National Assembly for Wales

We support local authorities through national planning policy and regulatory requirements to consult key stakeholders on certain applications. Our work on resilience includes proposals to increase planning application fees and improve the capacity of local planning services.

Prif Weinidog, I recently met with AMP Clean Energy, who are looking to invest £45 million in 150 small-scale battery box projects across Wales. These compact 24 sq m battery units can be rapidly deployed, as they’re not constrained by grid capacity issues, and they offer long-term ground rental income for local authorities and landowners, at no cost to them. Each unit has the potential to save nearly 5,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide over its lifetime. However, a key challenge is the inconsistency in how Wales’s 22 local authorities handle lease agreements and planning applications. While some councils manage these efficiently, others do not, leading to delays and possible loss of investment. Given the importance of these projects in supporting Wales’s energy ambitions, and the financial benefits they offer councils, what steps is your Government taking to ensure a more consistent and streamlined planning process across the whole of the 22 local authorities? Also, would you and your Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning be willing to meet with AMP Clean Energy to better understand the opportunities these projects could bring to Wales?

Thanks very much. I’m absolutely determined, as a Labour Government, that we increase the amount of energy we produce from renewable resources. And I think there are real opportunities, in particular off our coasts. But the fact is that, very often, the wind blows or the sun shines at a time when you don’t need it, and you do need, therefore, to develop battery technology, and it’s great to see AMP, and other organisations, have the appetite to explore what more we can do in this area.

In relation to planning, you’re quite right—it’s one of the things that I’ve focused on since I became First Minister. We’ve had a consultation promoting a resilient and high-performing planning service, and that was issued by the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning last November. So, there’s the opportunity for us to get that more consistent approach that you’re interested in developing.

First Minister, you were elected, like me, by the good people of Mid and West Wales to represent and advocate on their behalf. Can I ask, therefore, whether this is the kind of policy you expected from a Labour-led Government in Westminster—a policy that's going to hit the most vulnerable—

I think you've asked the question now.

—in our society and push thousands more into poverty? Is this what you meant by a partnership in power?

I think it's really important for us to recognise that, all over Wales today, there are tens of thousands of people who are really worried about the impact that proposed reforms could have, but they don't know to what extent it will happen, they don't know when it will happen. I am determined to make sure that Welsh voices are heard when it comes to welfare reform. I think it's also important to make it clear that reform of the system definitely needs to happen; I think trapping people in a welfare poverty trap is also cruel.

One of the things we've done as a Government is to make sure, in places like Mid and West Wales, we have introduced a system for people to claim what's theirs of right. Over the years, we have seen 361,000 people gain an additional £170 million. In Mid and West Wales, it's helped 50,000 people to claim an additional income of £31 million. Now, I think there is about £2 billion that is not being claimed in Wales. One of the things that we've done last week was to increase the amount of money that we give to that 'Claim what's yours' national benefit take-up campaign. We hope that that will support some people. But I will be making the case on behalf of people who we know are very concerned because of the reform proposals.

First Minister, I hope you would agree with me, but I don't want to see people dependent or reliant on welfare benefits in the first place, of course. Can I ask, First Minister, what steps is the Welsh Government taking to support people in mid Wales to benefit and be less reliant on welfare benefits and come into long-term and good employment?

Well, look, I think it is important for us to make sure we support people to get into work. I don’t think we should apologise for that. I think that is a good thing. I think that trapping people on welfare is not a great situation either. And the fact is that, we know from things like the report that was written in the Senedd that many, many disabled people are really keen to work, and we need to make sure that we provide them with a pathway and a ladder into work.

What we know works well in Wales is the way we did the youth unemployment. We tackled that particular issue by giving a guarantee, but by recognising that you can’t click your fingers and expect them to walk into a job. Some of these people are extremely vulnerable, some of them have real mental health issues, some of them have serious physical issues, and you can’t do it overnight. So, what we’ve done with them is to stand with them, and it’s made a difference. We haven’t done it overnight. We’ve worked with them over a period of months and we’re getting results. That’s why our youth unemployment rates in Wales are half what they are in England.

Sioned Williams. Sorry, I forgot.

Diolch, Llywydd. My breath has been taken away. You said you’re going to speak up for disabled people in your answer to Cefin Campell, you said you’re going to listen to them. It doesn’t sound like you’re listening. As has already been highlighted to you, these cuts have been roundly criticised, condemned even by policy experts, by support organisations, and, most importantly, by disabled people themselves.

Though you won’t share it, and we haven’t had any light shone on that again today, whatever Liz Kendall said in her answer to you, we know what the impact will be on Wales: it will push thousands of disabled people and thousands of children into poverty. Since these misguided plans were first revealed, you and your Ministers have been asked time and again by Plaid Cymru to listen to those expert voices, to speak up for the disabled people in Wales, warned you of the dire consequences, especially for Wales. You kept saying, 'Oh, it’s not my responsibility'. It’s really disappointing. The Green Paper wasn’t even published in accessible formats. Did you ask Liz Kendall about that?

Contrary to statements, and you’re making them again, you’re saying that some of these planned changes, such as the tightening of PIP eligibility criteria, are up for consultation. It’s not. That is not in the consultation. Only the mitigations are. So, I’ll ask again: how many people in Wales will be pushed into poverty by Labour’s welfare cuts, how many children, what work is being done to address this added human and financial cost across your Government? Will you condemn the cuts—yes or no?

I’ve been in contact with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and made it clear to her that I have no problem with her releasing the letter. I hope she’s going to do that later today. The implication in her letter is that there is recognition that the cuts will fall more heavily in Wales, although there’s no detailed assessment yet. My job is—[Interruption.] Would you like me to finish? My job is to stand up for Wales, and I have been honest with the UK Government about the fact that we are very exercised about these proposals.

My concern is about the failure to share information that the UK Government is sitting on. The concordat that was written between the DWP and the Welsh Government is absolutely clear that efficient and effective government requires good communications. There was a commitment to provide the detail of policy as well as information including statistics and research. The Treasury must have this information, so why is it not possible for them to share it with us?

The concordat was updated in February, and that establishes an agreed framework to ensure that there’s close liaison between the Department for Work and Pensions and the Welsh Government. Now, we do have a reasonably good relationship at official and ministerial level. The inter-governmental relationship follows that review of inter-governmental relations that is more general. Data analysis and data sharing have been recognised as a barrier to streamlining the delivery of Welsh benefits, and also a barrier that prevented people from claiming their entitlements. The DWP tell us that they are exploring how they can share their data in order for us to ensure that more people are able to pick up that £2 billion that they are eligible for.

