanent home outside the UK may not have to pay UK tax on foreign income, so if you have a dividend payment paid into a foreign bank and it becomes foreign income, you don't have to pay any at all; the same rules for foreign capital gains tax. All the above benefits disproportionately benefit those paying tax at a higher tax rate. Very few of my constituents get the benefit of that. The best financial devolution you could have would be for dividends to be devolved and for powers over non-dom status and for tax-deductible items to be examined, for pensions tax relief to be only at the basic rate. 

Yesterday in the debate on the Welsh Government's draft budget, I spoke about how the people of Wales are facing multiple crises, unprecedented crises since the advent of devolution, and I agreed with the Welsh Government that this was a difficult budget in a difficult time, and outlined the support that is needed for those who need it most, why the services providing this support must be given the resources that they need to fill those huge holes that exist in the safety net, which has been torn to shreds by the Westminster Tories. 

I set out in my contribution why Welsh Government should feel duty-bound to use all the levers available to it, which was the purpose of our call for it to use the income tax-raising powers it currently has to serve and support the people of Wales during these crises—the cost-of-living crisis, the NHS crisis, the social care crisis, the cost-of-learning crisis, the cost-of-doing-business crisis, the housing crisis, climate crisis—crises that disproportionately affect the most vulnerable of our citizens, and whose effects will scar our communities not just today or tomorrow, but for years to come. Because I, for one, am frankly fed up of hearing Welsh Government Ministers say over and over, 'We'd like to do more but we don't have the money'. If devolution truly is, as famously described by Ron Davies, a process, a journey with no fixed end point, enabling us to make our own decisions and set our own priorities, then calling for the powers we need for Wales to be able to afford to do so is a completely logical step, especially given the need, as our motion describes, to respond to the current cost-of-living crisis and the crisis facing our public services. So, that's the 'why', and in it's an important 'why' because it's not powers for their own sake but the means to make devolution work more effectively, to fund the levels of public expenditure we need.

We've already heard how Wales is something of an anomaly compared to the rest of the UK when it comes to its limited tax powers, and, to quote a recent report by the Institute of Welsh Affairs on this matter, as a nation we are

'in the relatively uncommon position of having little control'

over our devolved budget, with limited taxation powers, next to no influence over the block grant from Westminster, as we heard from Luke Fletcher, and exceptionally limited borrowing powers.

And our anomalous situation is also relevant within a wider international context. As a recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development study illustrated, the UK possesses one of the most rigidly centralised tax systems in the world—something Mike Hedges alluded to. Every other G7 nation collects more taxes at a local or regional level compared to the UK. For example, devolved or decentralised taxation accounts for 30 per cent of total German tax revenue, 34 per cent in the case of the USA and almost 50 per cent in the case of Canada. This compares to just over 10 per cent of local UK tax revenue that is collected at the devolved level.

We can look to the example of Euskadi, the Basque Country, too, whose devolved Government has extensive powers over personal income taxation, corporate taxation and its own wealth and inheritance and gift tax. This has engendered economic growth in the Basque Country, which has been described as highly inclusive by the Foreign Policy Centre. The region features among the top in Europe, not only in terms of GDP per capita, but crucially, given the current economic context, also in having a low percentage of population at risk of poverty or social exclusion. So, what we're proposing here isn't particularly radical, therefore; rather, it seeks to normalise what is already happening, and happening well elsewhere.

The argument that we can't use tax to fund the spending we need, to create the fairer, more prosperous Wales we all want to see, is patently fairly ridiculous when set in the international context. And with the powers to set all rates and bands, income tax can be a fair and proportionate way to secure the resources we need, to help us overcome the shameful levels of poverty that blight the lives of too many of our citizens, and the dire need for investment in our public services. Westminster has never and never will work for Wales. Devolution is a journey, a journey of discovery that the Westminster way of doing things is not a good model for Wales to follow. If you believe in devolution, if you believe in taking the responsibility of governing seriously, and if you believe in serving the people of Wales, you should vote for our motion.

