National Assembly for Wales

Good afternoon and welcome, all, to this Plenary meeting. The first item this afternoon is questions to the Minister for Economy, and the first question is from Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Thanks for the question. Our economic mission, published last year, sets out clearly the values and priorities that shape our decisions to support the economy. Just one positive example is the work we have undertaken to promote and secure investment in the compound semiconductor cluster in South Wales East. This includes, of course, the KLA multimillion pound investment, which will secure hundreds of new well-paid jobs.

Thank you for that answer.

In recent weeks, we've had the devastating news that two large factories in my region are closing—Tillery Valley Foods and, more recently, Avara—with a combined loss of more than 600 jobs. I hope there's swift and robust action from this Government in response to the heavy blow to the local economy, and I'd welcome an update from the Minister about what steps the Government is taking to help mitigate those job losses. I'm also keen to explore what jobs can be created in my region, specifically in the Tech Valleys project of Ebbw Vale. When this was unveiled some six years ago by your Government, it was hailed as £100 million investment that would create at least 1,500 jobs in new technologies and advanced manufacturing. A freedom of information response from the Welsh Government from March of this year showed that you can only account for 29 jobs that have been created, whilst admitting this may be an incomplete picture. Many people are asking where these jobs are that were promised. Recent weeks have shown how badly these jobs are needed. Can you confirm, Minister, that this project is still on the cards and won't be consigned to the file marked 'Yet another disappointment for Blaenau Gwent'? Diolch.

I'm positive about the future of the Tech Valleys programme. It's a subject that I've had a number of direct conversations with the constituency Member for Blaenau Gwent about since I took up this post, about what we are doing, and making sure that people think about the travel-to-work area as well, to make sure that the investment is focused on Blaenau Gwent. And the constituency Member has been very clear that he expects to be able to see the money spent within the constituency. What we are looking to do is to make sure that we're looking at strategic investments, and the way we've partnered with both the authority and the board around this are important parts of it. If you look at areas where that investment helped secure, for example, the work around Thales in Blaenau Gwent, a deliberates choice, added to by Tech Valleys, the work we're looking to do with both the TVR investment and the security of jobs on that site, and the investment in property, I think we'll actually have a good story to tell on Tech Valleys.

And more broadly, of course, on the issue you started with, about the significant loss of employment that is likely from both Tillery Valley Foods and the announcement yesterday about Avara, our concern remains the 440-odd families affected by yesterday's announcement, and the approximately 260 families affected by Tillery Valley Foods. And we're looking to have an approach that brings together both the trade unions—it's Community on TVF, and it's Unite at Avara—the local authority, the Welsh Government, and agencies from the UK Government too. The first meeting of a formal taskforce around TVF took place this morning, and I met with the deputy leader of Monmouthshire County Council this morning, who's the lead member on economic development in the county. In Avara, it's a fact that much of the workforce in Avara, which is in Monmouthshire, comes from Blaenau Gwent. So, I'm looking at how we join together the responses with both local authorities, both recognised unions, and opportunities, if there are any, to try and secure going concerns on those sites, and, if not, what we can do with the programmes we fund—Communities for Work Plus and ReAct+—to try to secure alternative employment for people directly affected by losses in this sector.

I join my fellow Member for South Wales East in his concern for what's happening in South Wales East at the moment, in terms of the job losses. Six hundred jobs are an awful lot of jobs. We saw, obviously, Tillery Valley Foods entering administration last week, and now we've got Avara Foods in Abergavenny. It would be interesting to see what actual positive action you have taken to date and timelines of anything you've done and what you plan to do in the future. It's great that you say that you will look to take care of families, in partnership with local authorities, that have been affected. But we need to know what you're going to do to improve job opportunities in our region, going forward, and how you are going to look to protect any more businesses from any more future job losses. We can't have a situation where, every week, we stand up in the Senedd and we've got more job losses. This seems to be a recurring theme at the moment. So, is there something that you can actually do, Minister, to intervene here, and to ensure that there are fewer job losses and more positive action from this Government in terms of what you're doing on the ground, perhaps even looking into extending degree apprenticeship opportunities, which are severely lacking in Wales compared to the rest of the UK? That also, in itself, will expand job opportunities and upskill many of the people in my area. Thank you. 

With respect, I don't think degree apprenticeships has much relevance to the challenges faced by Tillery Valley Foods or, indeed, Avara. We're thinking about a sector that is directly affected by a range of factors. It's affected by trading conditions, and you'll have heard, in the previous issues on Anglesey, that Two Sisters were clear that the post-Brexit trading environment was part of the reason why they felt that they could not go on.

The other common factor, though, is the reality of price rises. So, it's a cost-of-living crisis and a cost-of-doing-business crisis. Energy costs are a significant factor in this sector, and Avara have cited that that is a significant concern for them. They're looking to consolidate their business, and they're saying that they're also looking at investment choices within plant and machinery. And actually, within this part of the food sector, there is capital investment support available from the Welsh Government—up to 40 per cent support with costs for capital investment. We've offered that previously. We've made clear that offer is still available for Avara in the past, or, rather, in the immediate past following their announcement, because our focus is can we maintain the jobs and can we secure an alternative business on that site. If that isn't possible, we will need to look at what else we can do, and I've set that out both in the earlier response, but also in answer to the topical question from the Member for Blaenau Gwent about Tillery Valley Foods. That's going to be the continued focus. And I think, actually, if I go into too much detail on what the Member set out—what are the challenges for businesses and what can we do?—it will end up being a very, I think, typecast discussion and disagreement about UK-wide choices. 

I'll continue to keep people updated on what we are doing with both of the businesses and the scale of the job losses, and the alternatives for employment within the south-east area, where, in some sectors, we do have significant opportunities for the future. Others, I think, will be under increasing stress and pressure, and today's inflation figures, I think, underscore the unevenness of the pressure and challenges facing key parts of our economy and a range of jobs that rely upon them. 

I'm grateful to you, Minister, for the answers to those questions. I'm grateful to you also for the support you've given the people of Blaenau Gwent during recent years, and the work you've done leading on the Tech Valleys investments, which has led to the work that's been done in Thales, has certainly fulfilled the expectations that we had of that programme. The job losses we've heard in recent weeks, both in Tillery Valley Foods and, this week, in Avara Foods, are real serious blows to the local economy and to the families that are sustained by that employment. Most of the employees, of course, in Abergavenny are actually from Blaenau Gwent. And we are looking to Welsh Government to continue the work that you have undertaken in recent weeks. There's a jobs fair taking place this morning in Abertillery, and also, I attended the first meeting of the taskforce on Tillery Valley Foods, and the Welsh Government officials there provided great support to the local authority and to others, and we're grateful to you for that. 

Looking forward, Minister, we clearly need to invest in that A465 corridor, and we look to the Welsh Government for that northern Valleys programme that we've debated and discussed. You've already agreed to come to Blaenau Gwent to discuss these matters, and I look forward to your visit. But can we ensure that we do have the structure put in place to ensure that we have the Tech Valleys, that we have the response to job losses, but we also have the proactive business support, employment support and economic support programme that the Welsh Government can deliver, has delivered, and I'm confident will continue to deliver in the Heads of the Valleys?

Thank you for the comments and questions. I think it is good news that the taskforce has met, and that draws together Welsh Government, the local authority and, indeed, the local management of the Department for Work and Pensions, who have been constructive in this. I think it's important to recognise that part of the UK Government is actually trying to be part of the answer locally. There are issues around how we carry on our partnership work within the food sector, which, overall, has been a success story. But we do see challenges in some parts of the manufacturing chain, and that's exactly what we're seeing at the moment, and those challenges at the moment are leading to job losses. We need to look at those businesses, what the fragilities actually arise from, and what we can do and equally what other actors could do as well.

I'm very keen that we continue to make the most of the investment that we have undertaken in the transport infrastructure, and you're quite right about that. Actually, part of the reason why so many of the workers in Avara Foods come from your constituency is that it is a very short trip on a piece of network—on a piece of network that exists. But, also, it's a reason why it's an employment site that, I think, has good prospects for the future. Now, that won't be much comfort to those immediate workers who are there, but it's a site that is well served by infrastructure, well connected to workforce opportunities, and so I'm optimistic about what we'll be able to do in partnership with local authorities. And that comes back to your point around the structure and the opportunity to carry on investing, and not just the immediate reaction to where there are significant challenges, but what we'll proactively do to invest in communities, whether it's skills—. That's why we're looking to deliver more investment and why it was so important that we had a refresh of our manufacturing action plan. I'm very keen that the Welsh Government, local authority, including the Cardiff capital region, understand that we expect to see proactive investment and effort in the Heads of the Valleys, and not simply around the southern part of the capital region. It's an ongoing conversation. I'd be more than happy to take up the Member's invitation to come to an appropriate event in Blaenau Gwent.

Peter Fox.

Diolch Llywydd, and I'm grateful to you for allowing me to contribute as well, and many of the questions have been put. This isn't a time to play politics; this is an important time for us to come together to support the communities who are deeply affected by the threats of job losses. I am pleased, Minister, that you've already had that first meeting this morning with those key individuals to find a way forward for my own community and for neighbouring communities. That is fundamentally important. I am so worried for these people. They have homes, they have mortgages, they have families, and they must be in a terrible situation at the moment with the anxiety of what lies ahead of them. I suppose my question would be: how do we work together to help these people through this difficult time? But more so, how do we work together to lay the foundations for future job opportunities in the area? And, building on the fantastic expertise we have and the conditions that we have in the area, there is a great opportunity there and we need to grasp it. These shocks are difficult to comprehend, but we need to help these people through this difficult time, and I'm willing to play my part in what is needed next. 

That's a very helpful and constructive offer from Mr Fox. Look, I'd say the honest truth is, when the business sets out that energy and wider inflation have a cost, that shouldn't surprise us. But, of course, today's figures on food and inflation show a significant rise, and that's because those cost pressures are in every part of the chain, from the feed cost, and you'll be aware from your own enterprise as well that feed costs have risen—. That means that when poultry is then going into Avara Foods, it's at a higher price, that's being passed on and, actually, there's a challenge in people then deciding whether they want that product or not. That is a key factor in where we are. The Welsh Government and the UK Government need to be part of the answer. It's why I'm more than happy to work with the Member as a constituency Member, and, indeed, his colleague in the Westminster Parliament, who I may not always see eye to eye with as well, but this is an issue about the constituency and it's about people affected directly by that, and it's about how I think we can look to work with both local authorities, because there is a cross-over of interests and working populations. I'd be more than happy to get in touch with the office again. I know you weren't able to secure a meeting before today's debate—I understand you have a debate on a piece of legislation—but I am more than happy to make time to have a further discussion with him and other partners in order to see what we can do, as opposed to what things we can't do. 

Minister, I recently visited Shine Catering Systems, a family-run company that employs about 65 people in Newport East. They've been in existence for quite some time. They design, they manufacture and they install commercial catering equipment, and their clients include the Ministry of Defence and Google. They've got a long history of employing apprentices, Minister, and one of their issues at the moment is that they're finding it very difficult to recruit a manufacturing apprentice at level 3, and this has been a trend for some little time. So, they asked me, really, to raise these issues and what more Welsh Government might do, working with the city council, Coleg Gwent to make sure that manufacturing apprenticeships are attractive to our young people in Wales.

I actually think that continuing to raise the issue here and further afield is an important part of it. There's a job for the Government to do, but Members, with your own local influences and networks, and businesses too, as well. Because part of the challenge is that when someone is, at 16, considering their career then, there are a number of options that have already been closed off, so, actually, we've got to do more to raise the profile of other opportunities earlier on in their life, in education. It's something I discussed yesterday again with the education Minister.

But manufacturing does have a positive future here in Wales. It’s the biggest sector of our economy than in the rest of the UK—over 150,000 jobs are in it and they’re normally good jobs, paying well above the living wage. It’s about how we then encourage people to keep their minds open to the opportunities that exist because there is funding support still available from the Government to support people through apprenticeships. And when things like National Apprenticeship Week come up, you again see the variety of opportunities. We’re very clear that we want more people to undertake science, technology, engineering, and mathematics subjects and STEM-based apprenticeships. And I hope that the Member and others, when it comes to manufacturing week in the autumn, will take up further opportunities to highlight the wide variety of careers. It’s not just Jack Sargeant who has an interest in this area—all of us, I think, have an interest in seeing a bright and positive future for manufacturing. And we will keep on making the case to young people, and others later in life, that an apprenticeship is a really good route for their future and will also help us secure a better, stronger and fairer economy.

We assess all areas of labour market performance as part of the monitoring arrangements that underpin our plan for employability and skills. We continue to take a range of actions to try and ensure that the right support is provided in a timely manner to address the barriers facing economically inactive people here in Wales. 

Thank you for the answer, Minister.

The recent Office for National Statistics figures made for worrying reading and it is right to say that what they represent as stand-alone figures is a snapshot and that we need to see how we fare in the next few months for a fuller picture. But what is undeniable is that, like it or not, these figures feed into an already bleak picture when it comes to productivity in Wales. Gross value added per capita in Wales has never been above 75 per cent of the UK average throughout the devolution era, while GVA per hour has basically remained stagnant at 83 to 84 per cent of the UK average over the same period. On both metrics, we have consistently ranked amongst the worst performing of the 12 UK nations and regions.

While the first Welsh Government had the explicit targets for closing the productivity gap, subsequent Welsh Government economic strategies abandoned any targets, and there has been no substantive improvement since 1998. So, what are your solutions for getting to grips with this, Minister? The Working Wales programme was launched in 2019 to help economically inactive people back into work, but how much is currently being invested in this scheme? Can we expect to see specific targets on productivity from this Welsh Government?

Actually, our story on productivity and economic activity over the period of devolution is one of improvement. The challenge is that we still have much more to do to make up the gap. It’s a challenge on which, if you look at what happened both before Ken Skate’s time, during it and now, we have seen progress. The challenge is that, during the pandemic, we have seen a real challenge that’s made it even more uneven, so, some sectors saw productivity improvements; most others, for understandable reasons, saw a real move backwards.

Now, when it comes to Working Wales, they are not the only lever and not the only agency that are there to help resolve our productivity challenges. It goes into some of the really contested areas, for example, on skills and investment in those. It matters that we have less money available to replace former European funds—a third of our apprenticeship programme was funded through that source, as you’re aware. Having the UK Government compete in those areas, with a smaller sum of money, is actually really unhelpful, and it doesn’t get us to concentrate on where we could make a wider difference on improving productivity in a wide range of areas.

And it also goes to the point that John Griffiths made in his earlier question as well: how do we support people to undertake interventions, to undertake the support that we provide to make sure that they are better able to secure better paid employment? And how do we make sure that businesses too invest in their own workforce? It isn’t simply a public sector employment challenge—it’s both the workforce, the leadership and the management, where investment in their skills and abilities always makes a difference in terms of overall productivity. So, we understand what we need to do; we understand the broad reasons behind why we haven’t made as much progress as we would want to, and our challenge is having the right resources available to us of the scale that we want to make the sort of difference we want.

Minister, Wales now has the highest economic inactivity in the UK. A quarter of the population are economically inactive, but, more worryingly, a third of the inactive population is because of long-term sickness. What discussions have you had with the Minister for health about the impact that excessive waits for NHS treatment is having on the economic activity of Wales?

We are looking at whether the figures are the start of a new trend or whether they're an individual blip in economic inactivity. We've made progress over a period of time, as I've set out, and that's factually indisputable. The challenge is, in particular, post pandemic, where we're seeing more economic inactivity. Health-related reasons are the biggest factor that people state as to why they're economically inactive and, as the First Minister said yesterday, the biggest reason within those health reasons are, actually, mental health and well-being. So, you have a challenge that isn't always necessarily related to waiting times for treatment and support. What we are doing, in trying to secure people to return to work who are economically inactive, is a range of different interventions. It's both what we're doing on childcare and on access to training. And it's the reality that we are normally supporting people further away from the labour market, who need more support to return to being job ready. The DWP are much more likely to be active closer to the labour market, as well. Actually, I think greater join-up in what we're doing would actually be really helpful. The positivity in the DWP relationship around Tillery Valley Foods, for example, is something I would much rather see not just at a point of crisis, but in our more regular relationship. That comprised both policy and practical management choices, and it's why I'm optimistic about the ongoing conversation about our interaction with the benefits system for the future, because I think it would make a difference in helping to support people back into the world of work.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson first of all—Tom Giffard.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Good afternoon, Deputy Minister. This week, we saw Oil4Wales pull out of their relationship with the Welsh Rugby Union, citing concerns surrounding their governance. Of course, you recently spoke to our committee to address the issues of governance at the WRU, and one of the main topics of discussion was a letter that you received from Gower MP, Tonia Antoniazzi, on 9 May, citing her concern regarding allegations of a deep-seated culture of sexism at the WRU. In response to my colleague Heledd Fychan's question asking what did you know and when, you immediately referred to Tonia's letter on 9 May and then you referred to allegations that were already in the public domain, and followed it up by saying, and I quote,

'in general terms, that was the extent of my knowledge'.

However, we've seen a freedom of information disclosure from your ministerial office that shows that you actually attempted to meet with Tonia Antoniazzi weeks prior to the receipt of her letter. The e-mail was sent on 22 December from someone in your private office and asks, and I quote, 

'would you like us to hold off for now or try to offer him'—

Steve Phillips—

'a longer slot on Wednesday with the intention that you will hopefully meet with Tonia before that?'

Now, the intention to schedule a meeting with the WRU after a meeting with Tonia suggests that you had an awareness of her concerns before receipt of that letter, something that you failed to mention at your committee appearance. So, can you confirm whether that meeting did take place and what awareness you had of Tonia's concerns prior to her letter on 9 May, and how do you reconcile the evidence you gave to the committee with this new information?

The meeting I had with Tonia Antoniazzi is on the record, and that would have been available from the freedom of information request, as you say. There's no secret in that. I think the notes of that meeting would have been identified in the letters, in the information I gave to committee, from the follow-up request for a timeline and details of that meeting. So, I had been contacted by Tonia Antoniazzi, who wanted to talk to me about these issues. I had the meeting. The reason I wanted to hold off the meeting with Steve Phillips was because I was hoping that the meeting with Tonia Antoniazzi, which subsequently I asked her to write to me about, would have given me the detail I was asking for, and it didn't. That was why I asked her to write to me, and when the letter came, the letter also didn't give me the information that I wanted in terms of the specifics.

Thank you, Minister. That doesn't make clear why you didn't make that clear in your committee appearance. You said that you'd received that letter; you didn't make any reference to a prior meeting. But that letter and the committee appearance centred around an unpublished review into the women's game, and in that appearance, you said that you'd already called for the publication of the review into the women's game, which Tonia's letter had also mentioned. And at the committee meeting, you said, and I quote, 

'I had conversations with the WRU about why that report wasn't made public'.

So, I also asked for that, and I asked for all the transcripts of the meetings between the WRU and yourself, between when you became Deputy Minister and the airing of the BBC documentary. So, can you explain why those detailed meeting logs don't mention you calling once for the publication of the review prior to broadcast?

Okay. So, I think what I said in the committee—and I'm happy to go back over the transcript, but what I know I did say in the committee was that there are conversations that I have with all of our stakeholders, whether it is WRU or others, some of which are formal and some of which are informal, and some of which are on the record and some of which are off the record, some of which involve just officials and some of which involve me. And there were a number of those meetings that took place off the record, if you like, informal meetings, at rugby matches, when I was at the world cup in New Zealand, when we had various discussions when I was in the same space at Steve Phillips, and there were also meetings that took place with officials that didn't involve me, but they speak on my behalf. Now, those are not recorded meetings. But, in all of those discussions, the issue of the women's game and the report into the women's game and other issues were discussed. So, not all of those are recorded in formal minutes.

Thank you. It is obviously coincidental that there is no official record of you calling for that report to be published prior to the publication—or the broadcast, I should say—of that documentary. As I say, the meeting logs don't actually say that you ever asked for it. But, to avoid the confusion I think that we've come across here, you could have made those calls publicly, and, in the committee, you said, and I quote again,

'if I had been going public at that time, it would have been on the basis that the WRU were doing nothing to address these issues, but they were.'

But, Minister, I'm not sure that the people who were experiencing deep-seated cultures of sexism in the WRU would agree with you that they were addressing the issue sufficiently. In fact, I think you may have been too keen to protect the reputation of the WRU, even during their stormiest period. You could have been clearer sooner that you were aware of the issues raised by Tonia Antoniazzi, but you weren't. You could have publicly called for the review into the women's game to be published, but you didn't. And you could have made those calls privately, but the meeting logs also suggest you didn't. Could it be the case, Deputy Minister, that the Welsh Government was too keen to protect its cosy relationship with the WRU and that your inaction and lack of transparency came at the cost of women who had to suffer throughout?

I have to say, Tom, I think that's an absolutely outrageous accusation, to suggest that I would be doing anything actively to either protect an organisation that was acting in the way that we subsequently found out they were acting—. What you're talking about was the report into the women's game. That is not the report into the issues that came out in the BBC report. This was about the women's game, and action was being taken on the women's game. They appointed Nigel Walker. Women were given permanent contracts and international contracts, and so, for the first time, they became professional. All of those things were happening, and all of things were what was in the report into the women's game. The issues that came out in that BBC report were not covered in that report. So, even had that been published, and even if I had called for it, it still would not have given the information that we subsequently found in that BBC report. So, I really do think that if you are suggesting that in any way I was colluding with the WRU to hide this—I think you really should think about that and retract that.

What I would also say is what I said to you in committee was that I was aware of as much as anybody else in this Senedd Chamber and beyond until that BBC programme was aired. I did not have one single written question, oral question, letter or any contact from any Member of this Senedd, any MP other than Tonia Antoniazzi, any member of the public, any member of the WRU staff, playing staff or employed staff, raising with me directly any of the issues that you're now talking about. Now, what I have to say is that if all of those issues were in the public domain in the way that you suggest and that I should have done something about it, then that applies to every single one of you in this Chamber as well, because all of you knew as much as I did.

Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Heledd Fychan.

Thank you, Llywydd. As you'll be aware, Deputy Minister—

Apologies—apologies, Heledd, sorry.

Sorry, I'll start again.

Okay.

Thank you. As you'll be aware, just over a month ago, Bannau Brycheiniog National Park Authority announced that it would only be using the Welsh name from now on, stating that it was a way of celebrating the culture and heritage of the area. This comes in the wake of Eryri National Park following a similar path, and also Amgueddfa Cymru, which has adopted the Welsh name as part of its latest brand. Personally, I welcome these changes greatly, although it doesn't change things for me personally, or for many other people in Wales, because it is the Welsh name that I have used throughout my life.

I'm sure that you will be aware that a local campaign group has been launched, with around 50 businesses calling for the English name to be used, despite the fact that the national park has made it clear that this only applies to the park itself, and that individuals are free to use whichever name they wish. As the Minister with responsibility for tourism, how do you respond to the argument that has been made by some, that the use of the Welsh language is going to harm tourism and local businesses?

Well, it's an absolute nonsense, of course it is. And those organisations have every right to use the names that they feel are appropriate. These are Welsh organisations representing Welsh landmarks and Welsh national parks, and they have Welsh names. That does not prevent anybody using their English equivalents if they want to. So, from my point of view, I really think that there are far more things that I'd be getting exercised around rather than whether a Welsh national park should use a Welsh name to describe itself.

Thank you very much. And thank you for that unambiguous answer, because I think it's important to differentiate. There are a number of businesses that have called for this that don't use bilingual names, either, and I think that they must, before they make those calls, think about what that means in terms of their role in terms of promoting the two national languages in Wales.

Could I ask you, therefore—? In looking broadly at the issue of promoting the Welsh language when promoting Wales, you'll be aware, Minister, like everyone in this Chamber, hopefully, that the Urdd Eisteddfod will be held next week in Carmarthenshire. I'm really looking forward to attending it, and I hope to see you there too. And in August, the Llŷn and Eifionydd National Eisteddfod will be held. As part of the Welsh Government's tourism strategy, what emphasis is being placed on these national festivals in terms of promoting Wales internationally? And is there more that the Welsh Government could do to ensure that the Welsh language is more visible in Visit Wales campaigns in order to attract visitors to Wales?

Again, I think all of these are fair challenges, Heledd, and we do have a very clear strategy on promoting the Welsh language as part of everything we do in tourism, because we see the Welsh language as very much part of what we are. Now, I personally regret that I can't speak fluent Welsh; I can understand more than I can speak, so when you're speaking Welsh and you think I can't hear or understand you, I can. [Laughter.] I just can't speak it very well. But it's one of those things. I do it with Italian as well; I've learnt Italian and I can listen to Italian and I can hear it and understand it, but I can't speak it. I just need to know how it comes out of my mouth properly. But the point I'm making is that it is absolutely integral to our tourism offer. And it's one of the things that people love about coming to Wales—it differentiates us, doesn't it, absolutely, from the rest of the United Kingdom. People come here for a Welsh experience. We've got our national landscapes and our beaches and our lakes and our mountains and all the glorious places to visit, but we've also got a very unique language that people like to hear and like to be part of. So, that will remain absolutely central to our tourism promotion and marketing. And like you, I'll be at the Eisteddfod next week. I'm going to be sitting in on the FelMerch conference on Wednesday, so I'm really looking forward to that. Diolch yn fawr. 

If I could find my answer, I'd tell you. [Laughter.] Thank you, Russell, for that question.

Our strategy, 'Welcome to Wales: Priorities for the visitor economy 2020-2025', sets out our vision and ambition for the sector across Wales. Mid Wales features prominently in Visit Wales’s promotional activities and in our capital investment programme for tourism.

Thank you, Deputy Minister, for your answer. I was very pleased to take part in Wales Tourism Week last week, visiting two businesses in my constituency. The first was Plas Robin Rural Retreats in Llandysul, a new, recently established business, bringing forward some really quality accommodation, great workmanship and having unique selling points to their business. Also, the Smithy Park caravan park in Abermule, which I've visited previously. It's been there since the 1960s. When I raised with them the challenges and the opportunities that they see before them, both said to me and raised—without any prompting from me, I should add—their anxiety about the tourism tax. So, Minister, can you tell me how businesses such as those two businesses are going to benefit from a tourism tax, because their fear is that there will only be disbenefits?

Well, they'll benefit from a tourism levy. This is a levy, Russell. And the reason they will benefit from a visitor levy is that it will be used to improve the environment in which those businesses operate. We've rehearsed this many times. I know that Members from your benches, they get up and they ask the same question in very different ways, every week—[Interruption.] Yes, indeed. But it's the same question that comes up every week: I've got one later from Sam and I'm sure it'll touch exactly the same areas, and I had one from Tom last time. So, you know, you can keep asking the questions in as many different ways and as many times as you like, but the answer is still going to be the same.

So, we will be having a visitor levy, because the visitor levy was part of our manifesto commitment, it is part of our co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru, and it is going to be carried through. But I think that we need to be very clear that no decisions yet have been made about the level at which the levy will be set, and no decisions have finally been made yet about the detail of how it will be spent. But I certainly expect that tourism levy to be ring-fenced by a local authority that chooses to have it—and it's not compulsory on any local authority—that chooses to have a visitor levy to support the visitor economy in that area. That's the purpose of it.

At the same event that you spoke about, last week, Russell, I also spoke to tourism operators there and I had various views. I didn't have the blanket kind of view that we hear from your benches about everybody in the tourism industry being opposed to this. In fact, one operator spoke to me in very glowing terms about what he thought we were trying to do and how ambitious it was, and that, in fact, his bookings were up by 30 per cent for this summer compared to pre pandemic. So, you know, let's get some balance into this debate because not everybody in the tourism sector actually shares the views that your benches do.

Minister, you'll of course be aware of the considerable financial support that's been offered by the Welsh Government to tourist operators in mid Wales over many years. Like Russell George, last week I also visited some important attractions, attractions that draw people in to mid Wales and north Wales, including Chirk castle, where there's a new general manager with fantastic ideas for creating new installations at the site, and also Bangor-on-Dee Racecourse, which secured a hugely important grant from Welsh Government during the pandemic, unlike racecourses in England, which were only offered loans by the UK Government. Minister, would you agree with me that we can be confident about the tourism sector's prosperity in the future if the right support is available to enable operators of attractions to innovate, to renew and refresh, so that we draw more visitors into mid Wales and other parts of Wales in the future?