Good afternoon, First Minister. There is a real sense of despair and a sense that we expected Welsh Labour to stand up, as you have done, for the poor, the vulnerable, those who are voiceless, and yet we are not seeing this, if we're honest. I suspect that a lot of people on the back benches, and maybe you as well, feel in a difficult position here with what is happening in the UK Government. You are our voice with the Labour Government. We've seen reports of 31 per cent of children here in Wales living in poverty, and that was last week. That is shameful, and we are so, so saddened to think that we live in a country with that degree of children living in poverty. We plead with you—what else can we do—to say, ‘Enough is enough’. We have to scrap the two-child benefit. We have to make sure that payments are restored to people who need them. And we need you to stand up for us, please, First Minister. Will you do that? And would you consider things like the Scottish child payment as well? Bringing that here to Wales would make a huge difference. So, I’d ask you just to take those things back and just change the position of UK Labour, so that we don’t have 31 per cent—a third—of our children here in Wales living in poverty. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

I recognise that the Chancellor had really difficult choices to make, but it's up to her and the UK Government to defend positions taken by their Government. I am not a spokesperson for the UK Government. My job is to stand up for the people of Wales—[Interruption.]

I need to hear the First Minister. Allow the First Minister to continue with her response. 

My job is to stand up for the people of Wales. That's what I have done and I will continue to do. And if that requires me to take a different view from others, that's what I will do. I will always stand up for Wales and put country before party. 

Let me make it more clear and easy for you, First Minister. UK Government plans to help people into work outlined in the 'Pathways to Work' Green Paper are expected to save the UK Treasury £4.8 billion by 2029-30. Most of the savings will come from making it harder for people to qualify for personal independence payment, or PIP, a benefit for people with disabilities. Many people believe that this will hurt the poorest in our society. The Daily Mirror made the starkest assessment of UK Labour's financial mismanagement with the headline

'Balancing the books on the backs of the poor'.

My question to you, First Minister, is that since the UK Labour Government—[Interruption.]

Allow the questioner to continue his question, please. Altaf Hussain, you may continue. 

The question to you, First Minister, is this: since the UK Labour Government is changing who qualifies for PIP, what will the Welsh Government do now to ensure that those who no longer qualify for, or get less, PIP don't become poorer? I am sure that everyone agrees that those who are better off should help those who are struggling the most. Thank you. 

Thank you, Altaf. Your party will understand inequality and poverty, because you're the party that forced so many people in our country into that situation. It's part of the reason why we have quite so many people in a welfare system that is broken, doesn't work well for the majority of people and doesn't get people into work or protect the most vulnerable. And let's be clear, we are a party that believes in social justice, we are a party that stands with the most vulnerable, and we will make sure that those people who absolutely need the support will get the support.

What a disgrace this situation is. What contempt Westminster shows us, leaving us in Wales to second-guess the effect that these benefit cuts will have because Westminster refuses to tell us. They refuse to confirm what we all know, that Labour's cuts to welfare will hit us in Wales the hardest. We've become used to Westminster's cruelty. Under the Tories, we expected nothing less; under Labour, many would have hoped for better. How wrong that hope now seems. The savagery of these cuts must be acknowledged, yet so far they've refused to own the consequences of their actions. First Minister, are you content with how this is going? Don't you think that we in Wales deserve better than this?

Well, I've just told you that I will stand up for Wales, that we are exercised about the proposals in relation to welfare. I think that there are areas that are positive: I think that £1 billion to help people to get onto a ladder is something positive. But one of the things that I lament is the fact that, really, ideally, it should have been about putting people and the benefits system and the need to reform it first and then to worry about how that is organised afterwards. That's what we've done in Wales. We've done it through the youth unemployment scheme, we found the money and it is paying dividends. 

First Minister, back in September, you said, and I quote:

'Delivery, accountability and improved productivity will be the watchwords of my Government—making things happen on the people's priorities. And this will include more transparency and visibility for the public'.

First Minister, you said that you wanted more transparency, but what is your record? So far, you've refused to publish any correspondence about the operation of grooming gangs in Wales, you've refused to allow the Senedd's Wales COVID-19 Inquiry Special Purpose Committee to interview witnesses under oath, and now you have refused to publish a letter that you have received from the UK Government that highlights how the welfare cuts in Wales will impact vulnerable people the length and breadth of this country. It looks like you've got something to hide. What is it?

Thanks very much. Listen, I've been one of the people who have been up to my neck in the COVID inquiry, and I can tell you there's nothing more transparent than the system we've just been through. We've spent millions of pounds, taken hours of lawyers' time, making sure that we give answers to those people who suffered during the pandemic. So, I don't think that there's a lack of transparency in relation to COVID. And as I've just mentioned, I have no problem at all in Liz Kendall publishing that letter, and I hope she'll do so this afternoon. 

First Minister, I know it's April Fools' Day, but we will not be taken for fools. The reality is this: you had the opportunity to make sure that Ministers were required to tell the truth under oath; you rejected it. You had the opportunity to make sure that you published on the public record the correspondence between you, local authorities and the police about grooming gangs; you declined that request. And today, you still stand by your error of judgment in refusing to publish a copy of a letter that you would have relished the opportunity to publish had there been a UK Conservative Government still in this country. We will not be taken for fools and neither will the people of Wales. 

You told the people of Wales that having two Labour Governments working at both ends of the M4 would be delivering for the people of Wales. And you've been as good as your word, you have been delivering, but all of the wrong things. Let's have a look at what you've delivered: the longest waiting lists in Britain; the lowest educational standards in the United Kingdom; and the highest unemployment rates in the UK. And meanwhile, your colleagues in Westminster have delivered increased taxes, with national insurance contributions going up for employers—a jobs tax—a change to inheritance tax, which is going to destroy Welsh family farms, and a cruel end to the winter fuel payment that will force many pensioners to choose between heating and eating. In a pre-Christmas message to Labour Party members, you said:

'we are demonstrating the difference only Labour can make.'

You certainly are demonstrating a difference. First Minister, are you proud of this appalling record?