I'm pleased to take part in this debate this afternoon, and I'm going to keep my contribution fairly brief and to the point today. And I thank Plaid Cymru for tabling such an important discussion, as it shows again that the so-called Party of Wales is the most out of touch it's ever been with the needs of the people of Wales. Only last week, Llywydd, they were happy to grandstand with their showcase policy of raising taxes for working people, but do you think that's what people really want during a period of increasing cost in fuel, energy, food and everything in between? Is this really the Party of Wales acting in the best interests of the people of Wales? I think not. Most of Plaid-held constituencies are in the west of Wales with a high proportion of middle-class, socially conservative Welsh-speaking communities, rural areas with farmers and all the traits that go with it. Do you really think that the good people of places such as Lampeter, Cardigan, Aberystwyth, Newcastle Emlyn, Porthmadog, Dinas Mawddwy, and Beddgelert, even, appreciate your party being pulled in the direction of Corbynista-style nationalists? Again, I think not. Again, the self-styled Party of Wales like to believe they represent Welsh people better than anyone else and purport they are putting Wales first, but you want to devolve justice, devolve more tax powers, devolve the Crown Estates, devolve broadcasting and devolve the kitchen sink, all in the endless pursuit of independence. Goodness gracious me.

This Welsh Labour Government, propped up by Plaid, can't even run the current devolved powers or even run a bath, for that matter, but want to add insult to injury. Look at the state of the NHS in Wales and social care, for example. It's in a mess: one in four people on a waiting list, patients waiting longer than any other UK nation, the failure to build north Denbighshire community hospital in Rhyl after 10 years of broken promises. I could go on all day, but sadly I don't have the time. But what I would suggest is that we get our own house in order before we consider any further devolution to Wales, and you hardly help yourselves, do you? Anyway, I'll leave it there as that's pretty much my view on the subject and would urge Members to oppose this hideously out-of-touch motion. Thank you.

Doing nothing has a cost. The absence of action carries consequences for our society, and our debate today is all about costs. Not only what costs should be paid by people able to contribute to our society, but also the cost of not doing more to forge a fairer society, because the tax system in Wales neither adequately reflects the income and societal profile of our country nor our country's needs. There is an opportunity here to change that if we choose to take it. An opportunity and a cost, and economists would see a lesson there.

So, let's look at the detail. Only a minority of people in Wales pay income tax—roughly 43 per cent of our population—because so many people either don't earn enough or are past retirement age. Almost all, as we've heard, the income tax that's raised is raised at the basic rate, and the system and the bands we have at our disposal don't allow us the flexibility to better equip our communities with the funds they so desperately need. Because taxes are a force for good. It shouldn't be radical to say that, but the tired cliché of the tax 'burden' is accepted as the norm. Tax is only a burden if we live in a society where services are not funded enough to provide a decent quality of life to all citizens. Here's a quotation, Llywydd:

'I like to pay taxes. With them, I buy civilization.'

Those words are attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes Junior, Associate Justice to the US Supreme Court in the early twentieth century. And taxes do buy us chances to do things differently, to build something better for all.

If we look at the powers transferred to Scotland, both of the 2012 Act and subsequent to it in 2016, it's been able to set a lower rate for those who just creep into the bracket of paying income tax to buffer the support for those who need it most. The extra powers buy their communities hope. And the very fact that we don't have those powers in Wales has meant that revenue has to be raised through other, more regressive means. Wales has allowed council tax to go up significantly for years and, as the Wales Governance Centre and the Bevan Foundation have made clear time and again, council tax increases put more pressure on household budgets. It is simply not a fair or progressive way of raising revenue.

What's more, a higher share of revenue is raised in Wales from value added tax than income tax. It’s the reverse in England and Scotland. Why does that matter? Well, lower income households pay proportionately far more in indirect taxes like VAT than they do in income tax, so the people least able to afford it are once again shouldering more weight. Now, that is a burden we shouldn't be seeing. But doing nothing has a cost, a consequence. If we throw up our hands or sit on them, that cost doesn't disappear; it accumulates, and the quiet misery of millions continues. But, Llywydd, we could instead choose to lend a hand, to intervene, to create a more progressive schedule of income tax, to see tax as a means of creating the society we want. We have this opportunity to throw off the constraints of the Treasury-imposed straitjacket, to demand powers that will allow us more freedom, more flexibility, and create a system that truly works for Wales. Yes, I'll take that intervention.