Yes, I thank Ken Skates for that supplementary, and, yes, I am very confident and share his confidence. I think it's good when people like you, Ken, come forward and talk about what is happening in Wales and not the kind of narrow approach that we hear from the Conservative benches about how we are trying to deal with and promote and expand the tourism industry in Wales. Wales, as we all know, is a place of adventure, it has world heritage, it's got outstanding natural landscapes, it's got a thriving cultural scene, and accommodation is also part of that experience. We've got mouthwatering food and drink.

And, in fact, when I was in the Isle of Man just recently for the British-Irish Council for creative industries, we visited a gin distillery—didn't stay there long. [Laughter.] We visited a gin distillery that was absolutely fabulous. The Fynoderee Distillery—I should give them a shout-out. They actually asked, while I was there, if there was somebody from Wales in the room. I put my hand up and I said, and they were just gushing with praise for the food and drink offer that Wales has, and at every show that they go to, promoting their products, they couldn't believe how good the offer from Wales was on our food and drink offer. So, it's about time we started talking all this up and not talking it down, guys, because we do continue to invest in tourism attractions in north Wales, and Ken has named a number already. We've also just concluded the majestic King's gate at Caernarfon castle—a £4 million investment—and another £5.4 million investment in the new football museum in north Wales. We're also continuing to invest through our Brilliant Basics and tourism attractor destinations. And as you are a Member in north-east Wales, Ken, it would be remiss of me not to talk about our ambition for Wales as we continue the Year of Trails and internationally working to maximise the awareness brought through last year's world cup and the Welcome to Wrexham programme. 

Thank you for the question. Official-level discussions have taken place with the UK Government, but not at the level of detail we would wish. I'm disappointed at the lack of ministerial engagement to date, including after the launch of the belated strategy. We will continue to press the UK Government to work with us to promote the Welsh semiconductor sector, especially our compound cluster, for the benefit of both the economy here in Wales and its wider impact across the UK. 

Diolch, Minister. A week ago today you made public your letter to the UK Government expressing the view that investment in Wales was at risk due to the continued delay of the UK Government to publish its UK semiconductor strategy. Minister, your words clearly carry weight in the corridors of 10 Downing Street, as less than 48 hours later the Prime Minister was announcing in Japan his Government's semiconductor strategy. I have been contacted by constituents in Islwyn, though, who work in this industry and have been gravely concerned about their future employment with the ongoing uncertainty—[Interruption.]—I'm glad they find this funny—at Newport Wafer Fab. Minister, the Gwent Valleys communities of Islwyn are directly impacted. Gwent's city, Newport, offers high-quality employment opportunities in this vital sector, which produces parts for microchips in everything from smartphones to military technology. Since the Prime Minister's announcement and Chloe Smith MP's visit to Newport last Friday, what meaningful dialogue has the UK Government had with the Welsh Government on this vital issue, and what is the initial Welsh Government assessment of their strategy for the economy and the people of Wales?

I thank the Member for the question and the important points around the future of the semiconductor sector here in Wales, and its key importance as part of the future for the UK economy as well.

I'll deal first with the discrete issue around Nexperia. It's a business based in Jayne Bryant's constituency, but I recognise the travel-to-work area takes in a number of Members in this Chamber, including, of course, Islwyn. I've never sought the information that underpinned the national security assessment, because I knew it wouldn't be provided to me. So, I always focused on wanting a decision and certainty for the sector and wanting to have a plan for Nexperia and their workforce. And my disappointment has been that, having made a decision and taken a long time to make the choice, there hasn't been a plan. I think there was a naive assumption that, once the plant became available for sale, someone would come in automatically and buy it. And actually, without a plan and an understanding of what happens with the contracts on a wider basis that hasn't happened. The UK Government still need to be active in that area to make sure those jobs are not lost to Wales. 

On the broader point around the belated publication of the semiconductor strategy, it has been imminent on a number of occasions, and I've never understood why it was in the department that it was, in any good sense. But now that we have it, it provides at least some certainty. The problem is, though, the headline figure of £1 billion investment sounds good, but it's £1 billion over 10 years. That's too little and too slow. It won't keep pace with the significant investment choices being made in the US and across the European Union. The real risk is that we'll see investment choices drift into other parts of the EU and the US.

The positive side, though, is we do have significant assets here. It's why KLA that I mentioned earlier have made their significant investment in the cluster. That was directly because we were active and we helped to enable their investment in the sector. I still think there's more we can do, but we're putting to one side our competitive advantage by not investing properly in it and making sure that there is meaningful engagement with both the Welsh Government and indeed the capital region. I have not had any kind of ministerial discussion on this key part of the economy and what it could mean, and neither indeed have the capital region. I spoke directly with Jane Mudd, the leader of Newport, and Anthony Hunt, the leader of Torfaen, who's the chair of the capital region. We want to have a pragmatic and sensible conversation about what we can all do to promote the sector, but that should start with either of them actually being interested in talking to us and working with us.

I thank Rhianon Passmore for raising the question. Embracing the future global opportunities that the advanced semiconductor industry holds for Wales is absolutely crucial, and I'm pleased that the Welsh Government, together with the UK Government, is talking to the likes of Japan. It's going to be absolutely fundamental to our future semiconductor strategy. Through our advancement of compound semiconductor production, via IQE in Newport, linking with Wales's first CSC cluster, CSconnected, and the UK Government's prime investment in the first CSC Catapult, Wales is strategically placed to be one of the global leaders in this industry.

However, I was somewhat disappointed when I was reading, Minister, your new 'A Manufacturing Future for Wales', that little direct focus is on the area where I would have thought it should have been big and bold. And, throughout the report, there are repeated sections stating objectives and actions, but you can't find any actions. And so my question is: in this place, how do we monitor the delivery plans of actions, such as moving forward with the compound semiconductor strategies? How do we, and how do you, evaluate and measure progress against your objectives and actions? Because what I find, sadly, since I've been here is that the Government is excellent at writing plans and strategies, but is consistently weak on delivery and outcomes. Thank you.

I don't think that makes any sense at all when it comes to our support for manufacturing. We have a sector that is bigger than the UK-wide sector per head. It stocks 150,000 jobs, it's 16 per cent of our economic activity; it's about 9 per cent in the rest of the UK. And, if you ask the sector themselves, they recognise the support that this Government has and the fact that we've got a forecast and a plan for the future.

The initial manufacturing action plan, of course, undertaken by Ken Skates as the then Minister for Economy, has been refreshed—direct engagement with the sector—and they are positive about the plan we have to address a number of key challenges and to secure opportunities. Compound semiconductors are part of that. But, of course, we couldn't talk about a specific strategy for the sector, because we were still waiting on the UK strategy itself. It had been imminent for many months before we launched the manufacturing action plan. It should have actually been delivered in at least the year previously.

Now, the churn in Ministers at UK Government has direct consequences, and it's undeniable that this is one of them. We've not had a plan from the UK Government to be able to work with. Even a plan we don't agree with is better than having no plan and no strategy at all. What we are now doing is, we're looking to make the best of what we have. Compound semiconductors and the wider semiconductor sector will be of key importance in a range of areas of manufacturing. We've always recognised that. That's recognised within the sector. More certainty about the level of investment in the setting up of sector will help all of us to lever in and gain advantage from the opportunities we do have, and to make sure we do that whilst we still are in a position where we're in a global leadership with the compound sector. There's no guarantee we'll still be there in three years' time, for the sake of argument, and, actually, that's why the UK plan of £1 billion over 10 years is genuinely concerning, about it being too little and too slow. We could surrender our advantages.

Now, there shouldn't be a need to have party politics in that discussion; it's just the reality of having a plan that doesn't match the investment needs of the sector, and there are other parts of the world for them to go. So, I hope that, when it comes to the budget, or whatever they call the autumn statement, that actually, we see a great deal more in terms of a realistic level of investment and support, to make sure there are good jobs here in Wales and, indeed, in other parts of the UK.

Thank you for the question.

Responsibility for broadband is not devolved to Wales, yet businesses across south Wales are already benefiting directly from our £56 million broadband roll-out. Our Access Broadband Cymru and local broadband fund schemes also provide grants to help improve broadband connections to businesses.

Thank you very much, Minister. Several businesses in Pontypridd town centre have contacted me, as one of their regional Members, regarding the lack of broadband available in the town centre, which has had an impact on their businesses. A number of these businesses have also been affected by flooding in 2020. Rhondda Cynon Taf council has looked into this and has confirmed that there is a problem in terms of infrastructure that means that there are deficiencies and no options available to improve this. Now, you have outlined that there are some things available. Can I ask you more specifically in terms of Welsh Government, how can we improve provision in areas in South Wales Central, including the town of Pontypridd, which are affected in this way? And is it possible for you, Minister, to put pressure on companies to continue to improve provision as a matter of urgency, so that all businesses have access to the broadband connections that are necessary for their businesses?

Well, we're obviously concerned about the provision and the lack of it, and the investment in the broadband infrastructure. That's different, of course, to the price paid by the provider, but the infrastructure itself is the key problem. We're looking to enable at least 39,000 homes and businesses across Wales using the £56 million fund that I talked about, and we're working with Openreach to do so. We've also had direct conversations with the UK Government, with Minister Lopez, before she went on maternity leave, and I look forward to carrying those forward with her maternity cover replacement, to try to make sure that in the next stage of investing in broadband we're not left with quite the scale of sweep-up operations that we undertake not because it's devolved, because it isn't—we used devolved resources that are precious and limited because we recognise the key importance for homes and businesses.

And 'homes and businesses', I think, is important. We don't have specific figures on the actual number of businesses, because some people run some or all of their operations from their home address as well. We do know a number of non-residential addresses are being improved, so of the 39,000 figure I've given, I think at least 10 per cent of those will be non-residential premises. We'll carry on working with local authorities who can bid in to some of the funds that I have referred to, to try to address challenges where we know we don't have adequate broadband infrastructure. It will be an ongoing challenge. We can always do more if whoever it is in the UK Government is prepared to meet their responsibilities in full.

The ongoing cost-of-living, cost-of-business crisis is a real risk for the future of a number of businesses, including small and microbusinesses. The Welsh Government offers a range of support for small and microbusinesses across Wales, including support for skills, business development, research and development, and exports. Any Wales-based business in need of support should contact our Business Wales service to discuss their needs.

Thank you. Well, again I'm going back on an earlier theme. Responding to my colleague Tom Giffard last week, the First Minister stated that

'No business is forced to close because they don't let for 182 days.'

How do you respond to the legitimate small self-catering business owners I met last Saturday, during my Wales Tourism Week visit with the Clwydian range tourism group, who told me that they were being forced to close because they can't let for 182 days? And to the Flintshire constituents with a self-catering business within the curtilage of their own home, who have e-mailed that,

'The premium council tax for furnished holiday lets who don't achieve the 182 days and the tourism tax coming in is another nail in the coffin of hospitality providers. Sadly, we've made the decision to sell up. I just hope the Welsh Government have not made our property undesirable to future buyers. The current Welsh Government have truly messed up our retirement plans and investments so much we'll probably move to England. It is a sad state of affairs when your Government makes it so hard for you to earn a living how you want to, and taxes you in such a way that it makes it financially unviable.' 

The numbers are growing—

Can we have the question, please?

The question was—I already put it: how would the Minister respond to the constituents who have raised these matters with me?

I understand there are views and opinions on this subject. You'll understand that we put this into our manifesto, about what we would do moving forward. You'll also understand, of course, it's part of our co-operation agreement, and so we're doing—this may be unusual for Conservatives—what we said we'd do, and we're committed to doing that. 

The point the First Minister made—and everyone should really understand this—is, if you don't let for 182 days, it doesn't mean you have to close your business. It means that if you're operating a business for less than half the year you pay council tax, not business rates. And so that's the simple point. Now, people always need to make choices about whether they're prepared to pay for the costs to run their business, and if they think they can secure enough income to carry on doing so. But otherwise, people are opting between the two systems in a way that other tourism businesses don't say is entirely fair from their perspective too.

We are doing what we said we'd do, and of course we'll monitor the impact, but I do think that Members in Conservative seats need to recognise that their own view is not a universal truth accepted by everyone in the country, never mind in the sector. 

Our flexible innovation support programme is currently open to applicants. We will formally launch funding on 8 June. Funding will be targeted towards activity that will help deliver the missions laid out in our new innovation strategy, 'Wales innovates'. The Member, of course, will remember that it was launched in February of this year. 

Can I thank the Minister for the response? All successful countries, nations and regions have tourism and agriculture; they do not base their economic strategy on them. The two key drivers of a successful economy are innovation and entrepreneurship. I welcome the new funding round, worth £10 million over the next two years, to support scientific research in Wales via the internationally recognised Sêr Cymru programme. How is the Welsh Government going to work with universities in Wales to develop innovation and higher paid employment?

Well, on those points, I think we have a good track record, and our missions, actually, I think, highlight what we are going to do to work alongside universities to develop innovation and higher paid employment. It's part of the reason we're looking for research that can be applied. That will, to be fair, also work in some sectors that do take in agriculture and tourism. What we're saying is that we need to have a balance in our approach and the missions set out the key priorities for us. 

We're deliberately approaching areas of strength and opportunities to grow. In doing so, it'll be even more important that we're successful, because as the Member knows, within his own constituency, within his own area of interest across the city of Swansea, Swansea University has been very clear that the changes—the deliberate changes—to European funding will cost research jobs—cost decent jobs—that are actually leading to growing the economy; exactly the high-paid employment that I know he wants to see not just in Swansea but across the economy. I look forward to developing more of the action plans that have underpinned the innovation strategy and how we'll carry on working with the university sector to make sure that their research is applied for economic benefit.

Finally, question 8, Sam Rowlands.

Diolch, Llywydd, and you should be well-rehearsed on this, Minister.

I thank Sam Rowlands for that question. The Welsh Government's regulatory impact assessment was published alongside the legislation. Operators who do not meet the criteria can continue to provide self-catering accommodation and contribute to the local community through council tax. Those who meet the criteria will contribute through the higher levels of economic activity that they support.

Thank you for your response, Deputy Minister. As you will know, I was honoured to sponsor the Wales Tourism Week event last week, and I was certainly grateful for your attendance and your contribution at that, Deputy Minister; it was certainly welcomed by the industry as well. But, as you heard, there were clear concerns from attendees as to some of the worries that are facing the sector, and, indeed, the 182-day threshold for holiday lets is one of their significant concerns, which we've already heard this afternoon as well.

Indeed, the Wales Tourism Alliance have estimated that as a result of this policy from you, with Plaid Cymru's support, up to 84 per cent of holiday lets in Wales will be forced to close, which is a shocking statistic. I appreciate that the Minister, perhaps, doesn't appreciate that the actions being taken by this Government are forcing these companies to close. When you consider that the tourism industry in Wales is responsible for around one in seven jobs, this is a serious cause for concern.

What also seems to be overlooked in this is not just a financial impact, but we heard last week from the industry about the mental health impact on individuals who run these businesses as well. So, in light of these genuine concerns, Deputy Minister, and with such limited exemptions that have been included in this so far, is there anything that would make you reconsider these proposals? 

Thank you, Sam, for that question. I don't want to just keep repeating myself, but, you know, we are in a situation where we set out very clearly in our programme for government that this was what we were going to do; we have very clearly set that out in our co-operation agreement with Plaid Cymru; we have consulted with the sector and we are now implementing, and, in fact, the changes took place, as you know, on 1 April 2023.

The regulatory impact assessment considers all of the potential impacts of the legislation. It is true to say that the evidence base is very limited, so I would be more interested to know where this figure of 84 per cent came from, because that's certainly not a figure that I recognise in any of the work that we have done on this. But, I go back to what the First Minister has said and I go back to what the Minister for Economy has said: nobody is forcing these businesses to close. [Interruption.] Nobody is forcing a business to close. What is happening is that a business that is not operating for more than 182 days a year, they have to pay council tax, like the rest of us do. There are some businesses, some letting properties, that let for just 10 weeks of the year, and that results in that property owner paying no local taxes at all.

It is important to understand why we have introduced this. This is part of a three-pronged approach to dealing with the issue of second homes and the contribution that those second homes make to the local community and how those second homes potentially price local communities out of the property market. If the person who is running that business pays council tax on a business that they do not let for more than 182 days a year, then they're continuing to make a greater contribution to that community. That is the purpose behind it, and there is nothing that we have seen in the regulatory impact assessment that takes us away from that. And even if we did, historic occupancy is not necessarily an indicator of future occupancy. But what we do know is that, in Wales now, we are already seeing, in the majority of self-catering lets, occupancy over 50 per cent of the time—so that's more than 182 days. That's more than 50 per cent already meeting those criteria. Those that don't meet it have to address how they let their property for 182 days or more, or they pay council tax like the rest of us do.

Thank you, Deputy Minister and Minister.

The next item, therefore, is questions to the Minister for Health and Social Services. The first question is from Joel James.

The Welsh Government has set fair, equal and consistent expectations on the delivery of general medical services to people across Wales, using both contractual levers and by working with the profession to embed the GMS access commitment, to ensure everyone is directed to the right care to meet their needs, from the first time they call their GP practice.

Thank you, Minister. Constituents complain to me that they have been unable to make routine appointments with the Forest View Medical Centre in Treorchy, struggling to even get hold of them on the phone, which is causing considerable distress for people who need access to GP services. Their online appointment system and phone consultation service are almost always booked up, which means that routine appointments have to be made more than four weeks in advance. Cases have been reported to me where, due to the failure to access routine GP appointments, patients have then ended up needing emergency appointments due to rapidly deteriorating health. I've written to the health board chief executive and to the practice itself, and their responses are fairly standard, in that they're doing all that they can and are trying to implement better systems of working. But the truth is, the practice is overwhelmed with the needs and the size of the community it serves, and this is reflected among many other surgeries throughout my region. I'm conscious of the efforts by yourself to promote community pharmacies and streamline triage services, and I do believe that the practice is making every effort it can to see patients. But with this in mind, Minister, what thoughts have you given to improving the experience of patients when accessing appointment services, and what consideration has been given to the effect on GP staff morale and retention when dealing with such high volumes? Thank you.

Thanks very much, Joel. You'll be aware that the demands on our GP practices have been significantly increasing in recent months and years. I am aware of the particular issue in relation to the Forest View medical practice, and the difficulty in people getting access to what they, frankly, should be able to get access to. There is this new contract now; there are expectations in terms of delivering that contract. Because there are some examples where that contract doesn't look like it's going to be met—and don't forget that the new contract only formally started in April—what's happened, in particular with this practice, is that there will be an expectation that they will submit regular updates around their action plan, on a fortnightly basis. I know that they are actively trying to recruit additional GPs and team members, and that they're trying to use social media channels to explain to their patients what they've done in response to their concerns. But I am concerned to hear of the level of inaccess to Forest View medical practice, and I can assure you that my officials will make sure that the health board keeps on top of this issue. 

We continue to provide Gwent and Cwm Taf Morgannwg regional partnership boards with nearly £3.9 million annually to support the implementation of the dementia action plan vision, and to develop a joint health and social care approach to dementia support.

Thank you for that answer, Minister. Last week marked Dementia Action Week, which this year focused on the importance of an accurate and timely diagnosis. Dementia awareness is something that's close to my heart, and I know it's something close to the Minister's heart as well. There are estimated to be around 50,000 people living with dementia in Wales, and this figure could be close to 100,000 people by 2050. A diagnosis is instrumental in facilitating access to care and medication that supports people to live well with dementia. Nine in 10 people living with dementia surveyed by the Alzheimer's Society Cymru believe that a diagnosis has benefited them, with pathways and doors opening. Getting the message out about an awareness about the symptoms is crucial. What more can the Welsh Government and others do to ensure that emphasising diagnosis early plays a key part in the Welsh Government's dementia action plan, and also, in its plans for social care reform?

Can I thank Jayne Bryant for that question, and acknowledge her long-standing commitment to campaigning for improved dementia care? You are absolutely right about the importance of early diagnosis, and awareness raising is really very important for that. Weeks like we had last week—the dementia awareness week—are really important initiatives in raising awareness. There are also, as you probably know, helpful resources available from a number of our third sector partners, and we're also committed to supporting the dementia-friendly communities initiative, which can not just raise awareness, but also help to tackle the stigma.

Some of the early signs and symptoms of dementia include memory loss, difficulty concentrating, planning or organising, problems with language and communication, misunderstanding of what is being seen, being confused about time or place, and mood changes or difficulty controlling emotions. I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that if someone is worried about themselves or someone close to them having these symptoms, please contact your GP to discuss this further and to get an appropriate referral. 

I'd like to begin by saying thank you to Jayne Bryant for tabling this important question this afternoon. I can speak on behalf of myself, as well as all the Welsh Conservatives, in saying that we are absolutely 100 per cent behind this particular cause that you've mentioned today. 

Minister, it's really important to note the importance of high-quality, accessible data in ensuring that everyone has access to a timely and accurate diagnosis, particularly when it comes to dementia. There are over 100 types of dementia out there, and, whilst Alzheimer's is the most common form, there are also other types such as vascular, Lewy body and frontotemporal. We're also hearing more about young onset dementia, which is when someone under the age of 65 develops dementia. A survey by the Alzheimer's Society last year found that 17 per cent of people with dementia did not have a subtype diagnosis detailing the specific type of dementia that they actually have.

NHS Wales does not currently collect or report the number of people with a formal diagnosis of dementia centrally, and does not publish diagnosis data by subtype. Minister, do you agree with me that improved access to subtype diagnosis data will not only provide us with clarity on the picture of dementia here in Wales, but will also help us with futureproofing the diagnostic system ahead of future disease, modifying treatments that require individuals to have an early and specific subtype diagnosis, in order to inform treatment options going forward?

Thank you, Natasha. You are right to highlight that, of course, dementia is a term that covers a wide range of conditions. Sometimes we forget that. It is very important that we maintain accurate data on diagnosis, and guidance has been issued to the NHS in Wales on actually recording the different subtypes of dementia. And also, as part of the work that we're taking forward through the strategy, and through our dementia action plan, where we have five work streams, one of which is around memory assessment services, there is also a work stream as part of that that is designed to improve data collection. 

My grandmother suffered with dementia in her final few years, so I know how frightening the process can be for someone going through this and for people around them if they don't understand what's happening to them. That's why, as we've heard, having an accurate and timely diagnosis is so important, isn't it? But there are barriers, and you've set this out, Minister, preventing people from getting these diagnoses, like a lack of understanding of the symptoms. People living in rural communities, people whose first language isn't English, and people who are living in poorer areas are all less likely to receive a diagnosis early in the disease, which means that those people will feel more alone, more trapped in their heads, with feelings that they don't understand or don't recognise, and more scared and alone. So do you agree with me that there should be a fair access to dementia diagnosis for everyone? And would you consider introducing an annual public awareness messaging campaign, highlighting the symptoms and where people can go for help, so that fewer people in Wales will go through this feeling scared and alone, and will know exactly where to go for help? 

Thank you, Delyth. You raise a number of important points there. As I think you're probably aware, I myself have had a family member who's been through that, and I know not just how traumatising it is, but how isolating it can be for families. So it is really important to have that diagnosis, to have the support around people living with dementia. We do need to do more around diagnosis. That's why we've got the NHS delivery unit, who are currently undertaking a snapshot assurance review of memory assessment services across Wales, and we're going to receive the national report of that in either this month or next month. I should say as well that we've invested an extra £3 million to improve diagnosis and to support people as well while they are waiting for diagnosis, and that's recurring funding that we've made available. 

In terms of what you've said about an awareness campaign, I think most people have got a reasonable awareness of the symptoms of dementia. I think there's probably more an issue there about fear and stigma in coming forward to ask for help, which I completely understand, because we went through that as a family ourselves. But I'm very happy to take that away and look at what more we can do in terms of our public messaging to encourage people to come forward for diagnosis and then to access support. 

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Conservative spokesperson first—Darren Millar. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Minister, people across north Wales are pretty angry at the moment about what is happening in the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. I was given an anonymous copy of the Ernst & Young forensic report of accounting issues at the board, and I have to say it is absolutely damning. Its findings include false accounting and the manipulation of documents that amount to fraud. These were done in the knowledge of senior members of staff at the health board, including the chief executive and the finance director. The junior staff who pushed back against these appalling practices were overruled by their superiors and there, then, were deliberate efforts to hide those actions from Audit Wales and the forensic investigators from Ernst & Young. It absolutely stinks. The report still isn't in the public domain—it should be published—in spite of the significant public interest in these issues. I want to know what action the Welsh Government is now taking to ensure that all those responsible for the behaviour identified in that report are going to be held accountable for their actions.

Thanks very much. I was one of the few people who did have an early access to the report, and I've got to agree that it did make extremely sobering reading, which absolutely needs to be acted upon. As has been said in this Chamber on a number of occasions, this was not our report, and so I can't ask for it to be published. It was a report that was commissioned by the health board, and they have to determine what they're going to do. I have spoken to both the interim chief executive and the chair of the health board about the action that will be undertaken as a result of this report, and they have both reassured me that the health board is progressing the management of the issues that are raised in the EY report in line with their existing procedures and policies. My concern throughout has been that I don't want to do anything that will compromise or prejudice in any way the ability of the board to pursue the actions that they should and need to do.

Minister, it's been four months since that report was published. I cannot fathom why, in that period of four months, those individuals who were responsible for these actions have not been dismissed from that health board. Not only are these unprofessional practices for those who are registered as chartered accountants and with other professional bodies, but it actually goes beyond the health board itself. We know, for example, that documentation to obtain goods and services was falsified in order to award a contract of nearly £1.8 million to a company, Lightfoot Solutions, and that company, Lightfoot Solutions, colluded in the altering of documentation in order to get that award. We know that a purchase order was drafted that shouldn't have been drafted, deliberately designed to fail in order to avoid proper scrutiny, by the head of procurement services at NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership. Now, I don't know whether these individuals are still in post or under investigation, but this is not just about Betsi; this is about the culture in the wider NHS. I want to know what action is now being taken to make sure that Lightfoot Solutions, this company that has colluded, which has also had contracts awarded to it in other parts of Wales, not just the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board—. What is being done to make sure that we never engage with that organisation again? What is being done in terms of the NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership role in this sort of behaviour? It's wider than just Betsi, Minister. 

Thanks very much. My understanding is that the key individuals named in this report have been suspended, and, clearly, they have legal employment rights. The key thing for me is that we've got to follow the right process so that any system that needs to be followed is not undermined. I can assure you that, from the report, the Welsh Government was exonerated, that there wasn't any suggestion that Welsh Government was in any way implicated in any of this. But I have asked my director general to make sure that we look at the report to see what, if any, action we need to take as a Government if there are any broader implications for us as a Government.

There are clearly broader implications. You've had this report for four months, Minister—four months it's been lying around. I find it, frankly, very disturbing that you're only just starting to have these conversations about whether there are wider implications when, quite clearly, the report implies that there are wider implications because this goes beyond Betsi into an organisation that has multimillion-pound contracts across the Welsh NHS, and also into the heart of the NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership, with the head of procurement—not a junior member of staff, the head of procurement—in that organisation inappropriately drafting purchase invoices.

I think the public, quite rightly, will want to have some assurances that the Welsh Government is now going to look at every single health board in Wales to make sure that the sorts of practices—which didn't just occur in a single year in the Betsi Cadwaladr health board; the report refers to this being at least across a period of two financial years—that occurred there haven't occurred elsewhere, because, frankly, the involvement of the head of procurement services at the NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership suggests that this might have been replicated in other places too. So, when will you publish an action plan as to the work that you're now going to commission to make sure that these matters are properly investigated and, where necessary, referred to the police for criminal investigation too?