I'll tell you what I am proud of: the £1.5 billion extra that is now going into public services, no thanks to you and no thanks to Plaid. Because that is helping to bring our waiting lists down. It's really good to see that it is absolutely going in the right direction, and we'll be validating the numbers to make sure that we are where we hoped we would be. But that budget is answering and responding to the concerns of the people in this country, who were keen to see those waiting lists come down, who were keen to see mental health support, who were keen to see women's health hubs, who were keen to see new transport and trains in Wales, potholes being filled, who were keen to see how we are transforming our education services. You ask about what difference a UK Labour Government is making, and as I say, it's up to them to defend that. But today, 150,000 people in Wales will get an uplift as a result of the minimum wage, and that will make a difference to their lives. Because bills are going up—we know that—but there's an opportunity for them to help pay those bills.

I apologise, Darren Millar. Your third question.

I tell you what is going up: council tax bills, energy bills, water bills. These are the things that are going up under a Labour Government here in Wales and in Westminster. The truth is you give us the same old tired answers. You're a clapped-out Government that is running out of steam, running out of ideas, and let me tell you: you're running out of time too. The legacy of the previous UK Government was that you inherited the fastest-growing economy in the G7, and in just months, you've brought that growth to a standstill. Growth is down, inflation is up, taxes are up and unemployment is up. That's your record as a Labour Government here in the UK, and the British people, and people here in Wales, are working harder, paying more and getting less. It's economic chaos. That's why we had an emergency budget just last week.

More than 200,000 businesses have closed across the United Kingdom since Rachel Reeves was put in charge of the UK economy, the largest number in British history—more than 770 businesses per day. Many of those businesses, of course, are here in Wales, and those people that would've been employed by them are now on the dole. What is your Government doing to fix this? You're giving them the highest business rates in Britain. And just before the Easter holidays, when people should be looking forward to a beautiful break here in Wales, you're about to introduce legislation that will pave the way for a tourism tax. Can you tell us, First Minister, how increasing taxes, having the least competitive business rates system in Britain, and a tourism tax will benefit our Welsh economy?

You're right, I give a lot of the same answers, because they're the right answers. It's because we're responding to the priorities of the people of Wales. And I'm not going to be distracted from that. You can go off and ask me about all those other things that actually don't chime with the people of Wales, and they don't chime because—[Interruption.] You know why? You know why they don't chime? We know they don't chime because you tried it in the general election last July, and it didn't go well, did it? If we're honest, it didn't go well for you. I do think it's important to recognise that we have spent £5 billion on supporting some of the poorest people over the past few years, to make sure that they do get the support they need, and we're getting people into jobs. Fifteen thousand people have been helped with our employability scheme. Jobs matter. That's how you make a difference in people's lives, and we're going to stand with them to deliver that.

Diolch, Llywydd. Llywydd, we still haven't had a satisfactory answer from the First Minister on her views of the recently announced welfare cuts or on the question of when she will release details of the UK Government's response to her question about the assessment of the impact of those welfare cuts on Wales. She'd asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions for any analysis that has been undertaken on the impact of changes to the benefits system as they will apply in Wales. Later, we'll be calling for an urgent debate on the impact on Wales. If Labour won't do it, Plaid Cymru will. But does the First Minister recognise that publishing that response is rather important? And if she won't release it, will she at least acknowledge that, just as in the scrutiny committee last week, she's exposing this Labour Government's absolute lack of fight on behalf of the people of Wales? Why won't she just release it?

Do you know what? My mother studied under Saunders Lewis, and he gave her a tip once:

Learn to listen. Did you not listen to what I said? I don't have a problem with that letter being published, and I'm hopeful that it will be published this afternoon. It's not mine to publish, but I'm hopeful it will be published this afternoon. But what I know—[Interruption.]—what I know is that there are people in this country who are suffering, who need us to stand by their side. We will be making it clear that we will be expressing our Welsh communities' concerns plainly and unambiguously in the evidence that we will present in response to the welfare reform Green Paper. I'm going to be listening to the concerns of people currently on benefits. I'm also going to be listening to the concerns of people who are trapped in a system that makes it difficult for them to work.

The First Minister says she's listening, but she's not hearing a single thing. On not releasing that letter, this is the First Minister that read out a letter from the UK transport Secretary live on air in January, calling it 'breaking news', and that was shafting Wales as well. She wants this delayed because she knows that we'll confirm that there has been no impact assessment on Wales.

And on this business of reserving judgment, I think the First Minister would probably be happy with some of the newspaper headlines last week: 'First Minister refuses to back welfare cuts'. But I'll tell you what I find quite deplorable, that headline could just as easily have said, 'The First Minister refuses to condemn the welfare cuts'. We've got Save the Children and Action for Children saying this is a political choice. The most vulnerable children, 50,000 more children, into poverty. The Resolution Foundation—'Lower-income households are set to become £500 a year poorer'; Barnardo's, 'A bad situation made even worse'. Are they all wrong, First Minister, or are you reserving judgment on that as well?

Look, I'm really pleased the UK Government has committed to invest an additional £1 billion a year to build towards a guarantee of personalised support when it comes to employment. I think that's really constructive. That's standing by people, that's following the kind of approach that we have in relation to youth unemployment. Now, the UK Government is going to be supporting the Welsh Government as we lead the design of a 'get Britain working' trailblazer, and that's going to be backed by £10 million of funding to explore how work, health and skills—how that skills support will be delivered by the Welsh and UK Governments, how we join that up to help people to move towards and into work. In the longer term, the UK Government has also committed to devolving non-Jobcentre Plus employment support funding to the Welsh Government, and the Secretary of State has offered to work with us on the impact of the welfare proposals on Wales. And whilst, of course, we'll work with them, this is a UK Government proposal, and they must take ownership of it, but I will take up the offer to meet Liz Kendall to work through this.

This is a First Minister that seems very happy to read out published notes from a UK Government that she says she wants to stand up to. Let me summarise the First Minister's position: she won't be publishing the letter herself from a Labour colleague on the impact of welfare reforms on Wales, whilst the Secretary of State for Wales, of course, says that the First Minister supports those cuts. She disagrees with experts working in the field of child poverty who warn of the disastrous consequences of the cut; she doesn’t know who she spoke to in Downing Street when discussing the reforms; and, on top of that, she can't even bring herself to support a Plaid Cymru motion this week on bringing in a direct payment to children living in poverty. All of this, remember, within days of child poverty rates in Wales going up. The First Minister made opportunity for every family one of her top priorities. Now, the words are good, but on the deeds, she's falling well, well short. Is that because she's unwilling to do what's right, or unable to because for fear of upsetting her Labour colleagues at Westminster?