I think 92 per cent of taxpayers in Wales are basic rate taxpayers. Only 0.3 per cent, barely 4,000, are additional rate taxpayers. Do you recognise that higher tax rates, particularly in those sorts of circumstances, can generate lower tax revenues? 

Thank you for that intervention, Mark. Obviously, making a change like this can't be a—. I think we heard earlier, perhaps in a different debate, there's no silver bullet. This on its own cannot revolutionise the economy. We also need to have far more investment to make sure that there are higher paid, quality jobs, but I don't think that anyone would look at the tax system that we have in Wales and think that this is actually doing what it should be for the people of Wales. And I believe fervently that a change like this would benefit the people who need it most in our society. So, let's create a system that truly works for Wales, and a fairer future for everyone. Diolch. 

The Minister for finance to contribute to the debate—Rebecca Evans. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Well, this has been a really interesting debate this afternoon, and I absolutely agree with Mike Hedges that it is really good to be talking about tax in a more open and searching way that is just outside of our normal budget-setting process. So, long may that continue. And Adam Price said at the start that he feared it might be seen as a bit of a dry debate, but I think it's been anything but that. 

So, I will just begin with a few words on our current approach to setting tax rates for the next financial year, but I will then move on to address that longer term issue. So, our approach to setting income tax rates for next year is set squarely within the context in which we operate. And, as a responsible Government, we consider the setting of tax rates every single year, and we do that within the context of the time. We do face considerable pressure now on our public services due to high levels of inflation, and, of course, people across Wales are challenged every day with the cost-of-living crisis. The nature of our income tax base does mean that any significant increase to our resources through Welsh rates of incomes tax would have to mean that we raise the basic rate, and that's at a time when people are struggling to pay their energy and food bills. So, I have been really clear that now isn't the right time to increase income tax in Wales. And, let's remember that, with the UK Government's decision to freeze income tax thresholds, our lowest earners now are being dragged into the income tax system, and raising the basic rate would add an additional tax burden to the poorest people in our society at a time when tax is at the highest level for 70 years, and I don't think it's right to do that at this time.

Will you take an intervention?

Of course.

Thank you for taking an intervention. Hopefully, the Minister will acknowledge that this isn't a motion about increasing bands of taxation; this is about principle. She's acknowledged that this is an important debate to have, and that she wants to have it again, but will she give an undertaking to actually address why she as a Minister, and this Government, and Labour, cannot back the principles that are included in our motion today, because that's the key of this debate?

Yes, I am, absolutely, going to come on to the points within the motion that relate to the rates and bands and so on, but I did want to add that there is considerable uncertainty relating to the impact of raising the higher and additional rates. And the evidence base for any behavioural impact that might occur in relation to any material increase to higher or additional taxpayers is uncertain, because we know that those people have options that aren't available to other people—for example, changing their primary home arrangements to mean that they don't pay income tax here in Wales.

And, of course, we've got that long, porous border with England, and that creates the risk of outward migration for those more mobile taxpayers. And we had some questions yesterday in terms of how we consider that. So, just to reassure colleagues, that is already built into our ready reckoner, which estimates that a 1p increase in the additional rate actually generates a mechanical rate of £7 million, but an actual estimate of only £3 million, due to what we would expect the behavioural impact to be. And I mentioned yesterday that that was relating to the Swiss study, which is seen as the closest proxy that we have. 

Obviously, we do—

Will the Minister give way?

Of course. 

On the question of the primary home, what discussion have you had with HM Revenue and Customs in terms of having a concordat in terms of rules for defining what a primary home would be, because that applies, of course, in other tax contexts as well?