Thanks. Well, I can assure you that the report hasn’t just been lying around; there have been extensive investigations by the NHS counter-fraud office to see if there needed to be any police follow-up in terms of criminal action. They concluded that that didn’t need to be done, but, obviously, that has only recently come out, and that’s why it’s only now that we can follow up as a Welsh Government, and, as I say, I have already instructed my officials to look at whether there is anything we need to do in respect of lessons that we can learn.

I do think that it’s important that people in north Wales understand that, despite the very sobering reason, actually, no money was lost to the NHS—[Interruption.]—money hasn’t been lost to the NHS, and I think what the public in north Wales are concerned with at the moment is delivery of services. And I’m very pleased to say that, in respect of delivery of services, I’ve just been able to send out a written statement to ensure that the public understand, and the public in north Wales, that, today, we have been able to conclude with the NHS trade unions a pay offer that they have accepted—a two-year pay offer for 'Agenda for Change' staff. So, I’m very pleased that those negotiations, despite being very challenging, have now come to a conclusion and that we are in a situation where the public will understand that, actually, the threat of strikes that has been hanging over us for a long time—there is still an issue with a couple of unions that, obviously, we need to continue discussing—. The collective view of the trade union has been that they will accept the pay offer, and I’m very pleased about that.

The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Diolch, Llywydd. Yet again today, we have to focus on Betsi Cadwaladr. Two weeks ago, Plaid Cymru raised concerns in this Chamber about the implications of the Ernst and Young report—raised the same concerns that we just heard about from the Conservative spokesperson. Given how sobering the Minister says that that report was when she read it four months ago, perhaps she could put on the record what advice she immediately sought from officials, having read it. But now a former independent member of the board explaining that he was intimately involved in that EY investigation has now called for a police investigation, saying he believes there is clear and incontrovertible evidence that a number of crimes were carried out. It’s a powerful and damning indictment of the situation regarding Betsi Cadwaladr. I welcome the statement from North Wales Police saying they’re assessing the situation. I, too, call on them to initiate a full investigation.

Now, the First Minister told the Senedd that, with the NHS counter-fraud department having decided no criminal threshold had been reached, this was now only an internal matter for Betsi, but given the seriousness of the allegations now published, and given the doubts about potential conflicts of interest, conflicts of interest that the independent member suggests make it impossible for Welsh Government or its various health agencies to be able to comment objectively, will the Minister now agree that it’s beyond question that the police must investigate too, and that that investigation must have the full support of the Welsh Government?

Thanks very much. The police will determine if a criminal investigation is required, and they’ve already said that they’re looking at this and it’s not up to me to tell the police whether a criminal investigation is required; that is something that they will need to determine themselves.

I think it is important that there is an understanding of how the different organisations in Wales work. So, the NHS counter-fraud service is operationally independent from NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership, but it is hosted by the NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership as part of the Velindre NHS trust. So, it’s basically somewhere where they’re parked—somebody has to do their HR, somebody has to do their accounting, somebody has to do all of the other bits and pieces, but they are operationally independent. The counter-fraud office is made up of a team of experienced investigators, and they have a lot of experience in looking at serious, complex, large-scale crime cases, and they do give a specialist independent investigation resource to health boards. They have come to a conclusion. If the police want to look at it and come to a different conclusion, then obviously that will be a matter for them.

I've highlighted where I believe and others believe the conflicts of interest are here, and again I can't see why the Welsh Government wouldn't say, 'We would support a full police investigation as a means to bring back trust in the system.' The impact of all of this, of course, is to further undermine trust in Betsi. It affects staff morale. It affects patients. Our position is clear and has been for some time: I think we need a fresh start. Can the Minister answer this? And I know she'd rather avoid reorganisation—we all would. But isn't there a point where she is willing to say, 'Enough is enough'? We need a plan in place at least for new health structures in the north. If she does, great—let's at least start on that process to forming a plan B. If not, that worries me deeply. We can't go on like this. So, in order to help us out of the situation, we have to understand it. I've asked before and I'll ask again: isn't it time we had an independent investigation, an inquiry that can look transparently and forensically at what has happened in Betsi's past, so we can make plans for its future, but, more importantly, for the future of those staff working in it and the patients dependent on it?

Thanks very much. Well, part of the reason why I acted as I did is because I do believe that the board needed a fresh start, which is why we appointed new independent members to the board. There are 20,000 people who work for the health board, and I've got to tell you that this constant criticism is really sapping their morale. Now, I'm not going to reorganise, Rhun. That is not going to happen under my watch. You can keep harping on if you want, but it's not going to change my mind. I think you are undermining the people who you represent—the 2,000 people in Anglesey who are actually trying to get on with their day job.

Now, of course, I'm happy to be held to account. I'm held to account on a weekly basis here, very differently, let me point out, from the situation in England, where despite the fact that they have 21 hospitals in special measures equivalent—21—never, as far as I can tell, has there been a question on the floor of the house in the House of Commons on any one of those, and I am here week after week after week. So, I will respond—[Interruption.] But I am—[Interruption.] But I am—[Interruption.] I am accountable and I am here every single week.

Can we hear the Minister in her response? Thank you to the Minister.

The important thing for me is that we have had a fresh start and that we do turn over a new leaf, but we can't actually do that until we get to a point where all of this dreadful situation that we've seen in the past in Betsi is unearthed, and that we can then get to a point where—. We're very pleased now that we've got a new interim chief executive, and, from what I hear, the morale around the table at the top of the health board is in a very, very different place.

I'm aware from recent reports that some people may be being prescribed powerful medication following online private assessments in England or elsewhere. It does not follow that the NHS in Wales would continue to prescribe such medications, and a person's GP would need to be satisfied that it was safe and correct to do so.

Thank you. I'm sure many of us will have seen the recent Panorama programme that exposed the perverse consequences of giving people the right to a referral to a private provider in the English NHS, which has led to a proliferation of private companies, in Harley Street and elsewhere, all offering to give you an immediate answer, and offering you expensive drugs to go with it. Coincidentally, the day before that programme was broadcast, I was contacted by a new constituent, recently moved from England, armed with a prescription for drugs following a diagnosis for ADHD, who was astonished to be told by the new GP she’d registered with that she couldn't get these drugs until and unless she was appropriately diagnosed by a professional as to whether she really did have ADHD. I'm not making any judgment about whether that was the correct, appropriate medication or indeed diagnosis for this individual, but it tells you that there is a huge—. People are using the English NHS like it was a sweet shop, and just going in there and saying, 'I'll have some of that'. This is really serious, because it raises huge concerns amongst individuals who think that they need whatever it is they've been prescribed and, in many cases, are being asked to pay eye-watering sums to get these drugs privately. There are all sorts of consequences of this, and I just wondered how the Welsh NHS is dealing with this, given that we have a very porous border.

Thanks very much. Well, Jenny, I'm sure you'll understand that I can't comment on an individual case, but we would expect there to be continuity of care for any patient who moves to Wales, of course. But, in general, it would be the patient's GP who would determine whether a prescribed medicine should be given. And, of course, it's very different from England, because our prescriptions are for free in Wales, so we don't like to hand them out like sweeties. I think it's really important and, obviously, there are huge implications for that, especially when it comes to antibiotic medicines, and the last thing we want to do is to oversubscribe them.

But I do have real concerns about the Panorama programme and what that demonstrated, showing that individuals were being—. It was being suggested that they had conditions that they didn't have, which had profound implications for those individuals, and put them, perhaps, on a medical course that they needn't be on. So, it is something that, of course, we will need to ensure that we keep an eye on, and the implications for the Welsh NHS.  

When it comes to being referred to private treatment by a health board or the NHS in Wales, I wonder if the Minister can guarantee that there is no postcode lottery in this regard across Wales. And the context of my question is that a constituent of mine, after waiting a considerable length of time for treatment on the NHS, decided to pay privately, despite the fact that they couldn't really afford to do so, but they made life choices because their heath and quality of life was important to them. That they accepted, reluctantly, but what was galling to them was, when they went for treatment, to find out that there were other patients waiting the same length of time in other parts of Wales who are being referred for private treatment by their health boards, and this, they felt, was particularly unfair. So, I wonder if the Minister can assure the Senedd that all health boards have adopted the same approach when it comes to referring patients from the Welsh NHS or Welsh health boards to private health services to avoid what appears to be a postcode lottery.

Thanks very much. Well, you'll be aware that health boards are independent. They make these judgments on the basis of the clinical needs of their population, and one of the things I hope you noticed last week, and we're pleased to see, is that the statistics office are now producing the waiting-list time on the basis of individual health boards, which I think is far more meaningful for the population in Wales. So, what Members will see from that is that some health boards are performing a lot better than others, which means that there will be some, perhaps, that need to wait longer than others. Obviously, we’re interested, as Welsh Government, to try and avoid a postcode lottery, so it's not fair that some people in some parts of Wales have to wait considerably longer than others. Part of the reason we've kept £50 million back is to make sure that we see a better consistency, but we've got to be careful not to reward the people who are not doing well either. So, this is quite a difficult balancing act, and something that we're trying to work through.

But in terms of private practice, we need to clear the backlog. At this point in time, I think that's a priority. If some health boards want to use private practices to help clear the backlog, then they're able to do that. What I can't determine is who goes where at what point in terms of referrals from a particular health board to a particular private practice.

We continue to work in partnership to retain existing nurses across south-west Wales, to recruit locally and attract new internationally trained healthcare professionals to the area. While recruitment and staffing challenges remain, the nursing workforce of the Swansea Bay University Health Board is at record high levels.

Thank you, Minister, for that answer. You'll be aware of Swansea Bay University Health Board's recent plan to recruit 900 nurses from overseas for four years, particularly from Kerala in south-west India. Of course, we're not opposed to recruitment like this in principle, and I also understand that the Welsh and UK Governments have committed not to take NHS staff from the areas with the worst struggles, but, in principle, there's still a moral argument about the impact on vulnerable patients in those countries where we go to take potential NHS staff from. It's not a sustainable solution for nursing staff in Wales either who are currently leaving the profession, and training places are failing to be taken up as a consequence. On top of this, we know that it's a problem that might get worse with staff leaving the profession. A health board report said that we have an ageing workforce profile in nursing, with 1,322 nurses and midwives currently over the age of 51, and could retire very soon, or over the next few years. So, in light of the shortages in domestic nursing, what steps are Welsh Government taking to address these serious problems and challenges in recruitment and training and encourage more students in Wales to take up nursing as a profession?

Well, I'm pleased to say that nursing training places have increased by 54 per cent over the last few years. So, they were 1,750 in 2017 and 2,701 in 2023. So, we're seeing an increase, and that's a good thing. The problem is, as you say, there are people who are leaving the profession. Now I, like you, was concerned about this moral dilemma: should we be taking people from poorer communities in India and places? I was very fortunate to meet with the health Minister for Kerala last year in south India, and she was actually encouraging us, if we wanted to take more nurses, whether that would be something that we might be interested in. Actually, I put it to her very straight: 'Why are you over-training people? Why are you offering these people? Don't you have a situation in India that you should be addressing?', and she was very, very clear—she said, 'In Kerala, we deliberately over-train because it's actually part of an economic development approach'. So, 30 per cent of Kerala's gross domestic product comes from remittances from overseas. So, it did put me into a slightly different place, so I was more comfortable than I may have been otherwise in relation to that.

So, I am pleased that, last year, 400 international nurses were recruited through the first phase of the national programme, and further international recruitment will take place this year.

I expect the health board to work with partners to ensure that there is sufficient capacity to meet the needs of the communities it serves. This includes ensuring the clinical model, configuration of services, and facilities are fit for purpose and provide equity of access to deliver the very best care to all patients.

Thank you, Minister, for your response. We've already heard today about the way in which the health board has been run; it's simply not fit for purpose for people who I represent in north Wales. Not only is the treatment that people receive substandard, but we heard again about the leaked report showing that auditors were being knowingly misled and documents being falsified by senior health board officials. It's this behaviour that has a direct impact on the health provision for the people I represent across the region and the quality of the care that they receive, and it's financial mismanagement like this that eventually leads to hospital wards such as the one at Tywyn eventually closing. And it's this closure at Tywyn that risks putting serious pressures on other parts of the health service in the Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board area, and certainly makes it more difficult for our doctors and nurses and, ultimately, the residents I represent in my area. And when my residents see this money being wasted and documents being falsified, and then the impact it has on them in terms of services they receive, that's what really puts their backs up. So, Minister, why should north Wales residents have to deal with the negative impact of these ward closures, and what is being done to resolve this as quickly as possible?

Well, I was really pleased to visit Tywyn health centre on 12 May, because I knew that there were really serious issues there in relation to the closure of that facility temporarily. And you'll be aware that the reason for that closure was because of staffing challenges; it wasn't because there was any intention by anybody. And we, as a primary responsibility—. The health board's primary responsibility is to keep people safe and to make sure that there are safe staffing levels. There was a point in Tywyn when they went below the safe staffing levels and, therefore, there had to be a consequence to that.

Now, trying to recruit is difficult, but what you can't do is to constantly say, 'There's a problem in Betsi, there's a problem in Betsi, there's a problem in Betsi' and then think people are going to pour in their application forms, because that's not going to happen. There is a direct consequence to this constant talking down of Betsi—

It's not, it's called scrutiny.

I don't mind scrutiny, but there is a direct result to that, and that is that it's getting more difficult, potentially, to recruit. And that is something—[Interruption.]—and it's absolutely right, but there is a direct consequence, and I just think that it's important that people understand. And the people of Tywyn, when I spoke to the action committee there, they understood that message, even if you don't.

The Welsh Government has taken significant steps towards the integration of health and social care, including enshrining the duty to co-operate in legislation, establishing seven regional partnership boards and investing both revenue and capital funds in the development of new integrated models of health and social care.

Thank you, Deputy Minister. I'm not sure if the Chamber's aware, but I understand that the health Minister did visit Llandudno hospital last week. Now, I was part—[Interruption.] Anyway, I'm only sorry you didn't invite me along too, but hey-ho.

So, Deputy Minister, I sat, as many of us did, here, during the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014, if my memory serves me correctly, and in that Bill, there were great hopes that we would see better integration of health and social care. Ask anybody who has a relative or a constituent who now tries to get somebody out of hospital—we've still got a system whereby there are breaks, if you like, between people coming out, needing a care package, care package not available. I still do not believe that health and social care is any more integrated as of today than it was when that Bill received Royal Assent.

Now, the Minister will know, when visiting Llandudno hospital, that she herself, as a result of us requesting this, commissioned a six-month project in a specially configured Aberconwy ward. This was aimed mainly at easing pressure on beds in the main acute hospitals, and it worked really well in freeing up beds in the larger hospitals. Now, last winter—

Janet, can you ask your question, please?

Yes, okay. They wanted to do this again, but apparently, for them to be able to do it with the lack of staff, they needed to register with Care Inspectorate Wales. This just baffles me. So, Deputy Minister, what can you do to ensure that there is greater integration of health and social care? And, if there's a ward in what they used to call the cottage hospitals that will work well in taking off some burden and pressure off the bigger hospitals, can you perhaps work with the health Minister, so that, if they need to be registered at CIW, then fine? But let's get some common sense into practices that see people discharged from hospitals and then given the treatment and support they need at a time when there are very little social care packages left in many constituencies across Wales. Thank you.

Thank you, Janet, very much for that question. Certainly, the health Minister and I are working tirelessly on this issue. I would challenge what you say about there not being any further integration, because certainly as a result of the issues that you’ve referred to in terms of people waiting in hospitals in order to leave there, we created, working with the local authorities and the health boards, an additional nearly 700 beds that were either step-down beds or community packages, to directly address the issue that she raises. And of course, as a result of working to greater health and social care integration we have created the regional integration fund, the RIF fund, which has got an enormous number of projects that are working very closely between health and social care, and in fact north Wales is doing very well on these projects. The programme in north Wales comprised 40 projects across the six national models of care, and the total investment was £43 million. So, I certainly would contest what Janet says about there being no progress on integration. But we do know we’ve got further to go, I absolutely accept that. But we are on the way, and we are making progress. 

Our vision for stroke services and improving outcomes has been set out in the stroke quality statement. The unique circumstances of mid Wales are reflected in plans being taken forward by the national stroke programme, led by the clinical lead for stroke and the stroke programme board. 

Thank you, Minister, for your answer. You will of course know the sparse population of mid Wales, and the time it takes, of course, to get to hospital, especially for specialist services like stroke services, where, of course, time is of the essence in getting patients to hospital. We also know the population of mid Wales, of course, is an older population as well. Whilst those in the east of my constituency are close to the services in England, those in the west are not. So, given the strategic importance of Bronglais hospital’s services for the people of mid Wales, and also Brecon and Radnor, Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire, it is absolutely important, considering the time-critical nature of stroke treatment. I wonder if the Minister could outline some further plans on how those stroke services at Bronglais hospital are going to be sustained and developed? This is, of course, a crucial service that Government, I hope, would support in line with, indeed, as the Minister has mentioned, the stroke quality statement.

Thanks very much. I think it's important that it's clinicians that lead on some of these things. So, it's got to be them that decide, 'Right, this is the most appropriate response in this particular area when a particular circumstance comes up.' So, as a politician it wouldn't be right to second-guess the best way to do that. So, it means that local commissioning, operational delivery, remains in the hands of the health board, but obviously they need to think regionally and cross border, in particular, in the area that you represent. I think what's important here is to ensure that people of all ages have the lowest possible risk. So, we've got to get ahead of the game where we can to reduce the chances of people getting stroke in the first place. We've got to get into this prevention space. That's how we're going to—. We've got to recognise people will have strokes, but the investment going in up front, that's where I think the clinicians need to give us a lead on where best to put our investment. 

And finally, question 8, Vikki Howells. 

We continue to provide sustained funding to support the provision of mental health services. In addition to its ring-fenced mental health allocation, health boards have received an additional £26.5 million of recurrent mental health funding over the last two years to continue to improve mental health support.

Thank you for your answer, Deputy Minister. I recently met with the '111 press 2' team in Cwm Taf Morgannwg, where I was told about the high numbers of people the service had already helped to access mental health support. It was wonderful to meet the team to find out about the different skills that they brought to their roles and to feel their enthusiasm and commitment to what is a really important job. I was impressed that this was all done via a single point of contact, reducing stress for people who need help, and also by the organic way access to the service has grown via word of mouth. What plans does the Welsh Government have, working with local health boards and other partners, to raise awareness of the immediate mental health support available via '111 press 2'?

Can I thank Vikki for her supplementary and say how pleased I am that she has had the opportunity to go and see '111 press 2' in action? I'm absolutely delighted that that service is now operational 24 hours a day in all parts of Wales. At a national level, we've received already over 12,000 calls, and in just Cwm Taf there have been over 650 people who have contacted the service already. It really is 'no wrong door' in action, and that has been made possible by this Government's commitment to prioritise funding for mental health.

The Member is absolutely right that we do need to do what we can to raise awareness of the new service, and there is a full communications campaign planned. I'm going to be making a statement on it here in the Senedd next month, and we'll be doing all that we can to promote it. It is a single point of access, but it's also, vitally, a single point of access for professionals as well, who can get in touch if they are concerned about someone's mental health. So, it really is the embodiment of 'no wrong door' in action, and I'm delighted that the Member has had an opportunity to go and see it for herself.

Thank you to the Minister and Deputy Ministers. 

I've received notification that the Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales wishes to move a motion that the Senedd considers further amendments to the Agriculture (Wales) Bill at Report Stage, in accordance with Standing Order 26.45. I call on the Minister to formally move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. In accordance with Standing Order 26.45, the Senedd is asked to agree to consider further amendments to the Agriculture (Wales) Bill at Report Stage, and I formally move.

I understand that the reason for the motion being laid is to withdraw amendment 55, submitted in my name when we went through Stage 3 of the agriculture Bill last week. While I'm disappointed that this is the case, I understand why, on its own, that amendment is causing some distress to the Government, in terms of delivering on the agriculture Bill. The purpose of the amendment was to ensure that large corporations purchasing Welsh agricultural land and getting public money to plant trees was prohibited in the new agricultural scheme, and I know that there could be concern that new entrants, with this amendment being passed, wouldn't be supported. However, had the whole suite of my amendments been passed when we went through Stage 2, I'm sure that that would have been averted, but I completely understand the reason for this motion here today. Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I call on the Minister to reply.

Thank you. Well, yes, as Sam Kurtz is very well aware, following the Stage 3 debate, amendment 55 was inserted and a new provision in section 9, paragraph 3, 'Further provision about support under section 8', was, therefore, placed in the Bill. It does cause and create really strict restrictions for where financial support is provided, not just the scenario that Sam Kurtz has just presented the Senedd with. The provisions will have significant consequences for the ability of Welsh Ministers to provide support to the farming sector, and that does indeed include new entrants, commons, shared farmers, as well as the wider supply chain and other agricultural businesses.

The Agriculture (Wales) Bill has to work, especially in relation to those beneficiaries whose actions are undertaken in the very best interests of the agricultural sector. The Bill does need to ensure assistance can be provided to the right people, and that does include providing support to new farmers and to those who may choose to farm on common and, of course, tenanted land—that's very important, because so much of our land here in Wales is undertaken by tenant farmers—or, indeed, on land that is owned in whole or in part by them.

I've had some detailed discussions, I just want to assure Members, with stakeholders over the past few days, and they agree with the Government's position that there is a need for the agriculture Bill to work for all farmers, not create barriers to the support that can be provided. Diolch.

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

No topical question has been accepted.

We will therefore move on to the 90-second statements. First of all, Elin Jones.

Here in this Senedd, we regularly debate petitions where 10,000 people or more have signed to support a cause. Imagine a petition of 390,296 signatures, all women, all signed by hand, from every community in Wales, and all collected exactly 100 years ago. This petition was kickstarted at a public conference on the women of Wales and world peace, which took place in Aberystwyth on Tuesday 23 May 1923, 100 years ago yesterday. The gathering was presided over by Mrs Annie Hughes-Griffiths, Chair of the Welsh League of Nations Union. The petition called on the women of America to join the women of Wales to

'hand down to the generations which come after us, the proud heritage of a warless world.'

There were organising committees to collect signatures in every county, and, by early 1924, a delegation of four Welsh women had taken the petition to America on a two-month peace tour, and presented the petition to the US President, Calvin Coolidge. The petition was then kept in the Smithsonian museum, and its story disappeared from our national memory until very recently, and, with considerable effort by peace campaigners and national organisations, all seven miles of the peace petition papers have been returned for the centenary from the Smithsonian to the national library. The signatures will be digitised over the next few months and then we can check whether our mam-gus or aunties signed that glorious petition for peace 100 years ago. And in the spring of next year, when we celebrate the centenary of the petition’s arrival in America, why don’t we debate on the floor of this Senedd the women of Wales’s peace petition of 1923 to 1924? It’s as relevant today as it was then.

Next, John Griffiths.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. This year, the Severn Area Rescue Association, also known as SARA, are marking their fiftieth anniversary. They are a volunteer lifeboat and inland search and rescue charity, with seven lifeboat and rescue stations along the length of the River Severn. Each year, SARA are called out over 100 times. This includes covering callouts in Newport East, along the estuary and River Usk towards the city centre and indeed past my constituency office. Last Friday, I was pleased to join the SARA team to learn more about their operations, their plans for the fiftieth anniversary, and their aspirations going forward.

The Severn estuary and River Usk are hazardous places, with strong currents and fast-changing tides. That’s why the SARA volunteers are highly skilled and trained twice a week, so that, when they respond to a call, they know exactly what they need to do.

Dirprwy Lywydd, I want to put on record my thanks to everyone at SARA, and indeed their sister organisations right across the length and breadth of Wales, for everything they do to keep our communities safe and away from danger. I wish SARA a happy fiftieth anniversary and look forward to working with them further in the future.

And finally, Cefin Campbell.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the villages and towns of Carmarthenshire are now a swathe of red, white and green, as the town of Llandovery prepares to welcome the Urdd National Eisteddfod to the area next week. Could I, therefore, take this opportunity to congratulate the local appeal committees across Carmarthenshire for their tireless efforts over the past few years to raise funds to welcome Europe’s biggest youth festival to the Towy valley, with more than £300,000 having been raised already? And there is no doubt that there will be an unrivalled welcome in the town of Williams Pantycelyn, Twm Sion Cati and Ficer Pritchard, with the weather looking very favourable to welcome Mr Urdd and the tens of thousands of young competitors from all over Wales and beyond. There is no doubt that the festival will be a huge boost to the Welshness of the town and the county, and that in the face of a number of challenges faced by the language in our rural communities.

And in speaking of Llandovery, it would be impossible not to congratulate the town’s rugby club on their success last weekend as they won the Welsh premier league cup for the first time in their history. And although the game was played here in Cardiff, it was the drovers team that won, and I understand that the celebrations are still going on in the town of Llandovery. So, hearty congratulations to everyone, and I hope to see you all at the Urdd Eisteddfod next week, where a warm welcome awaits you in Carmarthenshire.

The next item is a motion to suspend Standing Orders to allow a debate on NNDM8276. And I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move the motion. Darren Millar.

I move.

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

The next item is a motion to elect Chairs and Members to the Wales COVID-19 Inquiry Special Purpose Committee. I call on a member of the Business Committee to formally move. Darren Millar.

I move.

Just a few words from me. We will support this motion today, because, after all, we co-submitted the motion requesting the establishment of such a committee. It's important to note, however, our shock once again that the establishment of a cross-party committee, which will work across parties, has happened as a result of an agreement between Labour and the Conservatives.

I note that, whilst I questioned the circumstances in which this deal was made, both Conservatives and Labour chose to add the word 'grubby', and both responded with a denial that there had been a 'grubby' deal—their choice of words. And now we see, of course, that the deal even involves a very unusual joint chairmanship. Now, we know what people are asking: 'What are Labour, responsible for the COVID response in Wales, and the Conservatives, responsible for the UK COVID response, trying to achieve here by keeping such a very tight control on this special purpose committee?' But as I say, we supported having the committee; Adam Price, I know, will make a very valuable contribution to the work of the committee; and whilst this is not what we wanted—we still believe that we need a full independent Welsh COVID inquiry—our priority now is to seek answers for those COVID bereaved, who deserve answers, and to ensure that lessons are learnt.

I call on Darren Millar to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would remind everybody that the reason that this motion has been tabled today is because of an agreement at the cross-party Business Committee, and that is why it is on the agenda. There have been no 'grubby deals', as Rhun ap Iorwerth would like to describe them; there was a transparent debate in this Chamber, which agreed to take forward a piece of work between the leader of the opposition—the only opposition, I would add—in this Chamber and the First Minister. That discussion took place, the outcome of those discussions was that this committee should be formed, and that there should be a co-chairing arrangement. I would draw a distinction between co-chairing arrangements and joint committee chairing arrangements, which is something that Plaid Cymru itself has asked for in the past. Indeed, there was a suggestion from Plaid Cymru that the Finance Committee should be co-chaired, for example, between the Conservatives and Plaid, in the past. So, these are novel arrangements. I trust that this committee will be able to get on with its work. There are quite rightly, understandably, many questions that the COVID-bereaved families and other people across Wales need to have answers to, and that committee, working with the UK-wide inquiry, will hope to deliver the answers that people need.

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

Item 5 today is a debate on the general principles of the Food (Wales) Bill, and I call on the Member in charge to move the motion. Peter Fox.

Thank you, Deputy Llywydd. May I first remind Members of my declaration of interest? As you know, I am a farmer.

Deputy Llywydd, I'm delighted to move the motion on the agenda in my name, and to open this debate. I'd like to start by thanking the Commission for the support it wrapped around me, and specific thanks go to Gareth Rogers, my Bill team lead, Martin Jennings, Elfyn Henderson, Božo Lugonja, Samiwel Davies and Aled Evans, and also to my own team, Tomos Povey, Jonathan Kelley-Edwards, and my past member of staff, Tyler Walsh. I want to also thank stakeholders and colleagues from across Wales and beyond, many of whom have repeatedly pushed food onto the agenda for years, and have continued to support me to deliver a Bill that will encourage the development of a Welsh vision for the food system, delivering on the wealth of evidence and research that clearly shows that, as Food Policy Alliance Cymru state,

'Food is Foundational but our Food System is unequal—due in part to lack of policy coherence and accountability'.