I've got a lot of people trying to put words into my mouth these days, haven't I? You've summarised my position. I had somebody else last week trying to speak for me. I speak for myself. I speak for the Welsh Government. The UK Government can speak up for itself, and they can defend their positions. I will defend the position of the Welsh Labour Government here in Wales.

Partnership working has grown between the Welsh Government and the UK Government since last summer, including more effective use of the framework provided by the inter-governmental relations review published in 2022.

Thank you for that answer. Of course, the framework has developed since then, and it provides for a secretariat, it provides for a disputes process, which has certainly not been used as I'm aware, and it also contains very serious commitments to supporting the principles and respect for devolution. But since then we've been in dispute in respect of HS2 funding, the Crown Estate, Barnett reform, welfare reform, data, youth justice, probation, and the list could go on. Now, our duty in this Senedd, it seems to me, is to stand up for Wales. So, I wonder if we could we have a statement on the operation and the efficacy of the framework, and its fitness for purpose? And would you also give consideration to—? Perhaps the biggest problem is that it is not in any form of statutory basis, and what we really need is a new constitutional reform Act.

Thanks very much. Well, certainly, the inter-governmental relations structures feel more stable since the UK general election, and we've definitely seen an increase in the amount of engagement with the UK Government. We think that the review of inter-governmental relations can provide the machinery needed to bring the Governments of the UK together to discuss the right things at the right time. I think there's still work to do on this. But you're quite right, we need to make sure that that is matured and that we're able to use it when those disputes happen. But there are examples, I think, where inter-governmental engagement has led to genuinely positive outcomes for Wales. Tata Steel saw an improved deal for workers. We saw additional investment when it came to coal tips. And there were additional jobs and investment in Shotton Mill up in north Wales.

First Minister, the Welsh Government has noted positive experiences of inter-governmental relations in relation to the work that has been on the freeport programme, which has rightly been called a benchmark for how Welsh Government can act in a partnership of equals with the UK Government. Now, we know that some progress has already been made in developing the freeport programme, and it's vital that that momentum isn't lost. So, First Minister, can you tell us whether you believe the freeport programme is still a benchmark for future inter-governmental working between the Welsh and UK Governments? And can you also provide us with an update on the freeport programme so we can hear more about the collaborative work that is taking place?

I think it's been really interesting in relation to the freeport programme. You'll be aware that there's one in the Milford Haven area and, of course, there's one in Anglesey as well. And one of the interesting things about the model that we have is that it's a model that works in social partnership. That means that we are making sure that everybody is involved in the process of developing what that looks like, in particular the unions, and the UK Government now is looking at that model to see if they can replicate it across the whole of the United Kingdom.

I know the First Minister has fought hard for Wales in terms of taking the Welsh message about what we require here to UK Government, but we also need to see some results. Many of us were profoundly disappointed with the news on the Crown Estate. We are profoundly disappointed with the lack of devolution of rail infrastructure. We are profoundly disappointed with the lack of progress in terms of devolution of criminal justice and policing and the rest of it. But perhaps the most important question facing us now is reform of the Barnett formula. Now, I know this is something that the Welsh Government has pursued with the United Kingdom Government over some time. Will the First Minister now give an undertaking that we will set out what reforms are required and the timetables by which we expect to see reforms delivered, because the real question facing this Government and this Parliament is protecting and investing in the future of our people and our communities. We can't do that if Wales is the worst-funded country in the United Kingdom. We need fairness and we need equality, here and across the whole of the UK.

Thanks very much, Alun. I couldn't agree more, and that's why I have made it a point of bringing up these issues at every opportunity that I have had with both the Prime Minister and even last week with the Chancellor. I think it makes sense for us to focus on things where there is a manifesto, a Labour manifesto commitment. So, for example, we're really pushing on flexibilities when it comes to the financial framework. Now, that sounds really dry and boring, but actually what it means is that we're able to use our money in a different way, which means that we'll be able to put it towards helping people in our communities and focusing on those priority areas. So, that's an area I'm very keen to make sure that we move on as quickly as possible. The Crown Estate—not going quite so well, but we're not giving up. And the same thing in relation to the fairness when it comes to rail infrastructure. I will not stop banging that drum. I did it again with the Chancellor when she visited Cardiff last week.

The fire and rescue service is primarily responsible for preventing wildfires. It leads well-established strategic and tactical partnerships, including the police, Natural Resources Wales, the Met Office and the Welsh Government. It also communicates extensively with landowners and others to mitigate the risk.

Thank you for that response. I was really surprised and disheartened, really, to see the number of wildfires that have happened and are still actually ongoing now. The devastation to our wildlife and natural environment is really concerning, and also it's worrying for residents as well, when they get out of control. So, First Minister, do responders know why or how they are being started? And would you join me in raising concerns about the impact of these wildfires on nature, and the impact that carelessness or even direct action can cause? Thank you.

Well, thanks very much, Carolyn. I think we're all concerned to see the large number of grassland fires—several significant ones in north Wales. At this time of year, the risk is particularly high if the weather is dry, as was the case for most of March, and what happens is that the upland vegetation is highly combustible just before it's replaced by the new season growth from about May onwards. And this also marks the end of the season during which landowners are permitted to undertake controlled burning, to clear the land for other use. So, those are the reasons why, at this time of year. Now, the good news is that, actually, in 2023-34, reported grass fires were the lowest on record—58 per cent lower than in the past 10 years. So, I think that that's an outstanding achievement when it comes to reducing the number of fires.

Last week, there were over 20 wildfire incidents across Conwy, Denbighshire and Gwynedd. One in Corwen led to the Natural Resources Wales helicopter delivering 1,200 litres of water to fire and rescue services, and that was the first time it's ever been deployed. I would like to thank all active common land farmers for the invaluable contribution they make to the management of our uplands. Active common land farming and grazing does in fact reduce the risk of wildfires. However, the tradition is in decline. More than 56 per cent of registered grazing rights have been abandoned since 1965. A common land association in my constituency has seen active graziers decline from 48 members to 21. The sustainable farming scheme now is set to see all individuals with common land rights eligible for financial support—even whether they graze, even whether they're active not, still being able to take resources.

I'd like to also put on record my thanks to those emergency responders, because, as, Carolyn, you've rightly pointed out, it's pretty scary when you see the acreage that's going on fire at the moment. Do you agree with me, First Minister, that farmers, in particular, who do use their common land grazing rights should be entitled to support through the new scheme, and also what resources will you provide to our hard-working fire crews, who really cannot keep coming to the rescue at all times? Now, we're going to be seeing more of these wildfires, if you read the reports from our fire services. So, I think they really do need some extra resource to help with that. Diolch yn fawr.