Yes, so that's set out in legislation and in guidance; we use the same kind of thing for council tax as well. So, obviously, Welsh Government officials and HMRC officials are in constant contact, both in terms of Welsh Treasury and the local government finance officials as well. So, I think that we have a shared understanding as to what a primary home would be. And we see that in effect, if you like, when we look at income tax and the C code. And we had lots of debate when we were introducing the Welsh rates of income tax about how HMRC could ensure that Welsh rates of income tax payers did have that C code attached to their rates of income tax, and we've had very good work done to make sure that we are making sure that as many taxpayers as possible have that code attached to their work. So, we also publish—I think it's annually—a report on the work of HMRC in Wales in relation to those codes as well, and I'd be happy to share more information with colleagues on that, if needed in future.

Turning to the longer term, in any change we will obviously be guided by our tax principles. They commit us to designing clear and stable taxes that deliver our progressive agenda, whereby those who are most able to pay pay more than those who are less able. So, whilst powers to vary income tax thresholds would provide additional policy tools for the Welsh Government, we do need to consider carefully our specific needs and the risks, including the risk of a much greater exposure to relative tax base growth between Wales and elsewhere in the UK, and that would be a particular concern to us in relation to the higher and additional rates, where the Welsh Government is only exposed to 10p in each band.

Does the Minister recognise that the maximum personal income rate tax in Germany is 45 per cent, while it's 55 per cent in Austria, and have you seen that transfer of people moving from Austria to Germany, based on the high tax rates in Austria?

I'll happily explore the issue between Austria and Germany. I would suggest that the situation is somewhat different here in Wales, given the fact that we are talking about different tax rates operating within the United Kingdom, and I will come onto that point when we look at the experience of Scotland, very shortly, as well. Mike. [Interruption.] Of course.

Do you share my concern about the use of dividend income to reduce the amount of tax being paid, and that we don't get any share of the dividend income of people who get paid by dividends in Wales?

Yes, and that would be another one of those challenges, and again I'll come onto the Scottish experience there as well.

Just to round off what I was saying in relation to the higher bands, growth in revenues for those two bands does tend to be more volatile from year to year than basic rate revenues, and they do vary more between parts of the United Kingdom, and that does affect the year-to-year net budgetary impact of income tax devolution via the block grant adjustment mechanism.

So, to give an example and to turn to the Scottish experience, Scotland does have full devolution of income tax, except for income on savings and dividends, and what I'm going to say next is really important, because it does set out and demonstrate the real risk that is involved here and the real volatility, which is what we really do need to consider before determining which way forward would be right for us. 

So, the Scottish Fiscal Commission is expecting a net negative impact of around £100 million on the Scottish Government budget this year, and that is despite additional tax effort by Scottish taxpayers of around £850 million from the rate and threshold changes. I think that does demonstrate the level of risk that is taken on when we're looking at this. So, understanding the behavioural changes is key, and I'm looking to better understand the behavioural impact in relation to the changes that the Scottish Government have made.

Would the Minister give way?

I will give way when I've finished my sentence.

Seeing as she's quoting the Scottish Fiscal Commission, does she also recognise that the net additional revenue that the Scottish Fiscal Commission has identified for next year, in terms of the divergence between the policies, is £1 billion extra? That's the net additional revenue that Scotland has.

I do recognise that, and of course you'll see that we also are expecting net additional revenue here in Wales as a result of the block grant adjustment. It's just simply important and responsible to consider the risks before we seek to devolve powers any further, and of course all of that needs to be seen within the context of our strategic tax policy priorities, and of course the future of Wales within the United Kingdom.

I'm really looking forward to seeing what the Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales has to say on tax in its final report. In its interim report, the commission did recognise the imbalance in the current constitutional arrangements, and these imbalances do play into the current impasse that we have in seeking the devolution of further tax powers of all sorts in Wales. So, any argument to seek further powers can't be divorced from the need to address the inadequacies of the current devolution settlement.

So, just to conclude, this is an important agenda. I really do welcome colleagues' interest in it. I would say that when we do consider the role of income tax in future, I think of it in terms of supporting sustainably our longer term strategic priorities, for example, such as addressing the pressures in social care for the future, rather than seeing it as a short-term tool to address those immediate funding pressures that we have. But, of course, I really would welcome an ongoing discussion with all colleagues who have an interest in this across the Chamber. 