Before I move on to the general principles behind the Bill, I need to be clear that this Bill is about more than just food, and I worry that some haven't fully appreciated that. It's been said by some Members that I've gone much further with this Bill than originally stated, and it's been suggested that maybe I should have put less on the face of the Bill. But if I had, that wouldn't have delivered the wider system change needed, the enhanced governance of the system that's so important to develop. As Torfaen council stated in their consultation response, the Bill

'would ensure that local initiatives are aligned with national commitments and vice versa, avoid duplication, increase efficiency and add value to our community wealth.'

They go on:

'It is proven difficult to align our work to the wider policy agenda in Wales without a Food Bill or associated policy.'

Then there's been the conflation by others between food and agriculture—two very interlinked terms, obviously, but two very different things. And I've heard that we don't need the Bill because we have the new Agriculture (Wales) Bill going through the Senedd, even though both Bills look at different sides of the same coin—you can't really deliver one without the other. How do we develop a more economically resilient agricultural sector, and encourage the producers to see the value of investing in sustainable land management? Well, in part, by developing domestic supply chains to provide greater opportunities for producers. How do we begin this? Well, by getting public bodies to start focusing more on their own role within the food system, and, as a start, ensuring that there's a clear direction of travel that's been set by the Government. 

Looking back, perhaps I should have called this the 'food system Bill' instead of the 'Food (Wales) Bill', because I always intended for it to look at the food system more widely. Put simply, the objective behind my Bill is to build a framework that enables a coherent, consistent and strategic cross-societal approach to policy and practice on all aspects of the food system. With the principles of resilience, sustainability and equality at its heart, this Bill looks to put the Welsh food system onto a healthier footing, so that Wales is firmly placed in the driving seat of progressive policy making, by joining up the different parts of the complex food system. And by providing that long-term statutory framework, we can enable the food system to flourish away from political pressures, and within the lens of the well-being goals and the five ways of working. To me, these are principles that we should all be easily able to support.

On the other hand, there is a big difference between being supportive of such principles and actually doing something to move us forward in our pursuit of them, because, as we know, the Welsh Government doesn't support the Bill, as things stand, and unless the Minister changes her mind today—and I hope she still will, but she won't—. Again, I reiterate my desire to work with the Government, and indeed, all colleagues here, to deliver this legislation in a way that is acceptable to the Senedd. But we can only do that if we move to Stage 2 and vote for this Bill today.

So, how does the Bill deliver on those principles I've mentioned and make the difference that is needed? Well, the Bill establishes a primary food goal to provide affordable, healthy and economically, environmentally and socially sustainable food for the people of Wales. This is that vision for Wales that I spoke about earlier. To help deliver that vision, there are secondary food goals with detailed descriptions of what should be delivered and targets for delivery set by Welsh Ministers.

The Bill will place a duty on Welsh Ministers to make and publish a national food strategy. Evidence that came from Stage 1 scrutiny of the Bill was overwhelmingly in favour of a national food strategy. But there were also strong views expressed that a national food strategy must be anchored in legislation to ensure that future Ministers and future Governments would be bound by the duty to deliver it for the longer term. Similarly, there was wide support for the inclusion of local food plans in the Bill, that flow from the food goals and the national strategy, that would ensure that food policy was delivered at a local level in a consistent and targeted way.

To ensure accountability, the Bill sets reviewing and reporting duties for Welsh Ministers and public bodies. This will ensure that things are being done properly, and if not, that there is an explanation of why and how that can be changed. And, of course, underpinning all of this, the Bill will establish a Welsh food commission, as an independent body to promote and facilitate the achievement of what is required in the Bill. The food commission would also provide independent advice and guidance to Welsh Ministers and public bodies on their duties. However, I acknowledge and understand that there isn't universal support for every element of this Bill. 

That leads me on to what happens if the Bill doesn't pass. Can we rely on the Future Generations Commissioner for Wales to do the work of the proposed Welsh food commission? No, we can't. The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 does not provide the strategic food policy and planning framework, as set out in my Bill. None of the well-being goals and indicators contain any meaningful reference to food. This is also why the new social partnership duty in the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Bill cannot cover food-related issues, and it risks watering down the intention of that Bill to very little in the way of meaningful change. Meanwhile, the commissioner's offices are already stretched in terms of workload and resource. In fact, the former commissioner heavily supported the need for this Bill.

It's also been argued that a much-awaited community food strategy might be able to deliver some of what the Bill intends. But it's hardly out of the starting blocks yet, and won't touch anywhere near what the food Bill will address.

Could we, instead, rely on the Food Standards Agency in Wales? Again, no. The FSA is under huge resource pressures relating to food safety and standards, which it is responsible for, as well as managing the post-EU landscape. Yes, the Food Standards Act 1999 enables the FSA to develop policy relating to food safety or other interests of consumers, but the FSA does not interact with public bodies about things like targets or localised food policies that the local food plans would facilitate. However, I recognise that the wording around the Welsh food commission's functions could be made clearer to avoid an unintended overlap or confusion with the Food Standards Agency. I intend to bring forward an amendment to this effect at Stage 2. 

Finally, the status quo is not an option. Responsibility for food policy is scattered right across Welsh Government ministerial portfolios. Different Ministers are doing different things in different parts of the food system, and it's clear that there needs to be a more accountable framework for food policy. To exemplify this further, look at the examples of where food policy hasn't been joined up enough, as suggested by Food Policy Alliance Cymru, for instance, including the contradiction between the drinks strategy, which promotes the alcohol industry, and the public health campaign to reduce alcohol consumption, or the inability to join Big Bocs Bwyd with things like the food and fun initiative, Nutrition Skills for Life and the income maximisation plan. A list of policy areas on food was presented in one of the committees during the process by the Minister, but it's not the same as an integrated, joined-up strategy for the food system.

Deputy Llywydd, I would like to thank each committee for their work in scrutinising the Bill. I appreciated the way they interacted with me and my team, and I've actually thoroughly enjoyed the process. Whilst I won't do so again here, I have responded in detail to each recommendation and encourage Members to read my responses. I have noted, accepted in principle, or accepted the majority of the recommendations that have been made following this. I intend to bring forward a number of amendments at Stage 2 to respond to these. For example, I welcome the ETRA committee's recommendation to strengthen the food goals and the associated monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. I also welcome the LJC committee's constructive feedback and suggestions for amendments, and their call for statutory guidance to outline how the food Bill would work with the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015. I also welcome the call from the Finance Committee for the Government to do more to provide information to Members. My team and I did the very best we could to estimate costs, but it's very difficult to do so without having considerable discussions with governmental officials, and that, we know, would require ministerial approval.

To conclude, Deputy Llywydd, this afternoon I will be voting for a Welsh vision of a food system that meets the needs of current and future generations, a food system that delivers resilience, sustainable development and equality. I truly hope other Members will do the same. I commend this motion and the Food (Wales) Bill to the Senedd.

I call on the Chair of the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee—Paul Davies.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. This is the first debate on a Member Bill in this Senedd. I would like to open my contribution by thanking Peter Fox, and the team who supported him, for their hard work on the Bill and for their contributions to our committee's scrutiny. As a veteran of the Member Bill process, I know exactly how much effort they will have put into developing and drafting this Bill. The power to legislate, bestowed on this place by the people of Wales, is a great responsibility. As such, it is extremely important that we use this power wisely.

To venture into the world of hammer-related similes, legislation is a sledgehammer and we need to be sure we are not cracking nuts. Whilst we have the power to legislate, we need to also look at every other possible solution before using legislation, to ensure we avoid holding a hammer and treating every problem as a nail.

As such, the committee spent a lot of Stage 1 examining the need for legislation. We heard very compelling arguments around the fruits that could be borne from a joined-up food policy, and an invest-to-save argument that this Bill would reduce burdens on public services through positive outcomes such as a reduction in obesity. For example, we heard from Simon Wright of the University of Wales Trinity Saint David and Wright's Food Emporium, who told us that existing food policy and legislation is an area where he thinks we've got a serious problem with working in silos.

However, we also heard that the Bill could be overly bureaucratic, and an expensive way to address the issues it seeks to resolve and that it may not deliver the desired outcomes. And so, after examining all the evidence available to us, whilst Members unanimously supported the policy objectives of the Bill, we could not come to a unified position on the need for legislation to deliver these objectives. As a result, the committee cannot give Members a recommendation on how you should vote today.

Whilst the committee could not come to a position on the need for legislation, we do agree that food policy is an area the Welsh Government needs to focus on and prioritise. It was very clear from the evidence received that there is at least the perception of misalignment of food policy, with departments working in silos. The Welsh Government must act to improve its approach to the food system. As Peter described, this Food (Wales) Bill sets out a series of food goals. In response, the Minister sent the committee a letter outlining the Welsh Government's food policies against those goals. This was the first time members of the committee had seen the Welsh Government's food policies set out in one place, and we very much appreciated seeing the Welsh Government's policies set out clearly against the Bill's goals. The committee also welcomed the inclusion of food goals in the Bill, although we did believe the goals as drafted were too sectoral. Those goals would be underpinned by targets set by the Welsh Government. The committee also supports the inclusion of the targets in the Bill. However, we feel that there must be a strong mechanism in place to evaluate and measure progress.

The Bill would establish a food commission—something that would be no small task. Members heard compelling evidence for and against the food commission and could not come to a settled position on its establishment. However, Members feel strongly that something should be established to co-ordinate food policy. We support the Minister’s suggestion of an internal Welsh Government board, or alternatively a new position within the future generations commissioner’s office with responsibility for oversight of the food system.

A key area of the Bill that Members are very supportive of is the national food strategy. For example, Dr Robert Bowen of Cardiff Business School told the committee that a strategy for the food and drink industry is essential, especially considering the challenges that the industry faces in Wales at present. This was the area of the Bill that had the most stakeholder support. Even stakeholders who did not back the Bill in general supported the call for a national food strategy of some kind. Therefore, it's important that the Welsh Government listens to those views and seeks to establish a national food strategy with the aim of joining up food policy.

The Bill also includes provisions that would require certain public bodies to produce local food plans. Members support the inclusion of the food plans in the Bill and have suggested amendments to strengthen local procurement of food and the involvement of community-based organisations in the plans' development. We hope the plans would build on and complement the good work already being undertaken at a local level, for example by local food partnerships across Wales.

The Minister has made it very clear that she will not support this Bill. While carrying out our scrutiny, we were very aware that this increased the likelihood that the Bill would fall. Peter Fox has uncovered some major issues within the Welsh food system. It would be a crying shame if the Bill were to fall and if all this work, from across the sector, were to be left unresolved.

As a result, our report makes recommendations to improve the Bill, but also policy recommendations to the Welsh Government that should be taken forward if the Bill falls. Regardless of whether the Bill becomes law or falls, the Welsh food system will be greatly improved over the coming years as result of Peter’s and his team's work.

I would like to close my contribution today, Dirprwy Lywydd, with some notes of thanks. Firstly, I would like to thank Darren Millar and Vikki Howells for stepping in and chairing the committee for part of Stage 1 while I was away. I would also like to thank all the stakeholders who took time to give the committee valuable evidence for our report. And, finally, I would like to thank the team who supported the committee through our scrutiny. I look forward, therefore, to hearing other Members’ views on this Bill. Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd.

I call on the Chair of the Finance Committee, Peredur Owen Griffiths.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Before I respond on behalf of the committee, obviously, with food businesses in the news at the moment in south-east Wales, maybe this Bill might have a bearing on those businesses going forward.

But I am here today as Chair of the Finance Committee, so, thank you for the opportunity, and I welcome the opportunity to participate in this Stage 1 debate on the first Member-proposed Bill to be introduced in this Senedd.

Our report comes to three conclusions and makes seven recommendations. Given the time available today, I'll focus on our key findings. I'd also like to thank Peter Fox for providing his response to our report before today's debate. As we've heard, this is a framework Bill that will allow the Welsh Government to establish a Welsh food commission and develop a national food strategy and local food plans.

As a result, it will be a matter for the Welsh Government to agree the scale and scope of many of the elements of the Bill, and therefore, many of the costs are unknown until the Bill is implemented. For this reason, we are unable to draw a conclusion as to whether the resources contained in the regulatory impact assessment are reasonable.

The Member in charge has said that the Bill was deliberately drafted as a framework Bill to give flexibility to the Welsh Government around the implementation of key provisions. However, we have been critical of similar approaches taken by the Welsh Government on recent legislation, and we cannot make exceptions for a Member Bill, even when the Member is a member of the Finance Committee.

All Bills introduced into the Senedd should be accompanied by the best possible estimate of costs and benefits to enable us to make a decision as to whether the resources are adequate to deliver the legislation. Nonetheless, we do have sympathy with the Member in charge, as we believe there could have been more engagement from the Minister. Therefore, we have recommended that, in future, the Welsh Government commits to assisting individual Members or committees proposing legislation by providing relevant financial information prior to the Bill's introduction. The opportunity for non-government Bills to be introduced is so rare that we do not consider this to be an arduous requirement. Before turning to specific recommendations, I would like to make it clear that, should the Bill proceed today, we would expect to see the information requested included in an updated RIA following Stage 2 proceedings.

It is estimated that the cost of setting up and operating the food commission will be between £0.75 million and £1.5 million per annum. This is based on a similar piece of legislation being implemented in Scotland—the Good Food Nation (Scotland) Act 2022—and the average cost of running the office of existing Welsh commissioners. The Minister has raised concerns that the costs may be underestimated, based on the latest calculations provided for in the Scottish Act. However, in response to those claims, the Member in charge suggests that the costs of implementing specific policy areas of the Bill cannot simply be measured by comparing the figures from Scotland without comparing other factors, such as how different provisions will work in practice. Our view is that further consideration is given to the estimates based on the latest information available. I'm therefore pleased that the Member in charge has accepted recommendation 2 and will reassess and update the costs based on the latest information provided by the Scottish Government.

Under the Bill, the Welsh Government and the food commission will jointly create and deliver a national food strategy. The RIA fails to provide the cost savings from the Bill, stating that this will not be known until the national strategy policies and goals are formed. Cost savings arising from the Bill should be a key element of the options appraisal process, and it is disappointing that this has not been the case. We therefore expect the strategy to be accompanied by a robust impact assessment with a commitment that the Senedd will have the opportunity to scrutinise the costs associated with it.

Finally, Dirprwy Lywydd, the RIA also lacks information on the cost of implementing local food plans. The Member in charge has agreed part of recommendation 6 to update the RIA with details of the public bodies that are already implementing such plans. However, it's disappointing that he has rejected the second part of our recommendation to use this information to calculate a potential range of cost. Whilst we appreciate that costs may vary across local authorities, we believe the Member in charge should attempt to estimate a cost range for implementing these plans. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd. I intend to speak as chair of the committee first, and close with a personal contribution as a backbencher, if I may. 

Our committee took evidence from Peter as the Member in charge and from the Minister in January, and we laid our report on 11 May. We made 10 recommendations, nine specifically for Peter. And can we just take the opportunity to thank Peter and his team for appearing in front of us? It's no mean feat, as a backbencher, to bring forward legislation at any time. So, thank you for that, and to the Minister as well.  

We followed our very standard approach to scrutiny, as the other chairs have done. So, we sought to identify how the Bill could be improved as a proposal for a new law, should it proceed. As part of that process, we considered how the Bill would interact with the 2015 well-being of future generations Act, which Peter has alluded to, leading us to recommend that the Bill should be amended to provide that statutory guidance must be issued to public bodies on how the duties imposed on them by the Bill interact with existing duties under the 2015 Act.

On specific sections of the Bill, we made three recommendations on the primary and secondary food goals, including in particular that the primary food goal in section 2 should be removed and that public bodies should be provided with comprehensive information about the secondary food goals and how they should be interpreted.

We also made further recommendations on the food targets in sections 4 and 5. We recommended that amendments are tabled to the Bill to propose that regulations must be made and come into force within two years of section 4 coming into force, and also to provide more certainty about who should be consulted. We further recommended that local food plans under section 17 should be published within three years rather than two years of the Bill coming into force.

Finally, we made two recommendations seeking clarity about consulting bodies that could be removed from the list of public bodies in section 22 and to which the Bill applies. I note that Peter rejected these last two recommendations, and our recommendation to remove the primary food goal from the Bill, whilst accepting all the others. Members can find further information in the detail of our report.

Let me turn to some personal reflections on this, because food and food policy is something that interests a lot of us, and myself included as a former Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs Minister with a lot of involvement in this as well. There's a hell of a lot of good in this Bill, there really is, but there's a lot in this Bill, full stop—there's a lot. I really do commend the ambition, I genuinely do, but—and it's a big 'but'—let me go through some of them, and this is a personal reflection, not as Chair.

You've really shot for the stars within this, and part of that is to do with the consultation, the wide engagement that you've had, and everybody has put in their two-penn'orth, and there's a lot within the Bill. That is great, and it's high ambition—you shot for the stars, but it causes some complications and some contradictions as well. It's comprehensive; it's all-singing, all-dancing, aims to be the one ring to bind them all, as Tolkien might say. But, you've talked about system change, governance overhauls that come with this. There's widespread engagement, and there's probably more to come if this Bill proceeds as it is; it covers every Government department; it's cross-societal, as Peter rightly said there; it touches Ministers in every department; it will look at setting up a new commission, which is quite interesting based on some of the discussions we've had about commissions and the merits and otherwise of this, but a new commission; it will have obligations and other public duties. We have unclear costs, and as has been alluded to, also unclear cost savings as well, which, if a Bill like this, of this scale, was coming forward, you'd expect them to be there; it overlaps with existing plans and actions to some extent; it may not deliver the desired outcomes, as was mentioned by Paul in his contribution there from the Economy, Trade and Rural Affairs Committee; and it will probably require diversion of a significant scale of current resource within Government and curtailment of some actions that are currently ongoing—those are the implications.

However—however—despite all of that, there's a hell of a lot of good in this Bill, which is quite frustrating, in some ways. The first thing is, you've already moved the dial on this—I think you've firmly put this on the political agenda, and partly through bringing that big coalition together. So, I would say to the Minister, if this Bill doesn't proceed, then what can be done sooner, and what is already in progress that can be strengthened or augmented, including the community food strategy, but other aspects that might be taken forward without any legislation, but picking up the good points from within the Bill? How can we work with that great food coalition outside that's been built now to build on this momentum? How do we define what we want from food policy? I talked about the contradictions—the grand coalition you've built sometimes have competing, conflicting objectives of what they want out of food policy. One of the things we need to do is nail that down on a Wales basis and say, 'This is the way we agree to go forward', with no prevarication, with no ambiguity, 'This is what we intend to do.'

So, identify what we can move on fast without legislation, work with the coalition, identify where laws may be needed—and let me just say, that could be on the right to food; it could be on food justice issues and tackling food hunger, things that we and others and yourself—I've run out of time—and the co-operative party have—. So, you've shot for the stars; I think you'll get at least the moon on this, whether it passes or not today, but I am worried about—. This is a Government Bill; you've put forward a Government Bill. This is not a classic backbencher's Bill, and I applaud that ambition, but short of the Minister saying, 'We're going to take this on and redivert policy', there are challenges.

I call on the Minister for Rural Affairs and North Wales, and Trefnydd—Lesley Griffiths.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I very much welcome the opportunity to respond to the committee's reports and present the Welsh Government's position on the general principles of the Food (Wales) Bill.

I'd like to begin by paying tribute to Peter Fox and thanking him for his constructive engagement both with myself and with my officials throughout the development of the Bill. I think Peter's brought a real energy to this important debate on the future of our food system, and I know you've brought many people together in sharing their ideas. I want to assure Members that we must build on the momentum that Peter and other Members who have long campaigned on these issues have helped to create, and I'm sure there'll be many of the ideas that have come forward through your work and the debate in the Senedd today that will merit further attention from Government and the many different players in our local and global food systems.

In considering the motion before the Senedd today, however, I believe that the best way to build on that momentum is not to give further consideration to this Bill. I support the broad aims of the Bill, as I believe many across this Siambr do, and I believe that those broad aims are consistent with the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, which was passed by this Senedd, the lens of which is applied to every decision I take, as a Minister in Welsh Government, in relation to food and every other matter. Further legislation in this area to require a detailed plan-setting framework, as this Bill proposes, however, risks adding complexity and reducing the resource available to address the challenges that Peter and others have rightly identified. It does not add to the tools already available to pursue food systems that are fit for future generations.

The reports by Senedd committees highlighted just some of the tensions that it would create with existing legislation and public bodies. I believe that the action we must pursue to confront the challenges across food systems with the urgency that they require is to use the powers that we already have, not only the powers available to Government, but working with public bodies, communities, food producers and other businesses, who all bring their own ideas and abilities to the table. There are many examples of communities, businesses and public bodies in Wales that are reshaping the food system with local and global impact, and I'm sure that every Member could highlight such initiatives in their constituency or region. The way they've shaped the food system is not as the result of a top-down directive, but it really comes from the people and the circumstances that exist in those communities. I believe that a community-focused approach to reshaping the food system, using our convening power as a Government and our ability to support local action, is the best way to address the challenges that have been identified. This can be more powerful than could be achieved by being overly reliant on bureaucratic means. The danger here is that, in the promise of a perfect legislative solution, we are diverted from more immediate and inclusive ways of achieving our aims.

The way in which the work of the Food Commission in England has struggled to move forward, whilst food poverty has soared, illustrates the difficulties of taking the approach put forward in this Bill. Clearly, for a plan to work, it needs to be focused on a challenge that it has some chance of addressing. It needs to properly engage all of those who need to be invested in its success. Whilst the Senedd and Welsh Government do not hold all of the levers to shape the full extent of the food systems on which we all rely, we can and do influence them in decisions we make. Food systems are also powerfully shaped by our food producers and other businesses. Consumer choices and community action also shape the way in which food is produced and shared. I agree there are opportunities for us as Government to use our abilities, in a concerted way, to shape the food system, and my belief is the most powerful way we can do that is not in the level of detail we can produce in a plan. Rather, it's more to do with our ability to support that community-level action, including by mobilising the support of the public sector and by helping them work with our Welsh food producers and the wider food sector. The Welsh Government and the Senedd have taken a consistent interest in how to make our food systems fairer, greener and stronger.

Delivering Wales's world-leading recycling record means that we are the first UK nation to have universal food waste collection for all households, to achieve sustaining emissions reductions and to stop vast quantities of waste going to landfill. This success relied on a combination of Government, industry and communities working together, with each having a role to bring about that lasting change. We've delivered universal free school meals, and during the pandemic, we created the Local Places for Nature scheme, which supported the creation or enhancement of green spaces, in areas of Wales where access to good-quality green space is limited, and that includes hundreds of community greening projects. These are policies advocated by many of those who are campaigning for a fairer food system, and reflect ideas endorsed by the Food Commission in England, yet they have been delivered in Wales without a reliance on a complex food system-planning framework.

In England, they've prioritised the production of a national food strategy, and despite having brought together a food commission, they've since disbanded it. Yet, they may still have to wait a decade or more for these important interventions in our food systems to be delivered there. And it's clear that the commission absorbed vast resources and yet that did not enable them to deliver change in the food system. In Wales, unlike other EU countries, we do have a future generations commissioner, and the legislation underpinning him, and I do not see the need for another costly commission here in Wales. There simply is not that level of funding available. I've already met with the new future generations commissioner to see how he can help us and what he can do to look at the food system and be a critical friend to us here in Government.

So this does not lead me to the conclusion that the best or only way to reshape our food system for the better is with this Bill. I believe the Bill proposal has created a powerful opportunity for the Welsh public and the Senedd to debate these issues. However, I believe it draws the wrong lesson from the English experience. The lesson we should draw, I believe, is by working in that particularly Welsh and collaborative way to have a focus on the people and institutions in every one of our communities, and what we can do to facilitate change from the ground up. Wales can deliver real and lasting positive change in our food systems and in people's lives.

Drawing on that lesson, and on the basis of work carried out by the Senedd committees in responding to Peter's Bill proposal, if the Bill is not taken forward today, I undertake to publish and update periodically a cross-portfolio document for stakeholders that would summarise our wide range of food policies and how they join up across policy areas and the well-being goals. I've also agreed with the First Minister that he will chair a cross-Government forum so that we can ensure that the efforts we make within Government are subject to appropriate oversight that allows for better policy join-up to be achieved and communicated, and to report back to the Senedd. Because I take very seriously the concerns raised during scrutiny that Welsh Government policies in relation to food are not sufficiently joined up and that Ministers work in silos. We can look at what we can develop from that cross-Government forum and see what we can do in relation to a strategy.

I believe that this can support the Senedd's ongoing interest in these issues and help enable wider public scrutiny of the way in which we as a Government are working to influence food systems for the better—not with a centralised single plan for every element of our food system, but by enabling greater Senedd scrutiny and public involvement. 

So, finally, Deputy Presiding Officer, I would urge all Members to continue to engage with me and with the people of Wales on this very important subject so that we can achieve more together, and to allow us the best opportunity to do that, I believe it is right for Members to vote against the motion today. Diolch yn fawr. 

I'm very grateful for the opportunity to speak in this afternoon's debate, but can I first begin by thanking Peter Fox and his team for their hard work and commitment to this piece of legislation? It made for very interesting committee sessions, scrutinising someone from my own benches for the first time, but I must commend Peter for his openness and honesty during those sessions. In fact, the way Peter answered questions at committee, he would make a fine Welsh Government Minister. 

So, what do I believe Peter is seeking to achieve with the introduction of his food Bill? I think it's transformational food system change—change that would benefit the whole food supply chain from the producers to the processors, and, importantly, to the consumer. By seeking to develop a resilient food policy framework, we can better protect our food sovereignty and, as we've already heard this afternoon, enhance consumer choice, eliminate needless food waste, tackle food poverty and bolster our efforts to fight climate change.

And as Peter said in his opening remarks, the time to act is now. Putin's illegal and barbaric invasion of Ukraine has shown that food sovereignty is critical to enhancing our own nation's security. We've seen first-hand the impact that geopolitics can have on our own domestic supply chain, the enormous rise in food production input costs, and food inflation hitting a staggering 19.2 per cent, a pressure felt right across the western world, 21.2 per cent in Germany, 16.6 per cent in Spain and 15.9 per cent in France. 

These challenges have direct consequences on our entire economy, from the farmer seeking to cultivate their crops to the consumer in the supermarket. If these circumstances continue to go unchecked, then our failure to act, to support this critical legislation and its aims, risks undermining Wales's collective resilience against some of the country's biggest challenges. And I believe that's why Peter Fox's food Bill is important and incredibly timely. To address these monumental challenges, we need a long-term statutory framework policy that recognises the complexities of our food system, that takes into account every single actor, from farm gate to plate. That's what Peter's food Bill does.

We need a collective food vision strategy that brings all partners together around the decision-making table to ensure that we have a transparent framework that takes into account the responsibility of every Welsh Government department, be that the Minister for Economy, rural affairs, social justice or climate change. That is what Peter's food Bill does.

And we need a national food strategy that is anchored in legislation, that has guaranteed, statutory safeguards that ensure everyone has access to top quality home-grown Welsh produce. That's what Peter's food Bill does. By working in parallel to the Welsh Government's Agriculture (Wales) Bill and the sustainable farming scheme, we can enact an all-encompassing food strategy that safeguards and stabilises Wales's food supply chain to the benefit of everyone. 

Having sat through committee sessions and listened to the witnesses, it is clear that all evidence points to the need for a transformational food system change. Whilst there was some disagreement on how this would be enacted, every witness argued that this effort needs to be pursued by some form of Welsh food champion, a figurehead to lead Wales's food story, or a food tsar overseeing how we procure our food. While there were different ideas as to how a food commission or commissioner would operate, or its structure, it was clear that there's a need for someone to be that champion, to be that figurehead.