Well, thanks very much, and I know that the Deputy First Minister is particularly proud of the fact that the SFS will be extended to include those on common land, so that is, I think, a big win. I think it's also worth setting out that controlled burning is something that is accepted as something that is legitimate during a permitted season, but it's got to be done in a planned way, and landowners have to inform the fire and rescue services before burning happens. Now, firefighters are extensively trained and they're fully equipped to tackle wildfires effectively. Our formal arrangements for strategic planning are, I think, clearly bearing fruit.

So, any additional resources: well, you might have had some if you had voted for the budget, but, as it happens, you didn't. [Interruption.] You say this, but it's true; £4 billion you voted against. You can't keep asking for more money after you've just voted down the opportunity of getting £4 billion extra.

Improving health outcomes, as well as reducing waiting times, are priorities for this Government. We've allocated just over £57 million of additional funding this year to support Aneurin Bevan University Health Board to deliver high-quality, safe and timely care to their residents.

Thank you, First Minister. I want to share a horrific experience from one of my constituents and what they had to endure when trying to get medical attention. My constituent's mother had a nasty fall at home and sustained some injuries. The family called for an ambulance and was told there would be a 14-hour wait. Following advice from 111, the family were told to move her onto the settee and keep an eye on her condition whilst they waited for a doctor to arrive. The following day, after her spending a night on the sofa, the doctor phoned to say he wouldn't be visiting, as his shift had finished, and, instead, told my constituent to take his mother to the Royal Gwent. As it was impossible for my constituent to lift his 98-year-old mother and carry her to the car, she remained on the settee.

Two days later, my constituent's mother's condition deteriorated and an ambulance arrived to take the patient to the Grange hospital, where she faced a nine-and-a-half-hour wait in an ambulance before being admitted. She was then transferred to the Royal Gwent, and one afternoon, as my constituent was parking his car at the hospital, the doctor called him to tell him to make his way to the hospital as soon as possible as his mother did not have long to live. After entering the hospital, he was told, in fact, that his mother had died two hours prior. First Minister, I appreciate this is a lot to unpack, but this really isn't acceptable, and I'm not having a dig at our fantastic healthcare staff at all, but I'd like to know what is the Welsh Government doing to stop truly upsetting and unacceptable incidents like this from ever happening again in the future. Thank you.

Well, that sounds like an absolutely dreadful experience, and that is not good enough. That is absolutely not good enough. What I can tell you is that additional funding has been given to the health board to try and tackle some of these issues. I know that the health Secretary is undertaking a review of the amber category in relation to the Welsh ambulance service at the moment. Also, as a Government, there has been £14 million additional capital investment to improve and support the expansion of the Grange emergency department, and that will double the current wait capacity. But that is simply not good enough.

I think it's probably worth saying that there are some great things happening, though, in Aneurin Bevan, that there are hundreds of thousands of people who are getting a good-quality service every day, and it's probably worth just emphasising that the two-year waits are down by nearly 30 per cent, and they're on track to eliminate 104 weeks in all but three specialities by today.

'Llwybr Newydd', our transport strategy, sets out our vision and priorities for transport in Wales, including Delyn. Our national transport delivery plan, plus the regional transport plans being developed by corporate joint committees, will set out how it will be delivered.

Thank you for that response, First Minister. When it comes to the road network, investment in improvement needs to be about the right roads and the right places, to look to future solutions and not fall back on past proposals. The draft north Wales regional transport plan is out for consultation until 14 April, and buried away in the plan is what looks like an attempt to resurrect the so-called red route. When this proposal was previously on the table, I raised concerns about it, including inadequacies with the consultation process; it started life as the Deeside corridor proposals, when the red route itself most impacted communities outside of the Deeside area. Indeed, back in 2017, I said in this Siambr that I was more than happy to offer Cardiff Bay's officials a crash course on the respective communities of north-east Wales and Flintshire. But, in all seriousness, though, there was strong opposition to the proposals from communities in my constituency. Of course, we all recognise that we need improvements to the A55 and the A494, some of which I've raised in here previously, but recycling the red route is not the answer; it is environmentally, economically and politically illiterate.

I'll be encouraging people in my constituency to have their say as part of the consultation, and I will certainly make representations on this, alongside, of course, investment in our public transport infrastructure as well. So, First Minister, do you agree that it should be made as accessible as possible for citizens to have their say on any transport proposals, and, as part of your Government's commitment to connecting communities, do you share my view that we need to focus on improving existing road infrastructure and looking to seek innovative solutions that serve both people and places? Diolch.

Thanks. I think it's absolutely right that local people should have a say on what their regional transport plan looks like, and my understanding is that that is currently out to consultation. What's good about that is that it's trying to bring all the local authorities together, because the fact is roads just don't stop at one local authority and start in another. So, that regional approach, I think, makes a difference.

What is important is that we get all of these things right. We are in favour of trying to get more people ionto public transport. That's why I was really delighted to see that the bus Bill was brought forward yesterday, and we hope that that will be transformational when it comes to how we organise buses in future. That is something that I think we should be really proud of, as well as the fact that we are seeing 87 per cent of services in north Wales now being operated on new trains, following our massive investment in rolling stock.

Trefnydd, I'd like to request a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care regarding ophthalmology waiting times across Wales. In my own local health board area, the average waiting time for a first ophthalmology out-patient appointment is 22 weeks, and the average waiting time for someone to actually start treatment is, indeed, 36 weeks. More worryingly, around 10 per cent of patients in the health board area are waiting 85 weeks or more to start treatment following their referral being received by the hospital. Now, I'm sure that you'll agree with me that these waits are unacceptable and that some patients are at risk of losing their sight while waiting for treatment. Therefore, I'd be grateful if we could have a statement from the Welsh Government on how it's helping health boards across Wales to address waiting times for ophthalmology, so that we can learn more about how this issue is being prioritised and so patients can understand what is being done to minimise their waits for treatment.

Diolch yn fawr, Paul Davies. Clearly, this is an area where action is being taken in terms of tackling waiting times, and ophthalmology is crucially important. Of course, in Wales, we do have that eye care initiative, which enables optometrists to play a key role in engaging and then referring for secondary care. But this is an issue that I will, of course, draw to the attention of the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care in terms of your question in your region, which, of course, is Hywel Dda. And I'm sure that you will be raising this with them, as it's their responsibility.