Adam Price now to respond to the debate.

Well, certainly it has been an illuminating, if somewhat dispiriting debate in its conclusion, with the remarks of the Minister, but I'd like to thank all Members who contributed to it. Peter Fox is a reasonable man—I'm not sure that I can say that more broadly, it has to be said—but I think the central point here, Peter, is this: if we have these powers, there's no point having powers if they're incredibly difficult to use. And, at the moment, with devolving rates but not bands, it means we don't really have the ability to use the powers to the full. And that's, really, the reasonable demand. And you can make your case in terms of your aspirations as to how to use them and we'll make ours, but isn't that how democratic accountability is meant to work? And that's, essentially, the core point that my colleague Luke Fletcher was making, that fiscal policy is critical to being a parliament, isn't it? We need to be accountable to the communities that we're meant to serve and, at the moment, without these full powers, we're not able to do that.

I agree with Mike—I should have taken an intervention now, Mike; I apologise. You referred to asymmetric devolution, and let's remember that the policy that we are seeking to get a Labour Government to adopt here was a Labour proposal. Through the Vow, through the Smith commission, this was a Labour policy, a Labour proposal, and yet here in Wales, with the one Government that the Labour Party runs, they're opposing it. I think you're right, Mike, as well, that there's a wider agenda. We've got to look at dividend income, income from savings, et cetera. I think we've got to look at capital gains tax as well to make sure that, when you devolve the powers and use them, there aren't actually loopholes. I'll be kind like you and talk about tax avoidance, rather than anything else. So, let's look at that and let's look at the interrelationship with national insurance as well, as the Scottish Government are calling for. 

Sioned Williams is right that, in the Basque Country, we see more devolution there of tax powers. In fact, even the provincial councils of Gipuzkoa and Bizkaia arguably have more formal tax powers than we have here. So, certainly we're outside of the mainstream, aren't we? Even now, even after 20 years and more of devolution in this hugely centralised UK state. And that's the core of this motion, to try to liberate ourselves from that.

I'd like to say that Delyth Jewell reminded us that we need to break this negative right-wing narrative around tax and public expenditure. The Labour leadership at Westminster and more broadly is falling into a trap here, I think, in the kind of language that it's using, because ultimately, instead of talking just about tax burdens, we need to talk about tax levers, about tax tools and tax instruments, because taxation ultimately, revenue, is the means by which we actually generate the basis for public expenditure, to do everything that we do in this place for the people that we represent, and we should make that positive case.

That's why we should have the powers, and that's why I was so disappointed by the response of the Government—a Government that has talked about radical federalism. There is nothing in the policy that the Minister has announced, rejecting this, that you could describe as either 'federalist' or 'radical'. There are two adjectives that I can apply to what I hear from the Minister, which are 'conservative' and 'unionist'. Where is the vision for the future—? [Interruption.] Well, you'll be voting with the Conservatives on this motion, won't you, in rejecting our position? Because you do not essentially accept the case that we have set out, that unless we actually have full devolution, we are not going to be able to meet the challenge that we have set ourselves in creating the kind of decent society—. And I don't see it; where is the radicalism in your constitutional vision for Wales, based on what the finance Minister has said to us?

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections. We will therefore postpone voting until voting time.

That brings us to voting time, and unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will move immediately to the vote—[Interruption.] Sorry—Adam Price?

[Inaudible.]

Okay, I will speak very, very slowly. And so, I will move to voting time. To be honest, I need to find the correct screen too. And so, the first vote this afternoon will be on item 6, the Welsh Conservatives' debate on free ports. And I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. In favour 14, no abstentions, and 37 against. And therefore, the motion is not agreed.

We'll now move to amendment 1. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. Open the vote on amendment 1. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 40 against. And therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

We'll move now to amendment 2, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 27, no abstentions, 24 against. And therefore, amendment 2 is agreed. 