So, with the agriculture Bill nearing the end of its legislative journey, the Food (Wales) Bill can be that final piece of the jigsaw, working one with the other to mutually strengthen their combined efforts. For too long, we've taken food production and its security for granted and been complacent with a Welsh food strategy. This is not just an opportunity to change tack, but an opportunity to develop the strategy that secures our food sovereignty for generations to come. It's with that that I would urge all Members to support Peter Fox this afternoon. Diolch yn fawr.

This Bill is not just about food production; it's definitely about a whole-system approach, and I very much thank Peter Fox for all of the work he's done. How could anybody not be in favour of the primary purpose of providing affordable, healthy and economically, environmentally and socially sustainable food?

On the secondary objectives, I agree that we must develop people's food skills, and not just in schools. At least six in 10 people never cook a meal from scratch, relying either on a takeaway or a ready meal. What's the problem with that? In short, it is killing you. Ultra-processed food is both addictive and loaded with additives to either prolong its shelf life or give some taste to poor-quality ingredients. We really are ultra-processed people.

So, I'm not surprised that the Food and Drink Federation don't want this Bill, as most of their members are involved in the ultra-processed game. The processors and retailers spend billions on devising new ways to hook people on their product rather than a rival product, and there are huge profits to be made. But the few large companies that dominate the landscape—far larger than any Welsh Government—are disinclined to share the rewards with the farmers, the people who produce the food.

It is quite challenging to buy food that has not been adulterated in some way with an additive to extend its shelf life. It's difficult to wean people off their addiction, because people eat more than they should partly because of its addictive properties, but also because food that lacks nourishment leaves people still feeling hungry.

The NHS now spends 12 per cent of its budget—over £1 billion—on caring for people with diabetes. That has gone up from 10 per cent a few years ago and it's due to increase to 17 per cent, so that's over £1.5 billion at today's prices. I'm sure you could all think of better ways of spending that money, if only we could halt this epidemic, and that's before you even talk about all of the other things that are diseases that are food related. We cannot afford to go on like this. Peter's Bill has highlighted the problem and articulated some of the changes required. 

But beating our obesogenic food environment can't just be the work of the ministry of rural affairs and the sustainable land management programme. The challenge is miles bigger than that, and, as has already been pointed out, this affects every single Minister on the front bench. They, in some way or another, are responsible for food policy.

So, the best efforts are being made at the moment by the education Minister, who has made a very good start on rolling out universal free school meals. Because this isn't about serving up junk food to our children so that they get something, this is about having nourishing, good food to give children, the next generation, the taste for proper food. I very much applaud his backing local firms fund to encourage local authorities to procure fresh ingredients. Healthy, sustainable Welsh food on children's plates—what's not to like in that? But he simply can't do this on his own.

We need more new entrants into horticulture. Existing farmers don't particularly want to learn these new skills, and that means it's a planning matter—we have to ensure that Julie James is protecting arable land from being built on—and it has to be an important ingredient of the foundational economy. We need new skills and we need the recruitment of new people into this important market.

This programme of focus in school meals has to be replicated in our food procurement for hospitals and care homes. If not, why not? It requires that whole-system change, which isn't really the role of a private Member's Bill. You simply haven't got the ability to completely turn around the Government. The First Minister does have that power, and I think the news that he is prepared to convene a summit to discuss this really significant issue is very, very important.

I've never been a fan of a food commission; we don't have time for that. This is so urgent. We already have the well-being of future generations commissioner, whose job it is to join up the dots. What I do think we need to do is to use the powers that the Welsh Government already has to appoint a person to the future generations commissioner's advisory panel whose specific remit is to be the food champion, because that person would then sit alongside the children's commissioner, the older people's—

Jenny, conclude now, please.

—commissioner and all the other people who are the very significant people. If this Bill does not proceed, we cannot use it as an excuse for further inaction. We have to ensure that we have whole-system change in our approach to food.

I want to begin my contribution by congratulating Peter Fox on bringing this Bill to this point on its journey, and I do want to take a moment to express our general support for this Bill once again. Plaid Cymru wants to see a Wales where everyone has easy access to nutritious food that has been produced sustainably and in a way that ensures a fair income for farmers and all workers in the food sector.

We know what needs to happen to deliver this: we need a systematic approach that tackles the serious deficiencies in the infrastructure of our food sector at the moment. But the reality is that the current policy landscape in food in Wales is too patchy and that there isn't an inclusive vision for food in Wales at a national or a local level. I welcome the commitment to developing a community food strategy as a step towards putting that right, but, as things stand, this will be a community strategy, so gaps in the policy landscape remain. Further, there is no fit-for-purpose delivery structure in order to deliver this vision, because different departments of Government are doing different things in silos.

As far as I know, there isn't a single body or department within Government that's responsible for holistically and strategically co-ordinating action in this area. That's why we on these benches believe that we need to establish a food commission to facilitate this, as well as the other commitments, some of them consistent with the Bill before us today, in order to deliver our clear and long-established vision for the food sector in Wales.

This Bill must ensure that healthy eating is encouraged by monitoring access to healthy food in our most disadvantaged communities, and ensuring that the food system is linked with other sectors, for example by ensuring that cookery is on the curriculum and that this includes local produce and healthy recipes.

As well as introducing free school meals for all primary school children, which is to be warmly welcomed, it would be appropriate for a food system created as a result of this Bill to ensure that food and its production are rooted in the lives of our schools, with contracts procured locally wherever possible so that children can learn where their food comes from and develop the habit of eating nutritious, locally produced food early on in their lives, which will mean that they are healthier, with benefits to the economy and the environment.

The Welsh Government has an important part to play in the work of changing the food culture of Wales, and this Bill should be an opportunity to do that. One area where this clearly needs to happen is our fisheries sector, in terms of aquaculture and seafood. Now the sector in Wales has an opportunity to develop and to contribute to the objective of Wales being in the vanguard in producing sustainable food. Wales is surrounded by the sea and our seas are abundant with produce that could feed the nation sustainably, but, at the moment, the sector is on its knees. Unfortunately, we as a nation have lost the taste for the nutritious produce of our seas, and this Bill gives us an opportunity to rebuild this sector.

As we discuss expanding and enhancing our food sector, we must consider the needs in terms of training too. The possibilities in developing our food sector in Wales are numerous, and a broad range of opportunities exist to modernise our food system by using new technologies and by investing in R&D. In order to do all of this, we will need a workforce with the skills and experience to maintain the sector. It would be good to hear the Minister’s response to these points also.

Plaid Cymru supports this Bill for the numerous reasons that I’ve outlined in my contribution and more. I would encourage every party in the Chamber today to support that too, ensuring that we work together and feed into this process in order to ensure that we can create a food system that works for Wales and all of our communities. It’s clear that the current system isn’t fit for purpose, and we as a Senedd have an opportunity to change that today. So, I hope we will see everyone here supporting Peter Fox’s proposal. Thank you.

Just for clarity purposes, the Minister will not be responding any further, because it’s the Member in charge who will respond. Laura Anne Jones.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. I, too, welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate, and may I first, of course, start by paying tribute to Peter Fox for all the hard work that the Member for Monmouth has done to date to get this Bill to this point?

The purpose of this Bill is admirable and much needed. It aims to establish a more sustainable food system here in Wales, which the country has been crying out for for some time now, to encourage joined-up thinking across stakeholders too, which, sadly, has been lacking for a long time. It lays out simple aims, which would have an enormous positive impact.

As shadow Minister for education, as a parent, like others in this Chamber have already mentioned today, I am, of course, interested in children’s nutrition and the content of school meals, and I feel that, unfortunately, we do not invest in our children in this regard like we should. School meal offerings differ massively between local authority areas, and it is time to start giving real thought to how we can offer more nutritious food to our children and young people, with the multitude of physical and mental health benefits that that would bring, as well as, at the same time, supporting local rural economies, supporting local procurement, so we have high-quality meat and veg in our schools, not using bugs. Supporting our local businesses and farmers and thus reducing food miles would also help the environment, and I welcome the aims of this Bill.

I have no doubt that using local food in our schools would not only improve education about where food comes from, but it would also emphasise the importance of buying local and the positive environmental impact of doing so. It is important that we capitalise on the wonderful world-class local Welsh produce that is all around us to feed our children in our schools, and I do believe that using the quality of what we have around us, reducing food miles, making the system more sustainable and the enormous health benefits is something that children want too. It would be great to see greater progression in this area as one of the many positive outcomes achievable from this Bill.

I know that Jenny Rathbone—. You’ve already outlined the positives of this as well, and, as someone who also wants to see this happen, you must see the opportunity that this Bill presents, and I hope that, like Jane Dodds as well, you will be supporting this Bill today.

There are a multitude of benefits to this Bill that Peter and others have already outlined, so I won’t go over them again, apart from to say that I know that we all as Welsh Conservatives see the high value of getting this Bill through the Senedd. Supporting agriculture is at the heart of this Bill, and as a farmer's daughter that delights me, and I wholeheartedly support that aim. The Bill has a real opportunity to ensure we are sustainable as a nation, whilst increasing our food security. We need to move to have the security of knowing that food production is sustainable and localised to cut wastage. I think it would be a travesty to miss out on getting this Member's Bill through to the next stage, or at least for its aims to be worked on and taken forward in other ways. It certainly would be a missed opportunity not to vote for it, to listen to it and take actions because of it, as this is an opportunity to lay foundations for future generations. Surely, this is why we are all here, and as Peter alluded to earlier, actions speak louder than words, and I strongly urge you to support this motion today.

There are two speakers remaining, and we are out of our time, but I'm going to call on both. I ask them to be succinct and within time, please. Vikki Howells.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I'd like to start by thanking the Member for Monmouth for bringing forward this Bill. It poses some really important questions and has created space within which we can discuss them: questions about our food supply, how we make it sustainable, how we make it secure and how we enhance consumer choice, whilst also ensuring those choices contribute to well-being and the safeguarding of our environment. We know that obesity is a leading public health concern here in Wales, but also more and more people are using foodbanks, as they just cannot afford to eat. Clearly, all of this suggests that we need to take a refreshed approach to food.

I also find this a very timely discussion running alongside our consideration of the Welsh Government's agriculture Bill. That, of course, looks at how we support our farmers and use our land. I've really valued the opportunity to be able to consider some of those questions as a Member of ETRA when we were scrutinising the Bill, and I know that's a feeling shared amongst other committee members too. I'd like to also offer my thanks to the clerking team and all who gave evidence for making this a really worthwhile investigation. I think, in the Member's response to our report, he talks about the overwhelming engagement from stakeholders, and I'd like to echo those comments. Thanks to all who engaged.

However, based on the evidence sessions, I will not be voting in favour of the general principles of the Bill and for it to move on to the next stage of the legislative process. I don't think, in its current form, it necessarily provides the answers to some of the questions I touched on earlier. Instead, and after hearing from all who came to ETRA, I've reached the conclusion that this is an area where new primary legislation is not needed. The Minister's view that the Bill as set out would be overly bureaucratic and expensive is, I think, the correct one, especially when we factor in all that we know about the pressures on budgets and spending.

Rather, our priorities should be about the development of a national food strategy. This should be co-produced between Welsh Government and stakeholders, and based on a thorough analysis of any gaps in existing targets. We know that work in this area is already ongoing. For example, there is the programme for government and the co-operation agreement, and these already commit to the development of a Wales community food strategy, to encourage the production and supply of locally sourced food in Wales. I look forward to further development of these proposals, based on the views of consumers and those involved in community food initiatives. This was also a point that came out during our scrutiny sessions, with some witnesses talking about existing local food partnerships. There is a need to scale up some of this work and in helping us to make these calls and rehearse these arguments, the Member's Bill has made a really significant contribution.

But against this, we don't need to take the Bill forward to take those proposals forward. We know, in addition, that without legislation, a new overarching body can already be created to oversee food policy in Wales and take forward some of that scaling up. Again, this could be an internal board, or I'm also struck with the suggestion of embedding this within the future generations commissioner's office. That could really give the proposals teeth. By doing so, this would help us create a food system that works for consumers and for producers in Wales. Thank you.

And finally, Gareth Davies.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Deputy Llywydd. It's a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon, and you'll be pleased to know that I'll keep my remarks very succinct, Deputy Llywydd.

I just want to start by saying thank you to Peter Fox for bringing this to the Senedd this afternoon, and for the work that you've done, obviously not just in committee but over a long period of time, because it's way over 12 months now, isn't it? It doesn't seem that long ago since we met up at the Royal Welsh Show and we discussed in detail the particulars of this food Bill. I think, for me, it was that opportunity of seeing it on that platform of the Royal Welsh Show and seeing how much it was indeed welcomed by the sector in that particular week. It was an eye-opener for me.

What I want to focus on, because in the debate we've covered quite a lot in this period of time, but what I want to focus on are points 196 and 197 on the food goals, and the opportunity and the scope that this Bill's got, in terms of achieving economic well-being. Obviously, in my constituency, the Vale of Clwyd, we've got two of the most deprived wards in the whole of Wales, in West Rhyl and Upper Denbigh, and I think the scope and the power of this Bill—. When I look at Bills, I always think to myself, 'What does this mean for my constituents, and what does it mean to a member of the public or somebody on the streets?', and I think the scope of this Bill and the research and everything that's gone into it, it has the opportunity to be really felt by everybody, from children to people in care and health and social care settings.

I fully agree with what Jenny Rathbone said about having good-quality food in health and social care settings, because when I was in physio, working in rehab, I used to think to myself, 'Well, we're expecting patients to be rehabilitated in quite acute settings, and they're not being provided with nutritious food.' And a key part of rehabilitation is that they are nourished to an acceptable standard, because, obviously, with broken bones and with some acute injuries that we can be faced with in hospitals, they need the rehab, but they also need the nutrition to go with that as well, because it's a whole package, and I think this Bill does achieve that.

And in terms of the power of it and how far it can go, I can't understand, for the life of me, why Labour aren't supporting this. They say it's the party of fairness, well, this Bill does that, as far as I'm concerned. It creates that fairness and I think the points that I've seen here, it's very much a classless Bill as well, because I thinks it's got the power to be felt by everybody in society, and I think that's something to be celebrated. So, I'll just finish my remarks by encouraging everybody to vote for this Bill tonight. Thank you.

I call on Peter Fox to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Dirprwy Lywydd, and can I thank every one of you for your contributions? It's been a good debate. There is a huge amount of work gone into this, and it wasn't brought lightly, as you know, and there will always be contention around transformational change, and this Bill was about transformation. Huw, I make no apologies for ambition. Governments should have ambition. They should have ambition to reach out past their norms, to challenge the status quo, to be brave, to be bold for the future generations. That's what we talk about so much in this place, about future generations, how important they are to us, yet we're frightened of acting because we hear, 'It's resource', 'It's money' and 'How do we afford this?' That's not cutting it. Governments should step up to the plate, above and beyond that type of rhetoric, and we need to move forward, and we're not, sadly.

But, anyway, I'll reflect on the contributions. Thank you so much to the Chairs of the committees and for the responses. I welcomed the challenge and I enjoyed the process, and I acknowledge the recommendations you made. I won't reiterate the responses—you've seen those. As I've said all along in the committees, I wouldn't be the one who could deliver this—this was for the Government. It had to be a framework. If I made it all-inclusive and put everything on the face of the Bill, it would never have been delivered. It's like so many other framework Bills that come here. Peredur, you know, within Finance Committee, we've talked about it regularly, the frustration of the framework Bills, that you can't get the RIAs detailed enough. I've sat in on other Bills the same. And I accept that, but it's not for me to flesh out what the costs would be, because it would be dependent on how much effort and weight and width the Government would put into it. But I thank you for your comment.

Minister, can I thank you too for your engagement? I know this is difficult, especially when it comes alongside so many other bits of legislation that you're trying to move through, and can be seen as frustrating. We can work together on this; we could have actually shaped something so positive, so transformational, that could have linked with everything that is going on. I acknowledge what you're offering around embracing a strategy, and an inter-governmental forum. That's great, but how do we hold that to account? How do we hold the food system to account without legislation? If it was possible, why hasn't it been done already? We have massive weaknesses in this sector, which has been highlighted by so many stakeholders, hence the need for policy to be rooted in legislation, so that it can be held to account for future generations. That's so important.

Sam, thank you for your supportive contribution all the way through this, and the recognition that we need this to strengthen our country's resilience.

Jenny, thank you for your support. You've been an advocate of the food system so much in this place, and I really do acknowledge your efforts in trying to move this forward, and I know that this is a difficult situation for you too, because you're so passionate about making sure the right things happen within the food system. We can't have sporadic policy cropping up here and there with a hope it might join together; it needs to be linked through something so much greater than that to hold it and bring it together.

Peter, you need to conclude now, please.

I'm sorry, yes, Chair. I've got stacks to say, but I know I'm not going to be able to.

Mabon, thank you and your group for your continuous support and the recognition of a commission. As I've said all through this, if there are elements that are the sticking point for us to move forward, I've made that concession that I will happily amend to work with you all to make this usable. If we let it fall today, it doesn't get a chance to breathe again, and we carry on with the status quo, and I shared how the status quo isn't working, as so many stakeholders have.

So, please, today, all of you, just think about your children, and your children's children, and how we should give this a chance to breathe at Stage 2. The Government can always stop it later on—don't worry about that; they will find a way. But, let it go to Stage 2 to prove that this can be so much more than what you think it is. Thank you.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Yes. I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Item 6 is next, a debate on the Equality and Social Justice Committee report, 'Women’s experiences in the criminal justice system'. I call on the Chair of the committee to move the motion. Jenny Rathbone.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Imagine a child saying goodbye to their mother at the school gate in the morning, and then being told she won't be coming to collect you at going-home time. Every year, every day, mothers are sent to prison for low-level offences, even to the surprise of their social workers. Sixty per cent of these prison sentences given to women in Wales were for less than six months. The average stay for a woman in Eastwood Park prison is 42 days, and the governor of Styal prison mentioned that one woman was there for a week, over Christmas, 'to teach her a lesson'.

Focusing on punishment and ignoring rehabilitation is a shocking misuse of public resources and abuse of the criminal justice system. Not only are we punishing innocent children, short sentences are just too short to address offending behaviour, but long enough to lose your job, your children, and your home, in most cases.

Seventy per cent of women given custodial sentences of under 12 months reoffend within a year—should we be surprised? There have to be better ways of spending £60,000, which is what it costs to keep someone in prison for a year, and there definitely are. It is now over 15 years since the landmark report by Baroness Jean Corston, which highlighted that most women who commit crime are extremely vulnerable and do not require a custodial sentence to protect the public from harm. She argued—and no Government has disagreed—that most female offenders can safely be given community sentences, with imprisonment reserved only for the most extreme and violent offenders. Progress in implementing Corston’s recommendations has been painfully slow, and in some respects we’ve gone backwards, because there are now twice as many women in the prison population as there were 20 years ago. With no women’s prisons in Wales, most Welsh women given custodial sentences end up in Eastwood Park in Gloucestershire or Styal prison outside Manchester. Both places are difficult and expensive to get to, and on average they’re 100 miles away from where families are living.

Most women committing low-level offences are vulnerable women with complex needs. Their vulnerabilities are exacerbated by the trauma of being sent to prison, and as we were reminded by the His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons report on Eastwood Park at the end of last year, prisons are simply not equipped to deal with the level of self-harm and mental illness exacerbated by being in prison, despite the best efforts of prison staff. By sending such people to prison, we are perpetuating the enduring harm of adverse childhood experiences from one generation to the next.

I would like to extend a warm welcome to representatives from the Nelson Trust who are in the gallery today to listen to this debate, and commend the wonderful work they’re doing in Cardiff, in Eastwood Park and elsewhere across the country. The committee would like to thank all those who engaged with us during this inquiry—the stories we heard, particularly from women incarcerated in Styal and Eastwood Park, and from community focus groups who have helped us to understand how we could, and should, be approaching offending behaviour very differently. I also want to thank the committee clerks, the research service and the community engagement team, without whose work this report would not be possible.

Central to the Welsh Government’s approach is the women’s justice blueprint. It was set up by the Welsh Government with the Ministry of Justice and His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service. There is broad support for this collaborative approach to women’s justice. The intentions and aspirations of the blueprint to keep women out of prison, where possible, is to be commended. However, awareness of this ambition still appears to be patchy. The Magistrates Association told us that, in a recent survey of their members, only half the respondents had heard of the blueprint, and that’s something that absolutely has to change, because these are the sentencers who send women to prison. So, there’s a lot of work to be done to prevent women from being sent to prison for offences that would be much better dealt with, and more effectively, in the community. We have concerns about the pace of change to keep most women out of prison and we require detailed updates, I think, on its implementation. Custodial sentences must be a last resort, not the default option. Women who do not pose a threat to society should not be going to prison for minor offences. While there is limited availability of alternatives across Wales, women will continue to be given custodial sentences.

Community-based women's centres can play a key role in providing a collaborative, trauma-informed approach to supporting women and helping to divert individuals from a path into the justice system. The Welsh Government is to be commended for the investment it and the Ministry of Justice have made in the North Wales Women’s Centre in Rhyl, and the most recent women’s centre in Cardiff, run by the Nelson Trust. I’ve visited both of them and caught a glimpse of the excellent work that is being done there. I commend the North Wales Women's Centre in Rhyl for having a strategy for ensuring that this is a service not just for women living near Rhyl, but also establishing outreach services in Bangor and Wrexham as well. We must enable all women across Wales to be able to access women’s centres, whether or not they have got themselves involved in the criminal justice system. We welcome the Welsh Government’s ambition in their response to work towards eventually having a women’s centre in each local authority area in Wales. On the question of who’s going to pay for them, I’ll come back to that in a moment.

There’s another really excellent initiative that’s been going on for the last two years in the South Wales and Gwent police areas, where over 2,000 women have benefited from trauma-informed diversionary services designed to keep them out of prison. An evaluation by Cordis Bright is yet to be published, but there is positive evidence that this approach is working. A senior probation officer said about the benefits of Safer Wales's approach in Cardiff: 'The activities on offer provide a safe and supportive environment for women, they allow women to take part in social activities, have emotional support and learn new skills. It offers also probation staff a different means of engaging with the women on a holistic basis, so we can talk to them in a non-offending capacity, and we have been delighted to work on this whole-system approach.' The deputy police commissioner for South Wales is in negotiations with the Ministry of Justice to expand this whole-system pathfinder approach across Dyfed-Powys and North Wales police forces as well, and that's strongly to be welcomed.

We have, in the past, briefly discussed a proposed women's centre in Swansea as well. It's come up in questions, and that would offer sentencers a residential alternative to sending women to prison. We feel that greater clarity is needed on the rationale for a residential women's centre, alongside an expanding suite of community sentencing options. The progress on these has been sclerotic in that the UK Government announced this pilot residential women's centre in 2018, and it was originally due to open in 2021. However, planning permission at two different sites in the Bridgend area have been rejected, and the Ministry of Justice is now in the process of appealing a third rejection for a 12-bed centre in Swansea, in the hope of opening a residential alternative to prison by next year. The prison and probation service cites an existing approved premises in Bristol and another residential women's centre in Birmingham as models for such a Swansea provision. And I can see, looking at the difficulties for women coming out of prison who have nowhere to go, having a residential centre as a transition to re-engaging with the community, particularly after a long time in prison, could well benefit many, many women. But I think there's a great deal more that needs to—. And women who we met in prison said that release from prison was likened to being thrown to the sharks, because they would either be homeless on release or placed in unsuitable accommodation, where they were brought into contact with other people who might bring them back into the criminal justice system.

Lastly, I just want to quickly address the jagged edge of the criminal justice system. We didn't consider the devolution of criminal justice in depth. However, frustration around the limits of what is within the powers of the Welsh Government is clear, and all committee members were convinced that the devolution of women's justice as a case is proven. Why is it that Scotland and Northern Ireland are trusted with running the criminal justice system, but somehow, in Wales, we are not to be allowed to do so? I find it very difficult to see how we're going to really embed the radical path that I think we should be moving down whilst we don't control all the levers.

In addition, we do have this issue of the cost, and I want to address Members' attention to the fact that the First Minister highlights that we are currently paying for services that we think are needed and are the right thing to do in Wales. These are services that, in England, would be paid for out of the Ministry of Justice's budget. And that is the moral hazard territory we are in, and therefore we have to be really clear about, when we devolve criminal justice to Wales, that we have the resources to go with it, because the savings are all to be made in not sending people to prison unnecessarily.

I would also like to thank the committee clerks and all the witnesses who made this inquiry possible. Chair, you have been fantastic all along.

Our inquiry looked at the support given by the Welsh Government to women in the criminal justice system, and in gathering evidence we heard about some truly shocking experiences. The lack of adequate support has led to startlingly high reoffending rates. Criminal justice might not be devolved, but the Welsh Government is wholly responsible for health and social care, education and housing, and it is shortfalls in these areas that help contribute to shockingly high levels of recidivism amongst female Welsh prisoners. The lack of drug and alcohol rehabilitation, particularly residential detoxification—and I must declare an interest here, as a patron of Brynawel Rehab—has a massive impact on reoffending rates. 

I was really disappointed to hear from our witnesses that accessing detoxification programmes was almost impossible for many women in the criminal justice system. This was made even more surprising when I learned that tier 4 funding for residential rehab was regularly returned back by area planning boards—hundreds of thousands of pounds allocated for the provision of rehab services returned to Welsh Government each and every year, yet many women cannot access such provision. I would ask the Minister to consider whether the substance misuse action fund and Rehab Cymru are working as intended, and whether the area planning boards are the right approach. If we are to prevent women from entering or re-entering the criminal justice system, then we have to prevent offending in the first place.

As the committee learnt, lots of offending occurs due to substance misuse issues. Residential rehab and detoxification programmes like those offered at Brynawel are proven to tackle substance abuse and addiction long term. Yet we know it is difficult, almost impossible, for most women in the criminal justice system to access such services.

As part of our inquiry, the committee visited Eastwood Park prison, and I have been told by the members of that prison’s drugs recovery team that the Welsh women are at a significant disadvantage when trying to secure funding for residential rehab. During our visit we heard that reoffending rates among Welsh prisoners were 10 times higher than those of the English prisoners. In order to tackle such a frightfully high rate of reoffending, we have to ensure Welsh female prisoners are fully supported in their health and care needs, as well as in education and housing.

The governor of Eastwood Park told us that housing was a particular concern as many Welsh prisoners have nowhere to go. Their nearest approved housing is in Bristol, so many of the prison leavers end up homeless. Women at the prison told us that some reoffend just to come back to the safety of the prison. We can’t lock people up just because they have nowhere else to go. Criminal justice is not devolved, but housing is. The Welsh Government have a duty to these women, a duty to ensure they get the care and support needed to prevent reoffending. I urge them to fully support recommendations 14 and 15, and urgently implement recommendations 17 and 18. Thank you very much.

I'll never forget visiting HMP Eastwood Park as a part of the inquiry that led to this report. I will never forget the Welsh women I met there—the Welsh women who live on the jagged edge of devolution, so disadvantaged, so discriminated against, so damaged by the fact that Wales doesn't have powers over our criminal justice system.

In our report, our committee cites and evidences the harm—the harm—to women arising from the current devolution settlement. The powerful testimony we heard, the devastating stories of these women, were reinforced by the expert opinion we heard as a committee. Dr Robert Jones of the Wales Governance Centre clearly illustrated for us how that jagged edge of intersecting unaligned but shared devolved and reserved powers and responsibilities over which the criminal justice system operates in Wales is such a sharp one for women.

Plaid Cymru is very glad to see the Welsh Government accept in full recommendation 2 of the report that it,

'should endeavour to obtain devolved responsibility for women’s involvement in the criminal justice system,'

agreeing in its response to our report that,

'outcomes for women in the criminal justice system in Wales could be significantly improved through devolution,'

and accepting Dr Robert Jones's description that,

'the ability of devolved government to act as an effective policy maker is constrained and, ultimately, undermined by the fact that the UK Government controls most of the key criminal justice policy levers.'