Diolch yn fawr, Heledd Fychan. And it’s really important that we look at this in terms of the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service particularly, but across Wales, in terms of fires close to coal tips. I will raise this, of course, with the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Climate Change and Rural Affairs.

Clearly, this is something where, again, we’ve acknowledged the role and the courage of the South Wales Fire and Rescue Service, and all emergency services, but what’s important is the communities, and community cohesion, engagement and safety and security, and, of course, the role of local authorities as well. So, it’s an important point that’s been raised this afternoon, which I’m sure we can clarify.

Can I call for a statement from an appropriate Welsh Government Minister in respect of the use of drones in Wales? Many people find drones to be a nuisance, particularly when they invade their privacy in their back gardens and the like. But I had a concerning report from Ruthin this week about drones that appeared to be hovering in and around two local schools in the town. Clearly, that is inappropriate. I don’t know why that was happening, or who was operating the drone, but we do need some clear guidance on drone nuisance, and the impact that it has, both on schoolchildren, and their privacy and safety, but also on homeowners and local residents across the country. And I think it’s about time that the Government works together in order to address this problem in order that it doesn’t become more of a nuisance in the future.

Diolch yn fawr, Darren Millar. This is an important issue, which, in terms of responsibility, we’d have to look into. I am chairing the policing partnership board tomorrow morning, and this is the sort of issue that I’m sure would be brought to their attention. But thank you for raising this today, and particularly in relation to your concerns as it appeared to be near a school. They are used for commercial reasons, we know. They’re used for all sorts of surveillance, planning, et cetera. But there are obviously concerns about their use, and I think it’s very helpful that you’ve raised it, as I’m meeting with our police colleagues, particularly, tomorrow morning.

I call for a Government debate, please, about how we can change planning systems. The planning system we have doesn’t work for residents; it works for large developers.

In recent weeks, I’ve been contacted by constituents in Gelligaer, Trethomas and Abercarn, all expressing frustration and anger about how impenetrable the planning system is. Some concerns about small, local decisions; others about developments of national significance. But there are common points in what each of them has said about decisions made by planning committees where only one resident is allowed to speak, or decisions that never make it to committee, or how exclusionary the language is that’s used in these complex, technical documents. How are we meant to get planning decisions that work for our communities if residents find it so difficult to engage in the process? And how can it be fair that, when decisions go against developers, they can appeal, but communities themselves cannot, when their lives will be disrupted by further developments?

So, can we have a debate, please, to settle how these things can change, because it needs to happen?

Well, these are issues for our local authorities, and, clearly, our local authorities with their planning powers and responsibilities, and their engagement and transparency with local people and those they represent, and indeed, of course, guided by policy planning guidelines from the Welsh Government.

But this is something, obviously, you could raise with the Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Energy and Planning—as I’m sure you have done—in her oral Senedd questions, or indeed you could consider this in terms of your opportunities to raise debates, as well, as a party, and as a Member. But, again, you’re on the record raising this as an issue in our communities.

Trefnydd, I’d like an urgent statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Education into the damning Estyn report on the education service in Powys County Council. The report highlighted what many parents and teachers have been telling me and others, that education in Powys, under the Liberal Democrats, is failing. The report highlighted political leadership as one of the failures in the report. What we're seeing is the council, led by the Lib Dems, running those services into the ground.

So, can we please have an urgent statement on this matter? And do you not agree with me, Trefnydd, that the time has come to look at putting commissioners into Powys County Council, because it is clear that the Liberal Democrats are a party of protest, they're not a party for delivering for the people who I serve? I think it's about time that the Welsh Government grasped the mettle and actually stepped in and dealt with the Liberal Democrats in Powys once and for all.

Thank you for your question. We're aware that the outcome of Estyn's recent inspection of Powys education service wasn't positive, and the local authority is being judged to be causing concern. This is a disappointing outcome. As you are aware, regular independent inspection of a local authority is a fundamental part of the accountability system, but also plays a major role in driving and directing improvements. So, Estyn has made, as you are aware, a number of recommendations. There now is a process to follow. The local authority will produce a post-inspection action plan, and set out how it intends to address the recommendations set out in the report. Estyn will undertake a series of monitoring visits to measure progress, and this is a fully transparent process. But senior officials of the Cabinet Secretary for Education, her officials are in regular contact with the leadership at Powys and Estyn, to ensure that the local authority also receives the support it needs to improve.

Trefnydd, can I request a statement from the Minister for culture in the Welsh Government, after the news that Bauer Media, who run Hits Radio in Swansea, decided to cease operations, closing broadcasting hubs right across the United Kingdom, including in Swansea, and now have condensed their so-called 'local' radio offer to four broadcasting hubs across the UK, in London, Manchester, Glasgow and Belfast—not one in Wales? Does the Welsh Government agree that that is a profoundly disappointing decision, not only for people across Wales, but particularly in Swansea, where Hits Radio was the spiritual successor to the legendary radio station, The Wave, which has served communities across Swansea for so many years, and it will be disappointing to see that the iconic studio in Swansea is being closed by Bauer as a result? So, can I ask for a statement from the Welsh Government on the future of local commercial radio in Wales?

Thank you for drawing this to our attention, Tom Giffard, in terms of our radio. Clearly, that is a decision taken by Bauer Media, and the independent broadcasting authority would have been aware of this issue as well. I'm just being aware of my own local radio station, very much community led in fact, as there are many across Wales. The Minister for Culture, Skills and Social Partnership, I'm sure, would be interested at some stage in reporting on how things are going in terms of community radio in Wales. But thank you for drawing this to our attention, because, obviously, community radio and access to radio is really important in terms of local news, information and entertainment.

I'd like to call for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Housing and Local Government regarding last week's decision by Denbighshire County Council to sell off its remaining leisure services to Denbighshire Leisure Ltd. Now, the first issue is that the decision was made behind closed doors, which I do take issue with—such large decisions not being subject to public scrutiny.

But one of the comments that the managing director made was that no other council in Wales would be in a position to do what Denbighshire decided to do last week. Now, I'm wondering whether that's something that is successfully being done by Denbighshire, or is it Denbighshire doing something different to every other council in Wales. Because I'm trying to establish why any other council wouldn't be in the same position to do those things, and why leisure services couldn't be sold to an adjoining company to the council.