The motion as amended.

I now call for a vote on the motion as amended. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 41, no abstentions, 10 against. The motion as amended is agreed.

The next set of votes is on item 7, the Plaid Cymru debate on income tax devolution. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 11, no abstentions, 40 against. The motion is therefore not agreed.

We'll now move to amendment 1 in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 25 against. And therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

I now call for a vote on the motion as amended.

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 26, no abstentions, 25 against. And therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

That concludes voting time.

But we do have another item this afternoon, which is the short debate, which is now to be presented.

If Members could leave the Chamber quietly, I'll call Russell George to introduce his short debate. 

Diolch, Llywydd. I give a minute of my time to Mike Hedges and Rhun ap Iorwerth as well. We currently face extreme pressures on our NHS, our health, and our economy, and our response to this extreme pressure must also provide long-term solutions that improve the lives of people in Wales.

Along with myself as chair, David Rees, Altaf Hussain, Jayne Bryant, Mike Hedges and Sioned Williams are all Members of the cross-party group on medical research. We launched an inquiry back in 2021 to establish the benefits of medical research to Wales. The cross-party group is due to publish its report this autumn, but our findings up until now outline the very real and tangible short-, medium- and long-term benefits of a thriving medical research environment. This view is supported by the people of Wales. According to the British Heart Foundation Cymru, an overwhelming majority of 82 per cent of the people of Wales believe that it is important for medical research to happen here.

So far, we've taken evidence from clinicians, patients, economists, researchers, funders and industry and we've heard unequivocally that medical research has enormous benefits for the Welsh economy, Welsh patients and the Welsh NHS. On the economic benefits, the cross-party group heard evidence from the Fraser of Allander Institute at the University of Strathclyde and the British Heart Foundation Cymru. Both contributions provided significant evidence that medical research is a vital part of the Welsh economy. Those recipients of research funding purchase goods and services in order to undertake the research and this generates activity in the supply chain and across the whole of the Welsh economy.

Medical research can boost output and productivity in the economy, with new technologies, medicines and processes, and as new methods and technologies are discovered, there are knowledge spillovers into the public, private and third sectors, which further boosts productivity and the economic growth. Economic modelling commissioned by the British Heart Foundation shows that charity-funded medical research alone supports £86 million in output and £55 million in gross value added, and 950 full-time equivalent Welsh jobs. Most of these 950 jobs are high quality and high-paid roles. The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry stressed to the cross-party group that increasing investment in science will help provide high-quality jobs that would drive the future of the Welsh economy.

Taking evidence from patients, clinicians and researchers, the cross-party group has seen first-hand the huge benefits that medical research can provide to patients. Breakthroughs in medical research generate improvements in preventing, diagnosing and treating conditions, improving patient experience, quality of life, and medical outcomes. Patients in Wales benefit every day from medical breakthroughs that happen all round the world, but there is also a huge benefit to patients if medical research happens right here in Wales. The cross-party group heard that patients who participate in clinical trials receive the best standard of care, and because of strict regulations in clinical trials, these patients are more likely to have a better experience, better treatment and better outcomes than patients who do not participate in clinical trials. For example, in motor neurone disease, there are UK-wide developments, and the Welsh Government, I think, must make sure that patients in Wales have access to those clinical trials.

Patients and clinicians also highlighted evidence to the cross-party group that patients who attend a hospital with a positive research environment have a better outcome. There may be many reasons, of course, for this, but the cross-party group has considered that research-active hospitals may have greater knowledge and more developed infrastructure. Research-active hospitals may find it easier to implement evidence-based practice and innovative procedures, and this culture of innovation may also enable research-active hospitals to implement and follow up-to-date clinical guidance, providing the very best care for patients.

This capacity for change and innovation is absolutely crucial if our NHS is to recover from the extreme pressures felt across the service currently. Medical research provides endless opportunities for cost savings in the NHS, as well as driving innovation and streamlining practices. The cross-party group heard from the pharmaceutical industry that each patient participating in a clinical trial represents a £9,000 saving to the NHS. That's £9,000 per patient. I can see the Minister looking at that with perhaps a smile on her face.