This is, surely, the key recommendation of this report and the key finding of this inquiry, foregrounding fundamental questions about the feasibility of doing joined-up policy in such a complex legislative landscape, with two Governments controlling different areas, levers and accountability, and clearly showing the effect of this on some of our most vulnerable citizens.

So, what progress is being made towards this, Minister? What conversations have you had with UK Labour leader, Keir Starmer, around this point, because we've had in the past mixed messages from Labour on the devolution of criminal justice to Wales? I would like to hear clarity from you and the party you represent on this point, especially considering Labour could come to power in the next year in Westminster. 

So many of our recommendations as a committee, from access to and equity of rehabilitation services for women, tackling substance misuse and aiding recovery, to meeting physical and mental health needs, are dependent on this successful joining up of policy—that which is set out and embodied in the aims of the women's justice blueprint. Although broadly welcomed, time and again we found the approach of the blueprint being hampered or even undermined, and progress on its aims slow and patchy.

As the Government agrees that custodial sentences must be an absolute last resort, then the work to ensure that sentences have alternative options to imprisoning women by provision of community-based options throughout Wales, and, of course, raising awareness of these options, must be progressed at pace. Because without this, the situations we all heard about will continue—the pointless, punishing short sentences that can completely blow up women's lives and have such a profound and lasting effect on their children. It's shameful and also baffling. We heard from the governor at Eastwood Park about that average sentence given to women of 42 days. The instance Jenny Rathbone mentioned about a week-long sentence in Styal prison over Christmas—not just baffling and shameful, but harsh, severe and cruel. This can't be allowed to continue.

The report makes several detailed recommendations about the proposed residential women's centre in Wales. Key for Plaid Cymru is that while it can provide a much-needed alternative to the current residential custodial sentences that Welsh women are forced to serve miles away from their families, we must get that greater clarity on the nature of that alternative. It's imperative, in line with the aims of the blueprint, the Corston report, the expert evidence we heard and the testimony of the women who shared their experiences with us, that this does not replicate the harms of the current situation. Wales's voice must be heard on this, so while the planning process continues, I'd like to hear from the Minister what preparatory work has taken place around recommendations 8, 9 and 10.

I would also personally like to thank my fellow committee members, the Chair, the research and clerking team and everyone who gave evidence to our inquiry. I want to say to the women we met that we heard you, we will not forget you and, as a committee, we will not let your Government abandon you on that jagged edge of an inadequate devolution settlement. 

I want to also start by thanking my colleagues, the Chair and the clerks of the Equality and Social Justice Committee for their work on this vital and timely 'Women’s experiences in the criminal justice system' report, as well as all of those who gave evidence and spoke before the committee. And I am pleased that Welsh Government has responded by either accepting, or accepting in principle, the recommendations of the report, and I look forward to seeing what further work is done to support these very vulnerable women.

I proposed carrying out this inquiry after the UK Government botched proposals to have a women’s residential centre in Bridgend and Porthcawl in my constituency, and I'm not being unnecessarily political there; it was a cross-party sentiment that they were completely inappropriate locations, and the constituents, myself and the local authority were accused of nimbyism, but it was not that at all. There was no consultation, there was no local understanding, and there were no clear reasons, objectives or understanding of why we were even having this in Wales. So, I am pleased that, through this inquiry, we have received evidence in which we have received some answers to these questions. I would say that what has really come through—you talk about the jagged edge, Sioned Williams, but it is a chasm, it is an absolute chasm because of the lack of joined-up working in all of these areas, and the lack of ability for our Welsh Government Ministers to really prevent these women, and give them the support that they need, and these are the women who are falling through that.

I also found that we may not have women incarcerated in Wales at the moment, but they are only just over our border in England, half-an-hour ride. I also visited HMP Eastwood Park prison and actually, Welsh women make up over half of the prisoners in there. And these are the women I want to focus on today, because I'm incredibly grateful for them meeting with us, and as you've said, Sioned Williams, I do not want them to feel as if we went in there, talked to them, and then nothing came of this, because I really want to see meaningful action from this.

So, some of the things that they told us: access to healthcare, the Welsh women were not getting access to Buvidal, they were only getting methadone. I believe that that has now been sorted. Welsh women were not getting the access and the funding to go into rehab when they came out, especially if they’d only been in there three months and they hadn't been able to see the benefit of doing a rehab programme, whereas English women were. Access to housing: many of them were just let out on the day that they were released, and they were just left to try to get to Bristol train station—£40 it was, for a taxi, where were they getting the money for that? And when they got to Bristol station, there are drug dealers there who know exactly how to pick them off before they even get a train back to Wales.

The access to elected representatives: they cannot reach their elected representatives. They don't even know who would represent them. Is it where they currently reside in the prison, or would it be where they're from? Would it be us, back in Wales? And I know that it does say in the report, that the Welsh Government—that this is the remit of the governor, but I know, from having one woman approach me and say, 'Can you get my MS to get in touch with me?’ that they have to give you their e-mail address, and then the MS has to e-mail them, pay 50p, and they told me, like, 10 times, because they were so desperate for help, 'Just please make sure that you tick the box that says I'm allowed to reply, because otherwise, I can't even reply to you'. So, I'd really like to know how—how exactly are these women able to reach us? Because it didn't seem to me like there was any other way apart from that.

I would like to say, though that there is good stuff happening that is coming from Welsh Government. Around half of the women in prisons are mothers, and the Visiting Mum programme is working. I also want to say the Nelson Trust, your women's centre was an absolute—just going in there and seeing what you've done and knowing that the women would have a space to go in there and the way that you've made it feel and made it feel safe—. But I also just want to emphasise that you have to have the money to be able to support the Welsh women, right, because that's all messy at the moment. Who's actually paying for that? And I don't want you, I know that you don't want to have to turn away Welsh women either, because of this jagged edge.

There's so much in this report—there really is—and I would implore you to read this alongside the Thomas commission, alongside the women's justice blueprint. The Thomas commission said the people of Wales were being let down by the current justice system; the women of Wales really, really are. Alun Davies, you said to me yesterday that this almost puts a face, a human face, on these previous reports. And that human face I want us to remember today is this that the governor of HMP Eastwood Park prison said to me: 'The only statistic that I'm happy to be quoted on is that 100 per cent of the women in this prison are victims'. All of the women in that prison are victims. The majority should not be there, and my colleagues have referred to why. So, Sioned Williams, I agree with you, we need the levers to be able to really tackle these issues and give the women the support and opportunities and the prevention, to stop them, as you said, Jenny Rathbone, perpetuating these adverse childhood experiences. Until this happens, I just want to say that we cannot turn away from this. I don't want this to be a report that just ends up going in the drawer, because these women might not be here in Wales at the moment, but they are not out of sight and they are not out of mind. And until we have the devolution of justice and policing, we must keep an eye on them and make sure that all of these recommendations are carried out. Diolch.

I would also like to extend my thanks to the Chair, to my committee members, and the Nelson Trust, who are here this afternoon—diolch yn fawr iawn.

You have everything stacked against you. You're poor. You're in terrible housing. You've experienced the toxic trio of mental health, domestic violence and substance abuse. And then you get sent to prison. You have no support there. You have nothing that helps you with your discharge. And so what happens? You end up there again. Fifty-six per cent of women who serve custodial sentences reoffend within one year. That should shock us. That should really chill us to the bones, because prison is not working. Prison is not working for women.

I was honoured but felt very sad to take part in this inquiry. Like my colleagues visited a prison, I went to visit Styal prison in Cheshire. I'm pleased to see that the recommendations from the report have been accepted. This report actually reminds us how women in Wales deserve so much better than the institutional failure of the English criminal justice system. Here we are, more than a decade after the Corston report, which suggested such a radical and progressive holistic approach, and yet, Welsh women continue to suffer short prison sentences that last long enough to ruin lives but not enough to help them in their rehabilitation.

I have five things just to highlight, if I may, with the Minister. We've heard many things, but just five from me. Magistrates—we heard from them. They need to have more awareness of the women's justice blueprint. They are critical—critical—to the pathway for women to hopefully avoid custody.

Secondly, we need sustainable and expanded funding for things like the Nelson Trust, for women's pathfinder schemes and for community women's centres.

Thirdly, as we've heard so passionately from Sarah, a greater awareness of the rights for women to access elected members. Once they're in a prison, we've forgotten about them, and I know it's the same with young people in youth offending institutions. If you put them somewhere, particularly somewhere in the middle of nowhere with a big fence around it, everybody thinks they're okay, but they're not. We have a responsibility, and I would like the Minister to specifically give the reasons why we as Senedd Members and as a Senedd Commission can't be more active in reaching out to those governors and saying, 'Please make the Welsh women aware of how they can access their elected members.'

Fourthly, you've heard—the devolution of the full criminal justice system. It's not a step—. We don't want steps, nothing like the suggestion from Gordon Brown of some smattering of the criminal justice system; we want it all, because we need to make sure that women and men and everybody in Wales can have a fairer, progressive system. Through that, I hope we'll develop non-residential centres, because we are prepared to take risks. And finally, fifthly, a more joined-up and consistent approach to mothers in prison. 

I'd just like to very quickly end with two things, if I may. I share the vision that we cannot actually wait for devolution. We need to get on with this right now. This needs to be a step towards full devolution. We need the Welsh Government to provide the consistent support and leadership needed now towards ending the intergenerational cycles of offending. Secondly, there is a saying about prisons—that prisons damage people and have always been used to control the most marginalised, and I'm afraid that's what I've read and that's what I've seen. We need to give those women hope. Let's be more radical and progressive, and let's care for them, not put them in our prisons. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

It's a pleasure to take part in this debate this afternoon. I will keep my remarks fairly short. Jenny Rathbone actually beat me to it, actually, in mentioning the North Wales Women's Centre in Rhyl, in my constituency, because I wanted to take the opportunity of this debate to highlight the good work they do for women, not only in my constituency, but across the region of north Wales. And as you mentioned as well, they have the outreach centres in Bangor and Wrexham as well, so it's really positive to see the good work that they do. I visited there at the back end of last year—it was November/December time—and it was a great pleasure to see the work that they do, and I attended a seminar there, and we spoke about the issues facing women locally and across, obviously, Wales and north Wales as well.

The common theme that came from the seminar was indeed the devolution of the criminal justice system for women, and the point I wanted to raise in recommendation 2 is that devolved responsibility. To me anyway, everything that is around the periphery of the justice system—things like hospitals, healthcare, social care and also housing as well—are all devolved things. And around that as well is looking at the issues that we've got currently around that. So, obviously, we talk in this Chamber every week about the latest failure of Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, shortages in social care workers, children's services. We talk about that every week here in the Senedd, and also the shortage of housing. So, I'm not too sure, personally, that devolution is the golden pathway to improving criminal justice for women. And in that sense, I think as well it's just about getting it right. I'm more than happy to support this motion in the voting tonight, but I just wanted to raise that, and say that devolution doesn't always mean better. I think it's looking at, obviously, the current system and maybe looking at how we can improve that, because, like I say, in the things around the periphery that are devolved, we speak about their chronic failures here every week. So, we could have a situation in that sense where we could be doing a disservice to our vulnerable women in terms of subjecting them more to the things that are failing currently under this Labour Government in Cardiff.

So, they were my observations on reading the report this morning. I enjoyed reading the report, and I thank the members of the committee and the staffing team who all contributed to this, and I only wanted to raise recommendation 2, as I did enjoy the report. And I'd just like to close my remarks by thanking all of the staff at the North Wales Women's Centre for the great work that they do, and I was really impressed on my recent visit there in my constituency. Thank you very much.

Alun Davies.

I'm grateful to you, Deputy Presiding Officer. One of the privileges of elected office, of course, is that we do have the opportunity to see and visit and speak with many different people, and we have the opportunity to see things and to experience things that perhaps you wouldn't necessarily experience in other walks of life. I think one of the things, as I look back over perhaps too long in this place—. I look at the things that have affected me most profoundly. And I have to say, prior to being appointed to ministerial office with some responsibility for justice, the justice system had never seriously crossed my path. I haven't been in prison, none of my family have, and I haven't had that personal experience of it. And I was shocked by what I saw when I visited the secure estate in Wales. I was shocked by what I heard was happening to people in my constituency, from my constituency, from our communities up and down Wales, on a daily basis. I was shocked by the way that people are treated in the criminal justice system and by the criminal justice system, and on every single occasion, without exception, the failures that are visited upon the male population in prison, and on the secure estate in different ways, are visited on women to a far, far, greater extent. I can think of not a single occasion—and I think men are poorly treated by the criminal justice system—where the experience of women gets anywhere close to the experience of men. And that is a standing rebuke to us all, and it's a standing rebuke to everybody who argues that the criminal justice system as it stands today succeeds in doing anything except visiting unnecessary cruelty on people and families. And on every occasion, without exception, the experience of women is much, much, much worse. And the experience of women from Wales is worse than the experience of women in England and Scotland.

How can anybody come here—? How can anybody come here—? Wherever you sit in this Chamber, how can anybody come here and argue for the continuity of a system that fails and does harm day in, day out? Women will be failed, Gareth, whilst you were making that speech and whilst you're on your journey home to your constituency tomorrow, and people you represent will be failed, and harm will be done to them. Harm will be done to them and their families. We cannot stand by and allow that to happen. We cannot stand by and be spectators. We can not stand by and wring our hands on a Wednesday afternoon, saying how bad everything is, and do nothing and not argue the case for change. Read the Thomas commission. Read it. Read it, and see what it says—[Interruption.] I'm not arguing devolution means everything is better, and I accept the points you make about some of the health services in north Wales—I accept that—but you cannot stand by and see the systemic failure of women in the criminal justice system in Wales and do nothing. That's not acceptable. Whatever your point of view, that isn't acceptable.

When Baroness Corston published her report, I think it was in 2007, she could not have imagined for a moment that in 15 or 16 years' time people would still be debating it without it being delivered in all its key ways. When we delivered the blueprint for criminal justice and women in the system, I think it was in 2019, we were looking back at a decade of failure already. That's what we were doing. And we were putting sticking plasters on that—let's be clear about it. Because what we need to be able to do is to deliver policy in a holistic way. And what really frustrated me—what really frustrated me—was visiting and speaking to women in the criminal justice system in Scotland and seeing how they were having services delivered to them. And it's not always good; I accept that, Gareth. It's not always good, and nobody is suggesting that this is the panacea for everything, but they had the holistic approach to policy that we lack here in Wales, and, as a consequence of that approach, Welsh women are being failed, and English women are not being failed, and Scottish women are not being failed, and that is something that you and me and all of us here have to accept. [Interruption.] I'll give way.

Very quickly, because you're already almost out of time.

Sorry. I wasn't looking at the clock. We've heard during this debate, and I believe I heard correctly, that outcomes for women from England after release from the same prison were better than outcomes for women from Wales released from the same prison, where the women from England were presumably dependent on services on the English side of the border, whilst the women from Wales, on release, were dependent on devolved services on this side of the border. So, you're right that change is needed, and it's something I've called for for many years, but isn't that change closer to home?

No. That's a fundamental failure, because women are failed before they go to prison, as well as being in prison and after they come out, and what needs to happen is to have a holistic approach to policy. The point that you've made is that a holistic approach to policy does have an impact on outcomes, and I'm glad you've made that point.

And I'll finish—. I won't test your patience, Deputy Presiding Officer; I already have, I know. I will finish on this: it is important that UK Labour takes this matter seriously, and it's not good enough for UK Labour simply to make speeches on it and to wash their hands of the matter. I do expect change from UK Labour on this matter. The devolution of this is not an academic exercise, it's a fundamental exercise of human rights, and the abuse of women in the system must stop, the harm being made to women must stop, and we all have a responsibility to make sure that that happens and it happens now. Thank you.

I call on the Minister for Social Justice, Jane Hutt.

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lywydd. And I do welcome the debate today and give my thanks to the Equality and Social Justice Committee Chair and committee members for their work on this important inquiry.

The Welsh Government is committed to improving outcomes for the most vulnerable, and this is why support for women in the justice system and their families is so important. And we recognise that many women in the criminal justice system who are vulnerable and who have complex needs are particularly women who are violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence survivors, as you identified in your inquiry. I spoke at a summit at the end of March regarding the Centre for Women's Justice report, 'Double standard: Ending the unjust criminalisation of victims of violence against women and girls' and gave those statistics: 57 per cent of women currently coming into contact with the criminal justice system are victims of domestic abuse; 63 per cent of girls and young women serving sentences in the community have experienced rape or domestic abuse in an intimate partner relationship. So, the circumstances of women in this situation—. And we heard, as you said, with my visit to HMP Eastwood Park as well, the governor saying all of the residents, all of those who are resident in that prison, were themselves victims. All those women were themselves victims.

The committee has played a vital role in highlighting the needs of women in the criminal justice system. It's evident today as well in the debate and, of course, improving outcomes for Welsh women in the justice system, at least at present, requires close working with the Ministry of Justice. They have the responsibility for the reserved area of criminal justice, alongside progress that we are making in key devolved policy areas, including housing, mental health and substance misuse. But the committee report is so important because it highlights the ambition and achievements of what has been the women's justice blueprint, which is an innovative programme, jointly agreed between the Welsh and UK Governments and policing in Wales, to transform outcomes for women in contact with the criminal justice system, or at risk of coming into contact with it. And the inquiry recognises, as the Chair of the committee has said today, the positive impact of such work as the women's pathfinder whole-system approach and the 18-25 early intervention service, providing tailored support for women in the justice system. An impact evaluation of the pathfinder, the key findings of which were shared with the committee, suggested it's improving life outcomes for women and increasing their ability to access services. Prevention and diversion services are now embedded across Wales through the blueprint.

The report also highlights the Visiting Mum programme, which supports children in Wales visiting their mothers in prison in England. This provides vital support for families and mitigates the disruptive and frequently unnecessary impact of custodial sentences for Welsh women. And when the Counsel General and I visited Eastwood Park, we met with beneficiaries of that scheme. We learnt of the strong community links that those families can have with their families back in Wales. But I do believe that this links directly to the recommendations that Members have referred to today on the importance of our work with the Ministry of Justice on a residential women's centre in Wales, because this is an alternative. This actually goes back to Baroness Jean Corston's original report, and what she did say, in her report, way back then, was that:

'The government should announce...a clear strategy to replace existing women’s prisons with suitable, geographically dispersed, small, multi-functional, custodial centres within 10 years.' 

So, that is why it is so important that we progress the opportunity of piloting a residential women's centre in Wales. It will provide a new alternative to custody. It will act as the start of a new vision for justice services for Welsh women, and the approach will be based on support and care delivered in a holistic and trauma-informed way, accessible in the community. And I've accepted all the recommendations, and particularly those relating to the residential women's centre, to understand what this alternative can mean. The committee, of course, also signals a range of further areas where there's more vital work to be done, and we've accepted its recommendations. And I think it's important, just in terms of the centre, which we know that we are pursuing with the Ministry of Justice, there is an appeal, and we expect a decision in autumn for the location of the centre to be confirmed. And of course, we can work on the operating model as we wait for that confirmation.

There has been reference to the non-residential women's centres across Wales, and our key priority is to develop that robust approach to those centres—centres such as the north Wales women's centre in Rhyl, which many of us have visited. We acknowledge today the important work that they've done, and also the Nelson Trust centre in Cardiff, providing such a valuable range of services, including support to manage and overcome substance misuse, childcare support, access to period products, help with the cost of living, access to cultural and well-being, arts and crafts, as we saw when we attended the opening of the Nelson Trust centre in January. I attended with Jenny Rathbone. We saw that full range of services, and it is good to see the Nelson Trust represented here today. But I think we learned most from the women who are using that centre, who actually spoke powerfully—and spoke in front of a large group of multi-agencies who attended—about the beneficial impact of the centre that it's had on every aspect of their lives. So, we must ensure women have access to this support, no matter where they live in Wales, and we're already developing work in this area with our partners.

The committee's work also highlights the vital importance of continuing to raise awareness amongst the judiciary of the impact of custodial sentences for Welsh women, and Members have mentioned and commented on this today. So, the blueprint leads have already delivered engagement events for sentencers, which Jane Dodds referenced, magistrates, raising awareness and confidence in community-based options—that's where you have to educate and influence the magistrates, the sentencers. Over 270 women have been reached out to through this work. But the inquiry found this is still an area where awareness and confidence should be stronger, and we'll be continuing to work with blueprint partners, including HM Courts and Tribunals Service.

I hope what is important is that the committee has found that success in establishing preventative and diversionary schemes across Wales, that there is more to do, to ensure that Welsh women held in prison in England receive the services that they need—both in custody and on release. And particularly important in such areas as housing and substance misuse, we are taking forward urgent work, in partnership with UK Government, to ensure, for example—and I just confirm—that Welsh women in Eastwood Park and Styal prisons can continue using Buvidal, and that's a key point raised in the report.

So, I'll finally say, we reflect, and you do, on the key findings of the committee, the jagged edge, under the current devolution settlement, makes it harder to deliver the services women need. Deputy Llywydd, we have a system where responsibilities are fractured—we've talked about a jagged edge, we've talked about a chasm—across two administrations, different mandates, which will never deliver the integrated, holistic approach we need in practice. So, we are continuing and we will continue to progress the case for devolution, and this is the work we're moving forward at pace. The Counsel General: you will have seen our joint written statement, outlining our work, on 25 April. This has been such a valuable report, and I thank the committee, and I say that, not only did I accept all the recommendations, but I am determined that we will deliver on those recommendations. Diolch yn fawr.

I call on Jenny Rathbone to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Minister, for that really resounding response—that's very welcome indeed, and I pay tribute to your personal commitment to this issue.

I've only got three minutes, so I'm going to have to rattle through it. Altaf Hussain talked about the importance of residential rehabilitation services, and, rightly, questioned why some of the budget that's been allocated for such services are returned to the Welsh Government. That's clearly something we need to look into—it's not something we did something about. But I’m fully aware that Altaf Hussain knows quite a lot about this subject, and he also questions why reoffending rates are much higher for women in Wales than they are in other places. So, we need to look into those things. Clearly, housing is a major issue.

Sioned Williams, very compassionate in her approach to the women she met in prison, and quite rightly puts pressure on the UK Labour Party to clarify exactly the pace of devolution of justice and policing to Wales. She explained how short sentences blow up women’s lives and are cruel.

Sarah Murphy also gave an impassioned contribution about the women who do not have access to Buvidal, which is typical of the criminal justice system in my experience. There’s just no join-up with the service that somebody was getting when they were in the community; when they go to prison they get a different service, and exactly the reverse happens in my experience, and this is a waste of public money all round. I think Sarah also mentioned the important point of how do women get to exercise their right to contact their Senedd Member. This was also emphasised by Jane Dodds, and it’s very disappointing that we have yet to hear from Pact, who are responsible for supporting women in prison. We need to follow this up.

I think Jane Dodd’s five-point plan—. I only wrote down three, but nevertheless, you were right to emphasise we have to get to the magistrates and ensure that they are aware of the blueprint, and that they’re signed up to it. As you said, prisons are always used to control the most marginalised—absolutely.

Gareth, I’m very glad that you are carrying on the good work of your predecessor, Ann Jones, who was a huge supporter of the north Wales women’s centre. I think that you have slightly misunderstood, and I don’t understand why you oppose recommendation 2 when your colleague, who’s heard all the evidence, is in favour of it.

It's always a privilege to hear from Alun Davies, and I acknowledge his genuine commitment to this really important issue, both as a Minister and as a backbencher. I know that you are really committed to ensuring that women are not treated in the way that we’re treating them. And indeed, men. If we are going to take away people’s right to be living in the community then we have to ensure that their time in prison is purposeful, and that is not the case at the moment. We clearly need to revisit the Thomas commission and remind UK Labour of what they need to do.

The Minister is quite right to highlight the Visiting Mum programme; that’s incredibly important for children and their mothers, but clearly it is no real substitute for the woman having to serve her sentence in the community and being able to continue being a mum. But I appreciate that both the Minister and the Counsel General are very committed to this issue.

And I think it was important that the Minister also reminded us that the residential women’s centre was a recommendation from Corston. If we’re going to close women’s prisons, there have to be small alternatives for some people who will simply find it too difficult to be serving effective community sentences without the controls around them. I hope that we will see an outcome on appeal to the residential women’s centre, and I have to just remind us that, if we have residential women’s centres in Bristol and in Birmingham, and the sky hasn’t fallen through, we ought to be able to make it work in Wales too.

So, I thank all Members for their contributions, and clearly this is a work in progress. This is not the end of the story.

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

Item 7 this afternoon is the Welsh Conservatives debate, NHS dentistry. I call on Sam Rowlands to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I start by thanking Darren Millar too for tabling this Welsh Conservative debate. We've tabled this debate today because it's clear that dentistry in Wales, along with many other parts of the NHS, is in crisis. The headline figure that starts our motion is from the British Dental Association, which states that 93 per cent of dental practices in Wales are no longer taking on new NHS adult patients. This is the worst rate in the UK, and it’s numbers like this that have created a need for this debate in our Chamber here today.

Now we could talk for a long time about the Labour-run NHS being the worst in the UK, with a bloated two-year waiting list, the dire mismanagement of Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, but we’re here today to highlight the disastrous running of Welsh dentistry, which continues in that Labour Party tradition of mismanagement of the NHS and mismanaging Wales. And this mismanagement is clearly shown in point 2 of our motion, which seeks for this place to recognise that over a third of dentists plan to reduce their Welsh NHS contracts, and I’m sure that’s a cause for concern for all Members in this Chamber.

And these overall statistics are, of course, a cause of serious concern for us, but within these are the individual experiences of people right across Wales, and perhaps I should declare an interest at this point, because my own family can’t get an NHS dentist, including my children. Indeed, children across Wales are being denied the chance to get an NHS dentist, with recent statistics from the Cardiff and Vale health board showing that nearly 7,500 children are still waiting to see a dentist. This is a damning indictment of the way dentistry in Wales is being run, and it’s having a terrible impact on the dental health of those children. Serious issues are likely being missed, and as a result, will get worse. For example, dentists, we know, play a role in screening for things like mouth cancer, and without regular check-ups, problems like this risk being missed.

Every part of Wales is poorly served, and in my region of North Wales, as I shared a few months ago, I decided to conduct some research of my own, and let me remind you that I contacted 69 NHS dentists in my region, spoke to 57 of those practices and the results were staggering: in all of North Wales, with a population of 700,000 people, not one NHS dental practice was able to take on new patients, with just four offering a place on a waiting list, likely to be over two years.

Our residents pay their taxes and should expect to receive decent public services in return. The Welsh Government gets £1.20 to spend on those public services from the UK Government for every £1 spent in England. And it’s clear that after 25 years, Labour mismanagement and poor leadership has ruined dentistry across the land. It’s a similar story across the rest of Wales. In October 2022, according to the BDA, only 17 per cent of dental practices in Monmouthshire were taking on new NHS patients. Across Mid and West Wales, not a single dentist practice was taking on new NHS patients, with Hywel Dda health board losing 20 dentists between 2018 and 2022.

Labour are failing in this instance, and a substantive plan needs to be in place to make things better. And we’ve put in front of Members here today the Welsh Conservative plan, which includes working closely with the British Dental Association, first of all to ensure that Welsh NHS dental contracts allow dental practices to increase the number of patients, and urgently recruit more dentists by making Welsh NHS dentistry an attractive career. And we’ve outlined how we would do that.

We would do this by refunding tuition fees for those who work five years in Welsh NHS dental practices. What we are proposing is a practical and pragmatic approach to the recruitment crisis that we all know is in front of us, and we desperately need innovative ideas like this to tackle the problem. So, Deputy—oh, sorry, Llywydd—[Laughter.] So, Llywydd, ending on a positive there in terms of the options that we’re putting forward to see these things resolved, I call on all Members of the Chamber to support this Welsh Conservative motion and I look forward to hearing the rest of the debate. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on the Minister for health to formally move amendment 1.

Formally.

That is formally moved. Rhun ap Iorwerth to move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian.