From the Welsh Government, I'd like to establish details of the advice and guidance that the Welsh Government have offered to Denbighshire County Council regarding the establishment and oversight of this new leisure management company, and assurances that Denbighshire County Council will not continue paying for properties formerly owned by Denbighshire Leisure. This really is something that hasn’t been seen before, and my constituents are asking me questions to get to the bottom of what’s going on. As I said, the decisions were made behind closed doors, which has limited my priviness to this matter, hence why I’m raising that in the Senedd today.

Thank you very much, Gareth Davies. Of course, this is a decision that was made by Denbighshire County Council, by democratically elected local councillors, who I’m sure will be the first point of call in terms of accountability for decisions made by the authority. Of course, there is monitoring governance as well for the authority, but this is a decision that has been made by that local authority.

Trefnydd, I’d like to call for a statement from the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care on parking capacity in Welsh hospitals. I’ve had frequent contact from residents in Wrexham about parking issues at Maelor Hospital, because of course people rightly expect adequate parking spaces when they’re visiting loved ones in hospital. The car park is often overflowing, causing distress, yes, for those visitors, but also for out-patients when they are attending appointments, and indeed for staff also. It’s causing issues on the surrounding streets around the hospital. There’s clearly a problem there with the capacity for visitors, out-patients and staff alike. I’ve written to the health board on this, and I’m sure there are similar issues across Wales, and indeed across north Wales as well. So, I’d appreciate, Trefnydd, an update on what action the Welsh Government is taking to support health boards in Wales to ensure there is enough capacity at car parks at hospitals, so people don’t have to go through the distress of trying to find a parking space when attending a hospital visit. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Sam Rowlands, and you’ve taken the right action by writing to the health board about the issues and concerns that will have been raised with you about parking capacity. It hasn’t been drawn to our attention in terms of other hospital parking arrangements, although I’m aware that hospitals indeed in the capital city of Cardiff have also got other ways and means to enable people to come to hospitals, which sometimes can be easier by other means, such as public transport and park and ride. And, of course, it’s staff first in terms of being able to access hospitals. You’ve taken the right action by writing to the health board in the first instance.

Trefnydd, could I have a statement from the Cabinet Secreaty for rural affairs on the Monmouthshire and Brecon canal in my region, please? Recently, I visited Goytre Wharf to meet with Mark Evans from the Canal and River Trust to discuss urgently what we can do to prevent the potential closure of the Monmouthshire and Brecon canal. The canal’s been voted Britain’s prettiest canal and is home to various wildlife. Yet due to new abstraction licences issued by NRW to take water from the River Usk, the canal potentially could face closure. This could be a devastating loss to the local community as the canal relies on having 81 per cent of its water from the River Usk and will be unnavigable without it.

The canal generates £26.5 million annually, 4.6 million people visit the canal every year, and there are 290 pubs, restaurants and cafes within a mile of the water that rely on the footfall the canal creates. The local councillor Jan Butler has started a petition to protect the canal, which has now reached the 10,000 people mark, demonstrating the strength of local feeling about the issue, and I look forward to debating it in this Chamber soon.

So, can I please request an urgent statement from the Welsh Government on what discussions they’re having with Welsh Water, the canal trust and other stakeholders? Because there is a solution that the water can be taken from the nearby Llandegfedd reservoir, which is owned by Welsh Water. This is a great historic and economic asset to my region. So, please can we have that? Thank you.

Thank you very much, Laura Anne Jones, and I’m aware of this as an issue as a question was raised previously with me. I’m aware that the Deputy First Minister recently met with Lynne Neagle, in her Senedd capacity, and also with the leader of Torfaen council to discuss the challenges. I’m aware that there’s an abstraction licence issue facing the Monmouthshire and Brecon canal.

The licence restrictions were put in place to ensure compliance with the habitats directive and to protect the River Usk as a special area of conservation river. And I understand the licensing process was undertaken by Natural Resources Wales, in accordance with relevant regulations, and the appeals process heard independently by Planning and Environment Decisions Wales. So, if a technical solution is available, it will require agreement between the Canal and River Trust and Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water. So, the Welsh Government have no part in this. But NRW have been engaged with both the Canal and River Trust and Dŵr Cymru regarding this solution, and they're prepared to continue with this engagement. So, we hope that all can be done to make water efficiency improvements to the canal to allow it to operate in line with the current licences. 

Diolch, Llywydd. Yesterday, the Bus Services (Wales) Bill and explanatory memorandum were laid before the Senedd. This legislation marks a fundamental change in the way the bus network is designed, procured and operated. It represents a significant, necessary and exciting change. The Bill delivers on our programme for government commitment to create a modern legislative basis for transport in Wales. It marks a significant shift in the way Welsh bus services are delivered, moving us away from a deregulated model that has seen services and passenger numbers gradually contract since 1985.

When we published our White Paper in 2022, we set out our vision of one network, one timetable, one ticket across public transport in Wales. This Bill will support the delivery of this vision. Under the new model, Welsh Ministers, through Transport for Wales, and in close collaboration with local authorities and corporate joint committees, will establish a national bus network that puts passengers first and supports us to reduce emissions from road transport. Bus services will be planned and co-ordinated at a national level and delivered principally through franchised contracts by private, third and public sector operators. 

The Bill includes a duty on Government to develop and publish a Welsh bus network plan, and determine the local bus services that are required to secure safe, integrated, sustainable, efficient and economic transport in Wales. This will ensure that the development of bus services is transparent and guided by core principles. A centrally co-ordinated network will also support us to develop bus services that better connect with rail facilities, increasing opportunities for integrated ticketing. 

The Bill also makes provision in relation to the collection and sharing of data. It will require bus operators and local authorities to share information with the Welsh Government in order to effectively manage the delivery of the network. Information on matters such as patronage, frequency and routes will help us create a modern, integrated bus network. The Bill will also ensure appropriate information is made available to the public to aid confidence and build patronage. We want to use technology to allow passengers to receive live up-to-date information on their bus services. 

The Bill will also deliver on our programme for government commitment to lift the ban on local authorities setting up new publicly owned bus companies. Therefore, for example, in rural areas that have historically been poorly served by the deregulated model and where there may be limited market interest in a franchise contract under the new system, local authorities will be empowered to bid for contracts or seek permits to run the bus services needed in their communities. To maintain the integrity of the new framework, the Bill places a restriction on bus operators from running local bus services in Wales, except where those services are provided under a contract, permit, directly via Transport for Wales or other exceptions specified in the Bill. Powers to take enforcement action against bus operators who breach these provisions are also set out in the Bill.