But one of the biggest problems facing our NHS is, of course, the recruitment, retention and support of NHS staff. The cross-party group has seen evidence that a thriving medical research environment is absolutely crucial to any workforce planning. From an evidence session with the Royal College of Physicians and clinicians, the cross-party group heard that that the opportunity to engage in medical research is important to clinicians' careers. Clinicians reported that engaging in medical research supports their career development, their morale and, therefore, their ability to care for their patients. Providing this opportunity to clinicians would not only support staff retention, but might even improve recruitment, by making the Welsh NHS a more attractive place to work, and this would bring more expertise into Wales and start to fill crucial vacancies across the health service. The Royal College of Nursing found that in Wales there were two and a half times as many applications per post when an academic component was advertised with the role.

A report commissioned by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry shows huge benefits that could be released across the UK and Wales if life sciences visions were fully implemented. According to the report, the NHS would generate an additional £165 million in revenue and £32 million in cost savings per year if recruitment to UK industry trials rose on a par with Spain, for example. The UK would generate £68 billion in additional GDP over the next 30 years if the UK pharmaceutical industry's spending on research and development rose on a par with the US. I accept that the Welsh Government has consulted on its draft innovation strategy, but this must be backed up by capital and ambitious leadership if we're to really feel the benefits of medical research.

My thanks to the many organisations who helped in terms of contributing to this short debate today, and particularly to the British Heart Foundation Cymru and Gemma Roberts. Thank you very much. Diolch yn fawr.

Can I thank Russ George for giving me a minute in this debate, but, more importantly, thank him for bringing this debate into the Chamber and putting forward a lot of ideas that I fully support? I want to continue the point made by Russ on the economic importance of medical research. Medical research has the advantage of being able to be carried out anywhere; you do not have to be in London and the south-east, you can be anywhere. It benefits from university involvement, and we are fortunate in Wales to have excellent universities. We need to support medical research at our universities and benefit from what they produce.

A major growth area in the world economy is life science. This has got to be a priority. It's meant to be a priority of the Welsh Government's, but it really does have to play a more important part. Universities can play a key role in developing further the Welsh life science industry. Unlike other parts of the UK, the activity and investment isn't concentrated in just one wealthy area or region. The growth of the life science sector in Wales spans the length and breadth of the country, from harvesting jellyfish collagen in the west to the foundation of cutting-edge infantile prosthetics in the north. It really is important that we make the most of it.

May I thank Russell George for bringing forward this short debate at the Senedd today? I just want to echo the comments that have been made already about the benefit that can come to us in so many ways in developing medical trials in Wales. The benefits come to patients, clearly, because the closer patients are to where trials are taking place the greater the chance that they can become part of those trials, and there are clear opportunities in terms of health that emanate from that. It is a way of strengthening our workforce. People want to work where the most innovative work is being done, be that research staff, scientific staff and clinical staff too. There are clear economic benefits in developing the life sciences sector, which has firm foundations in Wales but has significant room for growth. Tying the industry, with that commercial element, with the need to promote research within our universities is something that I hope that we can all, as Members of the Senedd here, be supportive of. Once again, I'm very grateful that this issue has been raised before us today.

I call on the Minister for Health and Social Services to reply to the debate—Eluned Morgan.

Thank you very much. First of all, I want to thank Russell George for bringing this important issue to the Chamber.

The medical research landscape is broad, from funding pre-clinical laboratory research to the more applied clinical research that takes place in the NHS. My responsibilities are focused on more applied medical research, which I think makes a vital contribution to treatment, development and evaluation, service organisation and delivery, and, crucially, outcomes for patients. I'm aware of the work of the cross-party group on medical research, which I know, Russell, you chair, and I'm looking forward very much to seeing your new report, because I know that the recommendations in previous reports have been very useful to us. 