Thank you, Llywydd, and I thank the Conservatives for bringing forward this debate in the Senedd this afternoon. I think the motion itself does reflect clearly the severity of the challenges facing dentistry, and it’s not to overstate the fact to refer to public dentistry as a service that’s on its knees in Wales. We know how many people can't register, we know how difficult it is to recruit and retain staff to a sector where the workload is so heavy and the investment and pay and so on are insufficient. We know how many dentists decide that they don’t have any choice but to bring their NHS contracts to an end and offer private-only services. Investment in new technology is difficult, we heard. And in taking these and other factors together, what we have is a situation where there is a failure to be able to offer quick and basic treatment to the people who need it.

We, as a health committee in the Senedd, were recently shocked by some of the statistics that were presented to us as we did an inquiry into dental services. But maybe the most striking thing was that it was impossible to provide a figure for how many people were on waiting lists for NHS dental treatment. That is a lack of data on the most basic level that you can get, and it makes it so difficult to plan more sustainable services.

The Government’s amendment talks about the pandemic and its clear negative impact on dental practices, but, in truth, the problems that we’re talking about existed long before the pandemic, and the Government failed to resolve those problems at that time. And what’s frustrating, in looking at some of the obvious problems, is that we’re looking at things that are very basic, and ensuring a sustainable workforce is something that is vital in all parts of our health and care services. That means recruitment and training; it means retaining what we have, and ensuring that dentists and other ancillary staff continue to provide services in the NHS. Fifty-two dental practices brought NHS treatments to an end between 2019 and last year, and I’m fearful that we’ll see more this year.

But as is the case for so many health and care workers, a pay deal that’s below inflation doesn’t help, and there is no plan in place, as far as I can see, in terms of how to retain dentists in the public sector in Wales after they graduate. The Government has to innovate in order to tackle that problem. We should train more. One suggestion in our amendment, and something that I’ve called for several times, is to establish a dental school in north Wales as well as a medical school, and a recent report by the health committee does echo that suggestion.

It’s very clear to me in the number of letters and e-mails that I receive from constituents—and I know that’s true for many other Members across north Wales—that there are major problems in terms of accessing dental care. In Ynys Môn there are only four public dental practices available and the others have gone private because they can’t deal with the requirements within the NHS contract, and because of the stress that was being placed, according to them, on staff and so forth. And even though there’s nothing uncommon, for many years, in seeing dentists working in the private sector, the equation and the balance between public and private in the NHS is out of kilter at present.

We have a three-tier system. Let’s remind ourselves what those three tiers are: those who can afford private care, those who have NHS care, and those who can’t afford to go private and don't have access to NHS services. And unfortunately, that final tier is growing very quickly across Wales. Where problems exist across Wales, it’s important that we feed dentists into that system. We know that north Wales is one of the areas where there are problems.

We need to work urgently on the contracts in order to ensure that the contractual conditions for dentists are attractive. We need to build capacity. This situation certainly doesn’t have to be like this. The Government has a responsibility to resolve these urgent problems now, and I am concerned that we’re running out of time.

First of all, I'll probably expand a little bit further on what Rhun ap Iorwerth has outlined in regard to the three-tier system that we have operating in Wales at the moment. First of all, we've got those people who can access an NHS dentist. They're the fortunate group of people. Then we've got people who pay to go privately. Actually, there are two sets of people there. There are those that can afford it easily and there are those that can't afford it but they pay privately anyway, because the only alternative is to have no dental care at all. So, they make life choices that allow them to pay privately, which puts them in a difficult position, of course. Then we've got the third group of people who can't afford to pay privately, so they don't go privately, and they can't get access to an NHS dentist either. Those are the people that are in the most difficult position of all, and that's why we've got a three-tier dental system operating in Wales.

I think back to last year, when one of my constituents, Dafydd Williams from Newtown, was reported on the BBC travelling from Newtown to Telford—100 miles away—to get a dentist, a two and a half hour round trip. I think of another constituent of mine travelling to Brecon. Powys residents aren't any different, I'm afraid, to most other residents across Wales, because in the county of Powys, there are no dentists taking on new NHS patients. At least, that was the case at the time of the FOI request when it went in, some months back. But Powys isn't alone in that. There are nine other local authority areas as well that are in exactly the same position. And of course there are fortunate people—. I say 'fortunate'—the one constituent going to Brecon, Dafydd going to Telford. I say 'fortunate' because they can make their own way there. But many constituents of mine won't be able to make that journey because there's not adequate public transport available. So, there are huge inequalities, I would suggest, Minister, in this regard.

Now, the Minister will say that the new NHS contracts with dentists will lead policy towards widening up access to patients. Well, fair enough—that's what we all want, isn't it? But the British Dental Association says that these new NHS contracts, which emphasise seeing new patients, are a bad deal to those already registered in a practice. Local dentists have told me their frustrations first-hand about their concerns about the difficulty of having the payment for dentistry work set in stone when they have to cover their overheads. This puts huge pressure and huge financial strain, leaving them with no choice but to reduce the amount of NHS patients they take on, and this makes it even more difficult for patients to find affordable dental care.

This is the big issue, I think, for me. We've talked about a scandal, or a crisis, if you like—a crisis in dentistry in Wales. That, I think, we can all agree on. I even hope the Minister will agree that we've got a dentistry crisis. But we don't know the scale of the crisis. That's significant, because how can we fix the problem if the Government doesn't actually know how many people are on NHS waiting lists? This is what we've got to crack. There should be a centralised waiting list. This is absolutely crucial as well. We need to know, in order to resolve the issues, how many people are actually waiting.

As Rhun ap Iorwerth has pointed out, the Health and Social Care Committee have undertaken work on dentistry. We did that last year, and we reported in February. This is our report from February. We'll be debating this on the floor of the Senedd, actually, in a few weeks' time, in June. Then I will go into more detail about the recommendations that the Health and Social Care Committee put forward. We made 16 recommendations in total. So, I would say, in terms of what the solutions are to the Government: look at the 16 recommendations, look at the plan that's been outlined by Sam Rowlands today, and this is the start in order to tackle the huge backlog that we've got.

What else was I going to say?

You've got 10 seconds to say it. [Laughter.]

In that case, I look forward to the debate today, but, particularly, I would say, please, if you haven't done so, read our report on dentistry, it's something to really get your teeth into.

I will avoid puns. Along with other Members of the Senedd, I met the local dental committee in West Glamorgan. I will start and end with the same request—that the Minister directly engages with the representative body of NHS dentists, and does not have their views filtered through the chief dental officer, who they tell me has never worked in an NHS dental practice, and has no adviser who works in an NHS dental practice.

Those dentists carrying out NHS work are committed to the principles of the national health service. The issues they raised included that the new contract is 25 per cent based on units of dental activity, and 75 per cent new metrics. Dentists signed up to the contract without the detail, which emerged later. This was meant to be a lenient learning year, but that does not appear to have happened. There's a programme to encourage Welsh-trained dentists to stay in Wales by offering a bursary for staying and also moving into rural areas, which I think is good.

Can I just say there's a need for a new dental school in Wales? Can I suggest Swansea University as a possible site? Though I'm sure people here are going to suggest Bangor. But I think it is important that we have another dental centre. That is important. If we haven't got enough dentists, how about training some more? This seems to be something that we've never quite mastered. 

A number of issues have emerged that are affecting dental care, and may mean that many dentists exit the contract in April. Around 75 per cent of dentists surveyed by the British Dental Association said that the contract was not working for them. The co-production meetings on the contract have increasingly lacked co-production. They also said the budget for NHS dentistry only covers 50 per cent of the population. Private work subsidises their NHS work at present. And these are people who are committed to NHS dentistry. They are not people who are against it. They are not the ones who jumped out at the first possible opportunity when they found they could make more money by doing private work; they all went 10 to 15 years ago. 

In 1948, NHS dentistry was introduced as part of the newly formed national health service. There were three fundamental principles: no-one should ever have to worry about being unable to afford necessary medical care; care would be provided free at the point of delivery; and care would be based upon clinical need. The dental contract has gone through many changes. The original payment system was a fee per item, where dentists were paid for each treatment they provided. Then there was capitation, where dentists were paid a fixed amount for patients, regardless of treatment. This was used between 1951 and 1990, and worked well.

The system was changed in 1990, involving dentists being paid a fee for each treatment provided, as well as an allowance for registration of adult and child patients. The units of dental activity was introduced in 2006. The bands involved dentists being paid for a set number of dental activities per year, with each band of treatment assigned a certain number of units. The prototype A and B system was introduced in 2011 as a trial for a new contract system. There were two prototypes in Wales. One was the quality and outcome pilot, and the second, a children and young people's pilot. Both removed the unit of dental activity, and gave clinical freedom to make clinical judgment on what is best for the patient.

The latest contract system was introduced in 2019, and called 'contract reform'. Every time I hear the term 'reform' or 'modernisation', I break out into a cold sweat. Under the system, dentists are paid for a set number of units of dental activity per year, with the emphasis on preventative care and patient outcome, which is good. But clawback has generated huge concern for dental practices.

The dentists suggested some solutions: that dental contractors are paid the same rate for each item of treatment they deliver; a weighted capitation scheme needs to be considered—remember, we used to have that; and dentists should be rewarded for seeing red and amber-risk patients more regularly.

Designed to Smile has worked very well, and has reduced dental demand from children. We should be seeing it now working its way through to adults who had Designed to Smile when they were children, who should still be looking after their teeth. Some are going to fall by the wayside—that's inevitable—but it's certainly set a good method of going forward.

Minister, you inherited this from your predecessors. I do not hold you at all responsible for any of this. This all happened before you were Minister, so I'm just asking you to try and resolve it. 

Can I end as I started, requesting that the Minister directly engage with the representative body of NHS dentists, who are committed to NHS dentistry, to find a solution, and not have their views filtered through other people? We want dentistry to work. I think that's one thing we can perhaps all agree on in here—we want dentistry to work. And, Minister, I have confidence in you in solving it. 

I thank my colleague, Russell, for tabling this important timely debate and, Russ, you are very right in saying that NHS dentistry, despite what the Welsh Government would have you believe, is in crisis—a crisis that started long before COVID hit our shores, but made much worse by the pandemic and the Welsh Government's change to the contract of dentist payments.

Last Thursday evening, I attended, along with Mike and Sioned, a special meeting with the Morgannwg Local Dental Committee. Nearly 50 local dentists, practice managers, dental nurses, hygienists, and therapists spent an evening explaining to us politicians why NHS dentistry was suffering in the Swansea bay health board. I was truly shocked by the depth of feeling that they are being let down by Welsh Government, but heartened by the absolute commitment of all those who attended to maintaining NHS dental provision.

Dentists feel they're not being listened to, and there were concerns raised at the meeting about the suitability of advice being given to Welsh Government. The fact that the chief dental officer had never worked in an NHS dental practice was a cause of concern in the minds of the dentists operating at the coalface. This has led to a dental contract totally unsuitable for dentists, and worse for patients. As one dentist put it, the contract is bad for dentists, but horrific for patients. It is a deformed contract, not a reformed one. Many practices have been forced to rely upon private patients in order to subsidise their NHS patients as the contract is capped. One practice told us that they have 13,000 patients, but only received funding for half that number. The dental contract is driven by targets, preferring quantity over quality. This is forcing many dentists to abandon NHS contracts or retire altogether.

Across my local health board, only 40 per cent of dentists are now doing NHS work. With a large number of dentists set to retire over the next few years, this is set to get a lot worse. Only 38 per cent of recruitment campaigns to replace the dentists have been successful. Swansea bay has 16 training practices and, over the past five years, they have trained 70 foundation dentists, yet only nine remain in the area. Cardiff School of Dentistry only trains 70 dental students and a handful of dental therapy students each year—nowhere near enough to fully staff our practices to provide dental treatment to the Welsh public. But, when you consider that a student can leave the dental school and go straight into private practice, doing cosmetic work without having to go through the additional years of foundational training, you can see why it is an attractive option, particularly when they can earn far more than they would on the NHS. Which is why our motion not only calls for reform of the dental contract, but also to refund tuition fees for those who work for five years in Welsh NHS dental practices. We have to incentivise people to pursue a career in NHS dental practice. The dentists who spoke to us last week are thoroughly committed to the NHS, and I would like to put on record my thanks to their dedication. Let's help them look after the nation's dental health by making the Welsh NHS the best place in the world to practice dental medicine. I urge colleagues to support this motion. Thank you very much.

Clearly, I'm not the only Member who's been undertaking some research across north Wales. My office has contacted and spoken with 97 per cent of all dental practices across the north and, of those we spoke with, only 11 per cent are taking NHS patients on in the next 12 months. The average wait for an NHS space was two years. Just over a half of them are taking children on as NHS patients, and the waiting times for NHS children can be anywhere from three months to three years, with the average being two years. Now, that's a damning indictment, and it does reveal the scale of Labour's rotten record on dental services.

The figures are damning, and it does echo something the Minister's refused to acknowledge in the past, but that has to be acknowledged now. There are three tiers within the service, as we've heard. There are those who can access NHS services, and they are very fortunate these days, and they're becoming few and far between. There are those who can't access NHS services but they can afford private treatment. They're fortunate, but, as we've heard, some perhaps can't really afford to pay but they have little choice. And there are some—and this is a cohort that's increasing week on week, month on month—who don't have access to NHS services and can't afford to pay for private services. And the Government hasn't tackled that issue, and they are the people who will pay the price not only in terms of their dental health, but also in terms of their mental health. Because I come across cases now, in my casework, of people, particularly young people, some waiting for orthodontic treatment, having been waiting a long time and are starting to feel that that is impacting on their mental health, and I do think we have to acknowledge that.

So, I would encourage Members to support Plaid Cymru's amendment to this motion and that we do encourage the Government to review dental contracts, that we do look at strengthening dental training provision, and that we need to develop a strategy to retain the current workforce because, as we see with GPs, they are leaving in numbers that are far too high and that's making a bad situation worse.

An investigation just last year by the British Dental Association found that 93 per cent of dental practices in Wales were no longer taking on new NHS adult patients. That's an increase of 8 per cent since 2019. In 2021-22, there were 1,420 dentists with NHS activity recorded in Wales—86 fewer dentists than in 2018-19. And, to crown the crisis, the BDA survey of 250 dentists in Wales found that over a third plan to further reduce their Welsh NHS contracts.

Now, Minister, you've described to us access to dental services as 'challenging' for some people in Wales. In Aberconwy, it is impossible. Countless constituents have told me that they're going private, and some now are even struggling to go private, because of the pressure now on private practice because we just haven't got any access to NHS. I know of some who have to travel as far as two hours away to Dolgellau for NHS dental care. What we have in Aberconwy is clear evidence that the Health and Social Care Committee is right that a three-tier system exists: people who can access private treatment; people who can access NHS treatment; and people who are left, actually, unable to access either, and it's a disgrace.

So, to help my local constituents, I have been liaising with Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board. They've advised me that several practices are considering expanding and view the academy practice model as a good way of being able to do this. It enables them to attract colleagues to come and work in the practice, as they can offer staff more than just delivery of general dentistry to the population. The health board have, earlier this year, sent their proposals to you, to the Welsh Government, for a tendering process. The procurement will be for additional activity in existing practices or for set-up of new practices and, I believe, it has a total combined value of £1.3 million per annum that is recurrent funding. Thankfully, the procurement exercise identifies the health board's priority areas of need for access, which include a number within my constituency, and those areas are Conwy town, Betws-y-coed and Llandudno. So, I would be pleased to learn, Minister, whether you have an update also on the north Wales health board's £1.3 million plan that could help Aberconwy and other priority areas: Dwyfor Meirionnydd, Anglesey, Flintshire, Abergele, Pensarn, Deeside and Rhyl.

Another welcome action in the priority areas is the trial use of a mobile dental unit at Ysgol y Moelwyn, Blaenau Ffestiniog. Oral health programmes should also be delivered through schools. Do you know, we were brought up that we had to have regular check-ups, and, in those days, the dentist's chair used to be rather frightening, but, every six months, we were marched to have check-ups and any dentistry that we needed. I have children of five and six who have never, ever seen a dentist, and I just think that we're sitting on a ticking time-bomb, because those children will grow up with teeth that are decayed, and, as they become adults, lacking in confidence because of—. I just think, in this day and age—. We are in 2023, and I have children who have never seen a dentist. It's shocking. It's wrong that 80 per cent of teachers are already providing pupils with toothpaste and brushes, with 25 per cent saying they have pupils who miss school because of poor oral hygiene, and 40 per cent reporting that they have students—students—who are socially excluded because of oral hygiene issues.

Wales can and should be doing better. We have relied on the goodwill of the sector for too long, so we must work across party to deliver on these dental demands. Dental practices complain about the increase of bureaucracy, so let's commit to cutting that back. Dental hygienists and therapists are generally subcontracted to the dentist, rather than being NHS employees themselves, so let's look at what benefits the NHS could offer them. Neither the general dental service volumetrics contract nor the older units of dental activity works, so there needs to be another review. Fifty per cent of dental graduates from Wales choose to leave here after graduating in order to see a better return on investment.

There is an option, and you've mentioned to me when we've talked about the north Wales medical school in Bangor—. I know that, in the past, Minister, you've mentioned that dentistry will be included in that. An update on that today would, I think, provide reassurance for us all in north Wales. I think it should offer different related courses, include a bachelor of dental surgery and the necessary degree for registered dentists, right at the heart of those priority areas I've mentioned in north-west Wales.

You need to bring your comments to an end now.

I am doing now. The dental sector is in crisis, but I'm clear that a lot can be done to undo damage and deliver stability for professionals and patients. Diolch yn fawr.

Eighteen months ago, I launched a survey of residents in Mid and West Wales, to look at their experiences of dentistry, and I extended that 12 months ago to people in Wales, to do that via our website. These are just a couple of cases that I wanted to highlight with you, because this is all about the people that we represent. So, the first one is:

'Because I was unable to access an NHS dentist, and for the first time in 38 years I now qualify for free treatment due to my income and age, my tooth had disintegrated and I was forced to find a private practice. It cost me £75—£75 that, for me, could have gone towards my energy bills and my dwindling food bills.'

The second one:

'I'm writing to you in the hope of finding out the situation regarding children's brace appointments. My daughter is 14 years old and she has waited 18 months for a brace to be fitted.'

And, indeed, Llyr referred to this earlier.

'We have had to go now to an orthodontist in Hereford, a trip of around an hour, and we have to go there between four and six weeks, every week. The likelihood is that she will be wearing a brace for around two and a half years, and we will have to continue to visit there.'

These are situations that I know are not uncommon. And I'd like to just raise, if I may, Minister, three issues, and I know we've talked about this a lot here in the Senedd, and I've raised this, as have a number of people over the years. The three issues I just wanted to raise are, first, the role of the private sector. There is an additional problem where services are provided by corporate organisations, particularly in rural areas. The closure of a single NHS dentist can lead to the effective loss of NHS services over a wide area, because there is unlikely to be another practice available that's willing to take on those displaced patients. So, I'd like to hear from you, Minister, what your views are on some of those bigger corporate organisations and how we can continue to hold them within our NHS dentist services.

I want to just touch quickly on waiting lists, which Russell and Rhun have mentioned. I asked all of the health boards across Wales what their dentist waiting lists were, and only two of them could tell me that they actually had a waiting list. So, we don’t know who is waiting where, for how long, whether we commission services in one place or another, where best to target our recruitment, where best to send patients requiring emergency care. This is, as we’ve heard, contrary to every single aspect of our health services, and surely we do need now to have a centralised waiting list that is going to be helpful, I hope, to you. So I’d welcome an update, if I may, on the development of waiting lists.

And finally, just in terms of the mixed skills of our dental services, we know that we need more NHS dentists, but we also know that we need other skilled people like dental therapists and dental hygienists. One of the things I know that’s been discussed a lot is around the dental therapists and dental hygienists being able to open and to close treatment. I wonder if you have an update for us, Minister, in that regard, because that would help us across Wales to be able to make sure that everybody has the opportunity to have that dental care.

I just want to finish by saying there have been some real movements, and I’m grateful to you for the work that you’ve done. I know that we’ve been able to work towards having an additional dentist in Llandrindod Wells, for example. And there are many things, many factors, that we know have affected the loss of our dentists. I am going to mention that Brexit is one of them, because we lost a whole host of EU dentists, many of whom were exceptional. They returned, and we need to reflect on the fact that, for those who voted Brexit, you voted to lose dentists from Wales. So, I do hope that we can continue to make progress, and I’d be interested to hear from you on those three areas. Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd.

It's probably dentistry that has moved further away from Bevan’s idea, and the founding principles of the national health service, than any other aspect. I stand to be corrected by Mike Hedges at least—

No. Unfortunately, you're right.

I’m right—there we go. And when we look back at that, it’s both Labour and Conservative Governments who’ve done that. It was Labour that first introduced charges for dentistry back in 1951, and the Conservatives were anxious not to be outdone and introduced more legislation in 1952. One of the first acts of that postwar Conservative Government was to increase dental charges and to increase costs for people who wanted to access the health service. At least they’ve been consistent over the years. And when you look hard at what both parties have done—and I’ve heard a lot from the Conservatives about the failures of this Government here—you also need to look at the record of Conservative Governments over the years that haven’t delivered anything except increased costs and lower services for the national health service.

But it’s important as well that we hold this Government to account, and I do regret sometimes when I see Welsh Government proposing 'delete all' amendments to debates on a Wednesday afternoon, because it is important that we’re able to look and take a review of how the Welsh Government is delivering on some of our services, and there are clearly difficulties facing dentistry across Wales. You don’t have to sit on opposition benches to recognise the issues facing dentistry in Wales. Certainly, as somebody who’s represented both mid and west Wales and Blaenau Gwent, if I look back at my time here, dentistry is one of those issues that has been a consistent problem in every part of the country that I’ve represented, whether it’s parts of north Wales or today, in the south Wales Valleys. There are difficulties with access, but those difficulties are worse today than they were a decade ago, and we need to recognise that.

The struggle to access NHS dentists is acute. It’s real for people. Last year, a dental practice in Ebbw Vale decided to go private and charge people, some of the poorest people in this country, £20 a month to access dentistry. People simply couldn’t afford it. They were terrified. They were being deprived of a service that Bevan told them was for life, and they were being deprived of it under a Labour Government, and we need to recognise that. And we need to recognise that the delivery of these services is part of the national health service that we have determined is a key part of what we exist to deliver, and it isn’t happening today.

And Jane Dodds is absolutely right. I hear the Conservative benches making all these remarks about the failures of the Welsh Government. Brexit has caused difficulties—[Interruption.] Well, I’m willing to take an intervention, Janet. I know you haven't scripted it, but I'm happy to take an intervention. I'm happy to take an intervention if you—

Okay. Would you give me one example where Brexit has actually caused this problem when, for 25 years, it is this Welsh Government that's been in power with some help from Plaid Cymru? At the end of the day, you get the funding package—

Janet, Janet, Janet, I—

—of £1.20, as opposed to £1 in England, and yet the problems in dentistry are here in Wales.

Janet, the loss of dentists as a consequence of Brexit has been well described—

So, why is everyone moaning about the contracts and the funding, then?

—and has been described by dentists up and down the country. It's recognised by the UK Government as well, so it's not just fruit pickers we've lost, we've lost real, important service providers. You need to recognise that, and you need to recognise the damage that that is doing to people in this country and in our communities. So, standing here and grandstanding on a Wednesday afternoon doesn't solve those problems.

But, let me say this—what I want to say to you, Minister, is that the current process of contract negotiation is not resolving the situations that we're facing. It's not resolving the situation. I speak to dentists on a regular basis in my constituency, and they tell me uniformly that the current issues with contracts are not delivering the services that people require. We need a different approach on that, we need a different approach to contract negotiation, and we need a different approach to the contracts that are being delivered.

There is a huge weight of numbers, I'm told by dentists, people waiting for basic services. Of course, when they do finally get those services, they require more interventions because their teeth and their dental hygiene have declined more in the wait for services. It's actually costing us more to keep people waiting than it is to resolve the situation. So, we do need to resolve the contracts, we do need to ensure that we do train dentists. We do need to ensure that we make clear that we require more services. We do need to ensure that the contract negotiations take place in a way that is a positive experience, and not the current, negative experience for dentists.

And we need to ensure that we keep in mind the ambitions and the visions of Bevan. We are going to be celebrating—and we will celebrate, I think, on this side of the Chamber, at least—the seventy-fifth anniversary of the national health service in July. When we do that, let us celebrate not simply an institution, but the people and the services it delivers for people up and down Wales. I can see Altaf nodding in agreement, and we recognise your service to people in Wales, and we thank you for it, let me say that. Right across the Chamber, we thank you for that. So, let us ensure that we mark the seventy-fifth anniversary of the NHS by redoubling our efforts to meet Bevan's vaulting ambitions for the people of this country.

I've been the patient of an NHS dentist for all of my 51 years till this month. My dentist in Swansea told me and 9,000 others like me that I could no longer receive NHS treatment at my practice. My teenage son hasn't had a check-up since 2019, he hasn't seen a dentist. On their website, Swansea Bay University Health Board helpfully state, 

'Across Wales there is currently a high demand from patients looking for an NHS dentist. The health board does not hold a list of practices taking on NHS patients'.

It tells anyone

'looking for an NHS dentist to contact a number of practices in their local area'

to see if they can be offered an appointment, to see if they can be put on a waiting list. You can put your postcode in to do this, I did this, of all of the five options that popped up, three were only taking on children, the waiting times for them all varied between two and four years—four years.

Stories like mine are repeated thousands of times throughout Wales. We've heard many of them this afternoon. Many of my constituents who have had an NHS dentist for years are baffled as to why they can't see their dentist, or those who have lost their NHS dentists can't understand why they can't get access to another one. They feel like they've pushed to the back of the queue. I've received so much correspondence on this: a married couple who've been patients at an NHS practice in Neath for over 10 years, last seen by a dentist in 2019. Another constituent from Cimla managed to get on an NHS list of dentists in Port Talbot, because she could no longer afford, given the cost-of-living crisis, the monthly charge of her private dentist. But, because she doesn't have a car, she finds transport there really difficult and costly. She hasn’t been seen, either, for three years now, but feels really frustrated and confused that that same practice is advertising appointments for new patients, those who have never been NHS patients.

If you have an urgent need, yes, you can phone 111 for help for finding an emergency dentist and you have to be experiencing severe pain, pain that can’t be cured with pain relief, or swelling, or ulcers that haven’t healed within a week. But I’ve had people tell me about toothache that, yes, can be eased by painkillers, which is having a huge effect on their ability to sleep, work and socialise. If you lose a cap or a filling, this isn’t classed as an emergency, although as Llyr pointed out, your confidence in your appearance can have a huge psychological effect on you and your ability to work or socialise, and when we raise these cases, dentists tell us that historic NHS patients are facing these delays for what is classed as non-urgent work because of the consequences of the new metrics of the reformed contract, with its emphasis on accepting new patients. Of course that’s something we want to see, but quite rightly, you said, Llyr, that there is an imbalance here, and Rhun also referred to this, about this equation that is somehow not balancing up anymore.

I was in that meeting with Altaf Hussain and Mike Hedges with the dentists working in my local health board, and they really feel like they’re not being listened to by the Government, and also, there just simply is not enough funding, they say, within the system, to provide the service that the Welsh Government wants. The contracts are unsustainable, the expectations are unrealistic, and we have heard details about that already. Worryingly, they also underlined to us quite powerfully how new dental graduates are now opting for private practice, due to the underfunding of NHS dentistry, although it was felt they were largely not clinically ready for this. The dentists felt there should be a requirement to work within the NHS for a minimum number of years, both in order to fulfil need, yes, but also to gain the necessary clinical experience to provide good-quality care.

Frustration was expressed that more of the limited places at Cardiff are not filled by Welsh students. One local dentist spoke with despair at the fact that none of the several local A* students who had attended work experience sessions with her before applying to Cardiff were even offered interviews. As the motion suggests, we must look at training, exploring the possibility of establishing a new dental school in the north—yes. And I, with Mike Hedges, would also ask the Minister to look at Swansea University, where the graduate entry medicine course provides a model of the type of approach that could be taken. Diolch.

The Minister to reply.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. It was only 10 weeks ago that I gave an oral statement providing Members with an update on NHS dentistry, but I recognise that this remains an important issue for people across Wales. I certainly get as many e-mails on this as any other issue in my mailbag, and I know that this is an issue of great concern to Members here in the Chamber, but more importantly, to the constituents we all represent.

You will all be aware that the pandemic has put additional pressure on what was already a challenging situation in relation to access to NHS dentistry in Wales. So, those new rules that protect dentists from potential airborne diseases have meant that we won’t be able to revert to pre-pandemic levels without an increase in capacity or a new approach. But we are recovering. Now, many of you have talked today, and you don’t sound like it feels like it’s recovering, but it is recovering. A million patients received NHS dental care in Wales last year—that’s a 32 per cent increase on the previous year. And 1.3 million courses of treatment were delivered—that’s a 30 per cent increase, compared to the year before as well.

I’m just going to turn to the motion now, and what I recognise is that we’ve got a long way to go on this issue. We’ve got a huge amount of work to do. It’s not going to be fixed overnight, and frankly, I need a lot of money to fix it, and that’s something that, at the moment, is in short supply. So, none of this is going to be easy. We all want it to happen, but frankly, it is not going to happen overnight, and I think it’s really important that I level with everyone about that.

Now, I understand that the British Dental Association and the BBC undertook that investigation last summer, and I’m afraid I just don’t recognise the reported outcomes, because 2022-23 was the first year in which the overwhelming majority of practices in Wales were operating under those new reform arrangements: 78 per cent of practices, accounting for 89 per cent of expenditure, were required to see new patients—they were required. That’s not something that’s in the English dental contract, but it is now in the Welsh contract. And they did. The fact is that they saw 174,000 new patients last year. So, it simply can’t be true that 93 per cent of practices did not take on a new adult patient.

Now, contract terminations and variations are inevitable and they’ve always taken place, and people retire; they leave for other reasons. And it’s true that we’ve seen perhaps more than we’d like to recently, but it’s still a relatively small number—only 5 per cent of contracts were returned last year. That’s 21 contracts, out of 413. Now, we’re just about to start the renegotiations on the new contract. But I think it’s probably worth pointing out that there are times—and it’s not ideal, but there are times—when those returns actually provide opportunities, partly because, actually, the contracts, the numbers of people that we have to treat, they don’t diminish, they just get redistributed to other areas. Now, sometimes that causes a geographical problem and people need to travel a bit further.

But, for example, in north Wales, the new dental academy, one of the reasons we were able to put that together is because some of the contracts were terminated and we were able to amalgamate them together. So, we’ve now got general dentistry, community dentistry and education, all of that, coming together because some of those contracts were terminated. And I think that academy will provide new premises that’ll serve patients in the Bangor area for many years to come—15,000 per year once it’s fully operational. And Alun Davies, I’m sure, will be pleased to hear that there’s a new practice in Ebbw Vale opening this July—all NHS patients. And that, again, has been funded because a large contract in that area was handed back. So, on variations, there have been some contract reductions—of course, we’ve got to recognise that—but we have seen more contracts increase in value than have been reduced.

Now, the choice of whether to offer the NHS service is not something that I can make—that is up to the dentist. These are, on the whole, independent practitioners. So, there are three forms of dentistry, and the ones that serve the general public are generally independent practitioners. They can’t be forced to work for the NHS. So, some clearly feel that providing a service only to private patients does give them the flexibility to provide a wider range of dental and aesthetic services. And sometimes it is more financially advantageous for them and it does require them to see fewer patients. But the income is not guaranteed and that’s why the certainty that NHS activity offers remains attractive to so many dentists.

I just want to clarify some misconceptions around registration. There is no registration in NHS dentistry, nor has there been since 2006, when the unit of dental activity contract was introduced. Now, that’s not to say there shouldn’t be one, and that’s why we’ve heard what the committee has asked us to do. We’ve been working very closely with the Member for Mid and West Wales, who I know has been really pushing us on this issue in terms of having a central data registry, and, hopefully, that’s going to be in place by the end of this year. Because you’re quite right: we need to know the scale of the problem in order to get our hands around it to understand, ‘Right, what exactly do we need to do to correct the situation?’

Now, you can’t switch these people on overnight. You’ve heard that Brexit has caused a problem. And so it’s going to take us a long time to train people. So, that’s another reason why—I’ve got to be straight with you—this is not going to be fixed overnight. And I’m constantly asking Health Education and Improvement Wales, ‘Look, let’s build some conditionality into this. If we’re spending £0.25 billion on training people in Wales, let’s bloody well make sure they stay in Wales.' So, that is something that I constantly ask the HEIW to consider.

I think it's important also that there's an understanding about charges. The fact is that NHS dentistry was only free for three years, and that was from 1948 to 1951, so there have been NHS charges since 1951. But I think it's probably worth pointing out that what we charge in Wales is significantly lower than what is charged in England. So, in band 1—[Interruption.] In band 1, England charges £25, and in Wales it's £14.70. In band 3, £306 in England; £203 in Wales—£100 difference. Now, in a cost-of-living crisis, that makes a difference.

We want to reach a position where everyone in Wales who needs dental care can access dental care. We estimate that around 20 per cent of the public were using private dentistry pre pandemic. We understand that some feel that they have been pushed into the private sector because they had difficulty in accessing an NHS dentist, but there isn't 100 per cent demand for NHS dentistry here in Wales. Now, having said that, there is a gap, and I want to acknowledge that there is a gap, and it will take us some time to deal with that. We've made progress, but there is quite a long way to go.

So, we are going to try and reform the contract so that NHS work is more attractive to the current workforce. We're also, by increasing the number of training places across the whole dental team, not just dentists but also dental therapists too—. Before long, we will begin the tripartite negotiations on the new dental contract. This will, hopefully, give an assurance to the profession on the future of dentistry in Wales. We are also training more nurses, hygienists and therapists than ever before, and this all requires new investment, which is difficult, given the current financial restrictions placed upon us. Now, this is an important issue for us all, but it's worth recognising that these financial constraints are partly because of the Conservative Government, but it's also important that we acknowledge that this wasn't on the list of Plaid Cymru's priorities: not a penny—not a penny—of the partnership agreement came to help with this situation. We're also trying to identify and create new and innovative ways of upskilling and improving career pathways within dentistry. In order to develop an effective service, we need to use a mix of skills in order to get a balanced dental team.

I will have to ask the Minister to bring her contribution to a close now.

So, unfortunately we can't accept the original motion. I spent the weekend rereading the committee's report, and I think there are many valid points within it, and I do think it's important that we follow up on those. So, unfortunately, I can't accept the unamended motion, because there are a few inaccuracies contained within it. Thank you.

I think the Minister may have used a word in her contribution that she may not have intended to use—

No, it was really bad. My mother's going to be very upset with me. I apologise.

Yes. Your mother would not be happy with the use of that word, and you said it so gently, I think most people didn't notice, so we'll consider it—. We'll pass by and we'll move on to Darren Millar, to respond to the debate.

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thank you to everybody who's taken part in this debate. I think it has been a level-headed debate, for the best part, and it's quite clear that we have a dentistry crisis across the country.

I was a little disappointed with the Minister's response. It did sound rather complacent to me. The Minister, as usual, likes to try to pass the buck to the other end of the M4 for something that has been devolved to Wales for over a quarter of a century—over a quarter of a century. I hear people baulking about Brexit having caused this crisis. That's absolute nonsense. We shouldn't need to have to import dentists into Wales. Our Government should have planned its workforce better to make sure that we had sufficient numbers being trained and paid properly to stay in our system. And I appreciate, now, that the Minister has inherited a very big hole that she has to try and climb out of, in terms of the mess that she had from the previous Ministers in the Welsh Government who held this portfolio, but she's got an awful lot more work to do than simply blaming somebody else. She needs to accept more responsibility for the state of the NHS in Wales, including this issue, so that we can get it sorted. 

Now, I heard the Minister, once again, suggesting that well over 100,000 new patients had been seen in Wales as a result of the contract reforms. We know that the British Dental Association said that the Government was misleading people by quoting these sorts of figures. They said, and I quote, that you have been 'cooking the books' in terms of the way that you have been describing things to this Senedd Chamber. And they've said this, and I will quote here—Russell Gidney, of the BDA Welsh general dental practice committee, he said this:

'for every new patient seen, a dozen historic patients could lose access to NHS dentistry'

because dental practices are closing. So, if you've got one in 20—. Even the Minister says that one in 20 have closed in the past 12 months. You said 5 per cent of practices have handed back their contracts; that's one in 20. You sound pretty complacent to me about it. But if it's one in 20 and each of one of those has got, say, 9,000 patients, as Sioned Williams's practice has, and Ruthin Dental Practice has in my own constituency, who are all now high and dry without an NHS dentist, then you're talking many hundreds of thousands of people, not just the 100,000-odd that you said who have managed to find access. They're just people floating around the system that have been de-registered in one place, desperately searching for another. And most of them still don't get access to an NHS dentist. So, I think we need to be less complacent, and what we need is a clear set of actions that you are going to take. 

Now, frankly, this new contract is an absolute disaster. It is not working. It was supposed to be a learning year last year, and the amounts and requirements, the targets that you'd set for practices, were supposed to be adjusted based on that learning year for the current financial year that we're now in. And it's because most of those were not adjusted that more and more dentists now are handing back their contracts and saying, 'We're not prepared to do dentistry work in the NHS.'

Mike Hedges, I thought, made a fantastically important point, and that is, if you have a chief dental officer who's got no experience in an NHS dentistry practice, then you're not going to have a lot of confidence that they're going to be the best person to lead the negotiations to develop a new contract. And I think that that experience that people are having now across Wales speaks for itself. Now, I don't know the chief dental officer; I wish that individual all the very best in trying to sort this mess out. But I think the fact that the profession doesn't appear to have a great deal of confidence in that individual is something that the Minister ought to consider. 

Now, I hear the bleating—I hear the bleating all of the time about the Welsh Government not having the money to invest in NHS dentistry. We all know—it's been rehearsed here today; Janet Finch-Saunders made mention of it, so did Sam Rowlands—that, for every £1 that's spent on an NHS dentistry episode in England, Wales gets £1.20 to spend here. On top of that, we also know that the Welsh Government returned 155 million quid, that it couldn't find an opportunity to spend that money on in the last financial year. And we know that they've poured almost £0.25 billion down the drain on a nationalised airport that they didn't have to spend. So, when people bleat—[Interruption.]—when people bleat that you do not have the resources, I'm sorry, Minister, it just doesn't hold water, that argument, in any way, shape or form.

Now, I want to commend the work of Russell George and the Health and Social Care Committee. The report that they've done on dentistry, which I've had the opportunity to take a look at, is very, very clear. These are not problems that started because of the pandemic. It makes it abundantly clear that there needs to be more investment, that the problems started a long time ago, and that there needs to be a strategy to get out of this hole, as I described it earlier on, that we are now in. And the only way to do that is by quantifying the problem. And that is why this issue of making sure that we know how many people are waiting to register with a dentist is so critically important, and I can't believe that it takes a committee report to get you to do that, frankly. It seems to me to be perfect common sense—you've got to find what the scale of the problem is before you can plan to get out of it.

Now, there are some green shoots, if we can call them that. Okay, you've heard about some of the innovations in north Wales that Janet Finch-Saunders made reference to with the dental academy. We know also that there's good work, which is going on, to establish new facilities in Bangor. All of those are really important, but unless we're attracting people in, we're not going to see any difference.

When I spoke to Ruthin Dental Practice about why it had decided to hand back its contract, with 9,000 people in the town of Ruthin being left high and dry, they said it was a threefold problem. They said, one, they were having difficulties recruiting people into NHS dentistry. They advertised for five months and got no responses. As soon as they said, 'We're going to be a private practice', and advertised, within a week they had dozens of applications, because people aren't motivated to work in the NHS because the contract system isn't working. And your contract reforms are causing even more people to turn away from a career in the NHS.

The second thing that they cited was the impact of the Welsh NHS contract reform. They said that the targets that they had been set were completely unrealistic in year one—the learning year—and, for the new financial year, they were given exactly the same unrealistic targets, even though they were told that they ought to be adjusted. So, clearly, they felt so demoralised that they wanted to hand back the contract.

The third thing that they said was a great problem was increasing NHS bureaucracy. So, in addition, the new contract that had been given—which has some laudable aims, I must say, and I think Llyr referred to some of the laudable aims in the contract—the problem is, if you tie it to too much bureaucracy, then it outweighs the benefits that they might see on the other side of things. So, one example they gave me was they said that the current episodes are 10-minute or 15-minute each, that they get to check through people's teeth, and then they move on, under the old contract. The new contract gives them 20 minutes, but they then have 10 minutes-worth of paperwork to do to follow up from that patient episode. Now, clearly, there needs to be a better balance, okay, to make sure that we get these things right.

Will you take an intervention?

I'll happily take an intervention.

One of the issues raised, actually, in the committee, when we took evidence on this, was that dentists would say, 'Oh, we've got too much bureaucracy', but I would be saying and arguing back, 'Yes, but we need that data. We want more data.' But what they said was, 'There's a lot of duplication going on.' So, they're forever—. Because we've not got the IT systems in place, what they're finding is they're putting the data in, and then a dentist or a dentist assistant has to then re-put e-mails, address, telephone numbers in a new form. So, it's about making that much more streamlined and making sure we've got a system that can work across Wales and across dentistry practices.

That's absolutely what we need and, hopefully, some of the innovation that we're seeing with the use of technology in the NHS now, with the app that we're finally getting, after £15 million has been spent, will help to address some of those concerns and make it more streamlined, because I recognise them when I speak to dentists in my own area.

So, we heard that there are problems in Swansea, we heard that there are problems in north Wales, in west Wales—all over the nation—in mid Wales as well with Jane Dodds's remarks. We have to get to grips with this problem once and for all. Yes, we need incentives for people to train in Wales. Yes, we need incentives for them to work in the NHS once they are trained. Yes, we need to know the number of people that we need to plan to train for, and that's why this list is so important, and that's why we've got to invest more money into the system in order to make this thing work.

If I can just end, if I may, just on the subject of emergency dental appointments. So, in north Wales, you're told, 'You haven't got a dentist, don't worry, there's the emergency dental line.' I had the misfortune of eating one of my mother's samosas over the summer. [Members of the Senedd: 'Oh.'] Yes, well, you haven't tried them. There was a pea in there that was so hard it cracked my tooth. So, I called the emergency dental line, because, unfortunately, it happened to be on a bank holiday weekend, only to be told—. It was very sore, very sharp, I couldn't—. Exactly. So, I was told I was eligible for an appointment. They gave me a telephone number to call. I had to dial that number, before I could get through to a human being, 100 times before I finally got through. Now, when I got through, I got my appointment, got sorted. [Interruption.] Yes, I'm sure she is. I managed to get it sorted. But it shows you that so many other people are in a similar situation, so we need to increase the capacity, in the short term, of those emergency dental services until we get the practices up to speed with their capacity. Thank you for your indulgence, Presiding Officer.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] There are objections. We will therefore move to voting time for voting on that item and other items.

Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, we will proceed directly to the first vote. The first vote is on the motion under Standing Order 26.45 to consider further amendments to the Agriculture (Wales) Bill at Report Stage. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 34, 15 abstentions and 1 against, therefore the motion is agreed.

Let me pause for one second.

The next vote will be a vote on item 5, the debate on the general principles of the Food (Wales) Bill. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Peter Fox. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 24, 1 abstention, 25 against, and therefore the motion is not agreed.

The next votes will be on item 7, the Welsh Conservatives debate on NHS dentistry. I call for a vote on the motion, tabled in the name of Darren Millar. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 15, no abstentions, 35 against, and therefore the motion is agreed—is not agreed, forgive me.

One moment of success there, Darren Millar. I corrected myself.

Amendment 1 is next. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Lesley Griffiths. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 25, no abstentions, 25 against, and therefore, I use my casting vote against the amendment. And therefore, the amendment is not agreed—25 for, 26 against.

Amendment 2 is next. I call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Siân Gwenllian. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 25, no abstentions, 25 against. I use my casting vote against the amendment, and the amendment is not agreed—25 in favour, 26 against. Amendment 2 is also not agreed.

Nothing is agreed in that series of votes. That concludes voting time, therefore.

We will now move on to the short debate. And the short debate this afternoon is in the name of Tom Giffard, and I will invite Tom Giffard to speak once Members have left the Chamber.

I'm sure Members will be leaving quietly, if they are leaving, and then I'll ask Tom Giffard to start the short debate.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. I'm honoured to be bringing this short debate to the Chamber this evening, and I know, like me, Llywydd, you'll be looking forward to hearing from Laura Anne Jones, Altaf Hussain, Natasha Asghar, and James Evans, to whom I've given a minute each of my time. I greatly look forward to hearing their contributions, as well as the Minister's response as this debate progresses.

Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II represented the embodiment of selfless dedication to duty. At just 25, she had an enormous responsibility placed upon her, one that, before the abdication of her uncle, no-one could possibly have expected that she would one day have to face. And yet, as our longest reigning monarch, she rose to the task like few people in the history of our country ever have. She represented service to the nation, a recognition that we are all part of something greater than any one individual. As I said when we met to offer our condolences last year, she truly put the 'great' into Great Britain. And I was honoured to be able to meet her when she came to open the Senedd, and it's a moment that I personally will never forget.

And in that debate, I also said that she was:

'a builder of bridges, because whether you voted Labour or Conservative you had one Queen; whether you were born in the UK or came here to build a better life, you had one Queen; held a faith or didn't, young or old, supported Swansea City or Cardiff City; whether you're a unionist or a separatist; whether you're a monarchist or a republican, you had one Queen.' 

I've quoted myself there like only Mark Isherwood could. [Laughter.] And from the enormous volume of correspondence I've received, I know how much Queen Elizabeth meant to so many people right across Wales. Both she and the King embody a long-standing dedication to Wales, our history, our culture and our values. From her regular royal engagements, to her meetings with so many wonderful voluntary and community organisations, to a very personal connection to the community of Aberfan, following their grief and tragedy, Her late Majesty's importance to us here in Wales is difficult to overstate.

And it wasn't just Wales or the United Kingdom either. As head of the Commonwealth, an organisation to which she devoted so much time and affection, she remained a much-loved figure. She stood above the political disputes of the day, and remained a unifying figure, even when political debate surrounding the monarchy and the Commonwealth intercepted, the Queen always remained admirably above the fray. For example, in Australia, whatever side of the republican debate people were, Queen Elizabeth II was always welcomed with open arms and warm hearts by the public.

And so, what better way to celebrate her amazing life than to ensure a permanent commemoration to her and her legacy, to remember her in a lasting way that will stand to remind people of the enormous sense of dedication to duty that she represented, a way to complement all of her individual experiences, memories and tributes in a way that will bring people together, a way for us all to recognise that we share in that same sense of duty, that same sense of something bigger than ourselves, that same sense of honesty and service that she embodied. Ultimately, commemorations exist to celebrate the lives of prominent individuals who achieved so much and made many transformative differences to people’s lives. The testimony of so many individuals and groups is perfect evidence of the effect the Queen had on so many people. It would be a chance for all of us to give something back to someone who dedicated her life to representing and serving us, both here and abroad, for so many years.

Commemorations of monarchs have historically taken place in a wide variety of forms throughout the centuries. Any number of paintings, tapestries, embroideries, statues, carvings and buildings have all been created, dedicated or renamed to the lives of our various monarchs. And while times may change and the exact form of commemoration has evolved to reflect the modern age, it’s that same spirit of wanting to recognise the good that’s been done that connects with that through line with the past. Because of course the passing of Her late Majesty was a tragic time. The funeral led to outpourings of grief, which proved just how much she touched people’s lives. But of course, after the sadness we can now look ahead to a positive and, hopefully, a celebratory moment to look at Queen Elizabeth II’s life and memory.

There’s a range of options that could be explored, whether it’s a statue, as was commissioned to commemorate the Queen Mother. That bronze statue by Philip Jackson was funded by a £5 coin produced by the Royal Mint. Although this was an expensive undertaking, many bronze statues have a starting price of £1,500, so financial obstacles need not be a barrier. But to have a similar statue commissioned for the Queen could be classed as part of the influential women series, which involves statues of influential women being erected across Wales. While this series does focus mainly on influential Welsh women, the Queen was influential in her own right in Wales, becoming Queen at such a young age, especially during such a male-dominated time.

A garden of reflection or a memorial garden is a good way of honouring influential people in a community. In my opinion, a memorial garden would be an excellent fit for the Queen as she was someone who was an influential person in so many communities. It particularly ties into the Queen’s Green Canopy project, which was launched for the Jubilee. That would enable the Queen to be remembered along with local communities and make a contribution towards tackling climate change. Making this either a Senedd or local community-run project would help local authority areas who are looking to sell land due to the increasing costs of maintaining it, as well as enabling local communities to tailor the project to suit their needs.

Public commemoration is not just the physical structure itself. Of course, statues, gardens and named buildings are an important form of tribute, but it’s also the thought behind the commemorations that gives them that greater meaning. Because ultimately, they physically embody the feelings of warmth, affection and love that so many of us had for such an inspiring figure.

So, to conclude, as our sovereign who did so much in service to this country, some form of permanent commemoration would seem to be an entirely fitting way to celebrate the life and times of Queen Elizabeth II. Circling back to my earlier remarks, whether unionist, nationalist, monarchist, republican, Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat or Plaid Cymru, I hope we can all recognise the selfless service that she embodied. Because day-to-day political divides are ultimately for us to play out in the arena of public debate. We challenge each other in policy areas on health, education, the economy and, of course, the constitution. However, with the passing of Queen Elizabeth, I hope all Members step back from seeing her as a constitutional monarch with a role the subject of political and constitutional debate and instead see her as an individual who made a historic contribution to our national life, and an individual worthy of a permanent public commemoration here in Wales.

Firstly, diolch to Tom Giffard for bringing this debate to the floor of the Senedd. Her late Majesty’s life and reign was devoted to the people of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth. She forged a bond with our nation unmatched. She stood strong and steadfast, upholding and promoting all that is great about our country for 70 years. She was always there, a constant and consistent guiding light through good times and bad.

After her death there was a profound sense of loss and people wanted a way to commemorate her and her life of service to our nation. There is an opportunity here to honour Elizabeth II, who remained faithful to her promise until her death, and it’s the very least we owe her as a nation. The majority of people, I’m sure, would support such a consideration. I know that many of my constituents and myself would love to have a permanent place or monument to mark the life of Her late Majesty and be reminded of her. I fully support my colleague Tom Giffard today, and I hope that the idea behind this short debate comes to fruition.

I thank Tom for tabling this debate and for graciously allowing me a minute of his time. Growing up in Kashmir, some of my fondest childhood memories are about Her late Majesty. Two of my father’s most prized possessions were a special coronation commemorative Thermos flask and a wireless set. At the time of Queen Elizabeth’s coronation, owning a radio in Kashmir was illegal. But my father kept one in secret, and we were able to listen to the ceremonies taking place in the United Kingdom, drinking tea from his prized Thermos, itself a rarity in Kashmir. That Thermos, with its portrait of the Queen, stayed with us for many years. In a way, you could say I grew up with the Queen, as she was always with our family. With her passing, we have to find a way of permanently commemorating the late Queen and memorialising the huge comfort she granted to millions of people across the globe. Diolch yn fawr.

I’d like to thank my colleague Tom Giffard for tabling this very important short debate this afternoon. Our late Queen was without doubt a role model and an inspiration to millions of people here in the UK and across the globe. We all saw how hard she worked day in, day out, and her love for her country and its people was unwavering. Her Majesty’s contribution to the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth will without a doubt provide a lasting legacy.

The Queen was a constant presence in many of our lives, reigning over us for more than 70 years, and our late Queen’s lifetime of dedication and devoted service deserves to be recognised permanently. I know many Members across the benches, from here, from all other sides—some may be present, some may not right now—did take great pleasure in meeting, greeting and spending time with Her Majesty when she did visit the Welsh Parliament. And I know, having said that, she certainly created history in every sense of the word. And I really do hope that we are all able to see a permanent commemoration of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II right here in Wales in the very near future to mark her contribution, commitment and love for the people of Wales.

I want to thank my good friend and colleague Tom Giffard for bringing forward this important debate today. Her late Majesty the Queen was a remarkable individual, an exceptional individual, and right across the United Kingdom the way we mark exceptional people is by giving them a long-lasting memorial. I think it is right and proper that we give Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II a long-lasting memorial for future generations of this country to look up at her and the remarkable service she gave to our country, and not just the country here, but the Commonwealth and the wider globe. I have a question directly to the Minister: what conversations have you had with the royal household about getting a long-lasting memorial here in Wales? I’d like to know whether that will be partly funded by the royal household as well, because I think that would go a long way with helping us get this over the line. Thank you very much.

I call the Deputy Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism to reply to the debate. Dawn Bowden.

Diolch, Dirprwy Llywydd. When the First Minister offered the Senedd’s condolences on the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in September of last year, he reflected on her lifetime of service, duty, and self-sacrifice, and her personal commitment to Wales and its democratic institutions. I’m sure that everyone in this Chamber recognises those values, and how they endeared her to so many people in Wales. So, could I welcome today’s short debate from Tom Giffard, which has provided us all with an opportunity to reflect once again on the late Queen’s life and service? And to think about public commemoration, which of course is central to the way in which we represent and recognise our history, promote our values, and celebrate our communities.

I’m of course aware that there are discussions about possible commemorations to the late Queen in London and elsewhere in the UK, and we’ll pay close attention to those ongoing debates. I’ve also listened carefully to this afternoon’s debate to get a sense of how this Senedd might wish to approach the issue, although clearly, we’ve not heard from all sides on this debate, given the attendance here this evening. However, there are local initiatives under consideration in parts of Wales, as well as elsewhere in the UK, as I've mentioned, to mark the reign and the service of the late Queen Elizabeth II.

Our commemoration, of course, can take many forms and it need not be, say, a traditional statue in the city centre, which is the point that Tom was making. In Northumberland, for instance, after public consultation, it was decided to establish woodland walks and to make park improvements in memory of the late Queen. But in terms of any national commemoration in Wales, it would be important to proceed on the basis of consensus as far as possible, because commemoration must always strive to be dignified rather than divisive. A proper and fitting commemoration should blend those very significant values represented by the late Queen with the values of today’s Wales, as a forward-looking, inclusive nation, in a way that is dignified and appropriate.

As Members will be aware, the Welsh Government has recently consulted on public commemoration in Wales, which is guidance intended to help public bodies reach well-informed decisions about public commemorations, and it will help those bodies play their part in making Wales an anti-racist nation and celebrate individuals from all parts of our society who’ve made an outstanding contribution to Welsh life. It’ll be published in the coming months. This guidance sets out that inclusive decision making is essential for any public commemoration. To quote the guidance,

'Ideally, the choice of what history to commemorate in our public spaces and how we mark it will be an expression of values and ideals that are shared by everyone.'

In following the principles of that guidance, then, we should make sure that the views of communities are taken into account, as well, of course, as the views of the Members of this Senedd, both today and in the future. Again, as Tom Giffard mentioned, Wales is already benefiting from the Queen’s Green Canopy, which involves the planting of trees across the United Kingdom. That project was created to commemorate the late Queen’s Platinum Jubilee and has been extended in her memory.

The First Minister presented the then Prince of Wales with a sapling from the historic Pontfadog oak last summer to mark the Queen's Platinum Jubilee, as a gift on behalf of the people of Wales. The King and the First Minister attended the planting of the sapling at the National Trust Erddig estate near Wrexham last December—one of his first visits to Wales after becoming King. So, an initiative similar to the Queen's Green Canopy, which would bring benefits to all of Wales, could constitute a fitting and lasting commemoration for her late Majesty, but there may be other, equally appropriate means of marking her decades of service. 

Can I therefore close my contribution this evening by thanking all Members for their contributions too and say that of course I do welcome further discussions with them on this particularly important issue?

Thank you all. That brings today's proceedings to a close.