As Minister for Health and Social Services, the funding I provide through Health and Care Research Wales makes a huge difference to the medical research landscape. I'm pleased to say that, last year, I agreed an additional recurring £5 million increase to the Health and Care Research Wales budget. This will be used to support the implementation of the Wales cancer research strategy, to create a new adult social care research centre, and to fund an evidence centre that will identify and answer questions of urgent importance to policy and practice. It will also be used to offer new personal award schemes to support capacity building in the NHS and social care sectors, which will enhance our commissioned research programme and support new models for clinical research delivery. This new investment complements the £42 million we spend annually on our Wales-wide health and care research infrastructure, which includes funding for the NHS research workforce, our research centres and units, our research funding schemes, and our partnership working.

But everyone understands the challenges of the current financial environment. I'm afraid that the situation is being exacerbated by the UK Government's approach to the UK shared prosperity fund, which replaces EU funding, which means Wales as a whole is worse off, coupled of course with the uncertainty over future access to the EU funding programme Horizon Europe. I am concerned that delays in associating with the Horizon programme, if we ever do so, are also compromising our international research collaborations on medical research. In many ways, the financial climate underlines the importance of collaboration. 

We do collaborate and have partnerships with many organisations. For example, we're a part of the Medical Research Council-administered Health Data Research UK initative, and the UK Prevention Research Partnership, all of which are cross-fund alliances. We co-fund the Cardiff Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre with Cancer Research UK, which enables patient access to early stage clinical trials, and translation of scientific discoveries into new cancer treatments. We have active partnerships that fund specific research programmes with the Scar Free Foundation and Fight for Sight. We participate in a range of UK research funding programmes run by the National Institute for Health and Care Research in England, which provides Welsh researchers with access to large multimillion-pound funding streams across the health research spectrum.

We can't, however, achieve success without having a nurturing research environment for health and social care professionals. Staff who are evidence driven are more likely to use innovation and improvement to develop ways of working that drive change, transformation and patient benefit. Research careers are therefore highly rewarding, and organisations that are research-active have a stronger ability to attract the best staff and retain them. And that's why, last year, Health and Care Research Wales, Social Care Wales and Health Education and Improvement Wales initiated a joint review of research career and training pathways, which set out recommendations in the 'Making research careers work: a review of career pathways in health and social care' report. 

We have right here in Wales new treatment options through participation in research, which can be especially important for conditions where all other options have been exhausted. There are over 500 studies taking place in the Welsh NHS that are currently accessible to our population, covering conditions such as motor neurone disease, long COVID, asthma, cancer and diabetes. We're also seeing huge advancements in areas such as genomics, brain imaging and advanced therapies, which are key to discovering future treatments. But we all recognise that NHS services are under unprecedented pressures and undertaking research is challenging. We've seen the impact of the pandemic, coupled with workforce pressures, having a real effect on the research capacity in the NHS. Investing in our dedicated research delivery workforce and awarding NHS research time awards through the faculty has, therefore, never been more important. 

Later this spring, a refreshed NHS research and development framework, which has been co-produced with the NHS, will be published, outlining what a high-performing, research-active NHS organisation looks like, and we also need to capitalise on our strengths in health data, creating a new digital infrastructure, to make study delivery faster and more efficient.

Before I sum up, I want to focus on the real difference that research can make to the lives of people, patients and communities. We've seen, particularly at the height of the pandemic, how crucial good research is in helping to deliver patient care, treatment and, of course, vaccines. Wales is leading in areas of research development, which has a real impact not only on Welsh patients, but across the UK. 

One of the main diseases affecting people in Wales, namely cancer, has also had key research success. Our researchers recruited over 1,000 volunteers to the SYMPLIFY process, which was a crucial, new early identification test for multiple cancers, which can identify over 50 cancers. In addition, the FAKTION clinical trial on breast cancer, which is also Welsh-based, has also had success in slowing the growth of tumours and extending patient life. 

Finally, I want to mention that strong public involvement in research, design and delivery improves the quality and relevance of research, helping to ensure that research delivers public benefit and addresses public need, and this is something that I know is at the heart of Health and Care Research Wales activities. Diolch yn fawr. 

Thank you very much, everyone. That brings today's proceedings to a close.