A key consideration in taking this new model for delivery forward is the workforce. Without drivers and other key staff to keep our bus services moving, we will not have a network to run. We have made provision in the Bill for a regulation-making power to apply the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations to certain circumstances arising out of the Bill. We will work with the unions, with industry and with others to ensure we provide assurance for staff and facilitate the smooth transfer of operations during the transition to franchising and in the future. We are aware that some SME operators are concerned about competing for contracts with larger operators. I have instructed TfW to develop an approach that attracts a range of operators, offering various types of franchising packages that will be attractive to smaller operators and others that may be more attractive to larger ones. We will also consider what additional support can be provided to aid this process.

I have been clear that creating a new network primarily delivered through bus services contracts will be a complex challenge, so it should not be introduced across the whole of Wales at once. Therefore, as I have previously set out, a phased implementation will take place, with our public sector delivery partners using a regional approach modelled on the CJC regions. Regional and local input into the delivery of bus reform is absolutely vital. So, TfW are collaborating closely with CJCs and local authorities to establish effective ways of working to ensure that local knowledge and expertise is embedded in the development of the network plan and in all aspects of implementing bus reform. Progress is most mature in south-west Wales, which is due to be the first region to be rolled out in 2027.

At the heart of our plans is the desire to improve services for bus users and potential users of the network. As I said in the Siambr before Christmas, buses are a vital public service that are a lifeline for some of the most vulnerable and isolated people in society. This Bill will help lay the foundations of a network that prioritises the people who rely on these services, and make better use of the significant funding the Welsh Government already injects into the bus network.

The current deregulated system is not working for the people of Wales. I know there has been frustration that this Bill has taken time to develop and introduce. This reflects the complexity of legislating to end the deregulation of the bus industry on an all-Wales basis. This is a significant change and we want to get it right. I believe this Bill will facilitate the changes we need to address the decline in the bus service provision, as well as help to deliver on our commitments to reduce emissions and attain our social justice agenda. I'll ensure that the drive for positive stakeholder engagement and collaboration that has been at the core of this legislation will continue, going forward. I look forward to the scrutiny of the Bill by Members and to hearing the views of stakeholders, delivery partners and the public during the legislative process. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Can I thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your statement and, indeed, for yesterday's statement also? It's clear that, here in Wales, things have to change when it comes to the management of our bus services, as you recognise. We've seen bus passenger journeys reduce over many years, and certainly plummet since COVID, especially in our rural communities. Over the last decade or more, we've seen hundreds of bus services either altered, reduced or withdrawn, and it's clear that the Government has dragged its feet too long on addressing the situation. Hopefully now we can put some things right. 

Inadequate and unreliable bus services have restricted the movement of many in Wales, particularly the elderly and most vulnerable in our communities, and we know that it has affected our younger generations, too, making it more difficult for many to get to school or further education. Public transport in Wales hasn't been a high enough priority for this Government and, as a result, we see mismatches in Government policy, where one aspiration is contradicted by the lack of ambition in another. And this isn't uncommon, I've noticed, in this place. A bus Bill was expected in 2020. We know that COVID held that up, but why has it taken over five years to bring further thinking and potential solutions forward? Labour have been in Government here for over 25 years, yet these proposals could take that additional five years.

Through this Bill, the Government has to put the needs of people first, especially in rural areas, where the person too often comes second to the profitability of routes. We know the Government favours bus franchising as their preferred model of reform, however the verdict is still out on this for many. What is important, though, is that whatever future delivery models are decided on, they have to make sure that the industry can operate sustainably and that smaller bus companies are not disadvantaged or pushed out. What is clear is that the Welsh Government has to create a sustainable and joined-up public transport system, but one that is affordable and deliverable. The Government mustn't create something that ends up taking us backwards or that places huge additional pressures on local authorities, who would have to pick up the pieces if patronage targets aren't met and fare revenues fall against assumptions. This would present significant risks to the local authorities.

A report from the Confederation of Passenger Transport Cymru has stressed the fact that simply introducing franchising will not address the key factors that influence our bus services in Wales, including the shift away from office working as well as greater reliance on online shopping. The CPT also highlights the fact that altering the model of transport will not affect the issues around reliability, punctuality, the speed of bus journeys and congestion—those things that hold things up.

We also know that franchising can be expensive. Just look at greater Manchester, where, over five years, the cost is likely to be circa £700 million, yet Wales is a far smaller place with a greater—. Sorry, their region is smaller than Wales, but has greater infrastructure. Currently, the Welsh Government provides about £140 million a year in subsidy, and we know that £8 million of that will go to fund the under-21s fare. Well, that's a long way short of what we're likely to need. So, Cabinet Secretary, can you outline how much money your proposals will cost, including through transition to delivery phase and then, perhaps, on ongoing administration? Wales isn't like London, greater Manchester or Liverpool—it's far more diverse, with passengers sparsely spread. The transitional costs will be huge, for sure.

Where will Wales get the professional expertise from to run the franchise model across the whole country? Will you, Cabinet Secretary, consider alternative models, and I think you said you would, to gross franchising, such as net franchises or enhanced partnership arrangements? You'll know that Jersey, for instance, set up in 2002 a franchising model and changed in 2013 to a different model because it wasn't working; they found a better solution. These are fundamental questions that, hopefully, will be answered through the scrutiny process. Cabinet Secretary, I look forward to working with you to ensure that this Bill does get the scrutiny it deserves. 

Can I thank Peter Fox for his questions and his comments? I was pleased to hear that, in broad terms, the Member is supportive of the change that is required. Change is needed because the system, as has been operating for far too long, does not meet the needs of passengers across the whole of Wales. In taking control of the network, and taking control of timetables and the fare regime, we will be able to provide an integrated public transport system. 

Now, Peter Fox rightly identified that bus services are particularly important for the most vulnerable people in society, especially the elderly, people who face disabling barriers in their daily lives, and young people. Indeed, 20 per cent of people in Wales do not own a private car and desperately rely on bus services. That's particularly the case in rural communities, and I think that this legislation will be of immense value in rural communities in particular. But, Peter Fox is right that this is not a panacea—this is a huge step forward, but it must be met with complementary work to improve reliability and punctuality. So, for example, investment in bus priority lanes will be required in order to attract more people to use buses.

In terms of professional expertise and alternative models, we've learnt valuable lessons from elsewhere, including Jersey—we, indeed, looked at Jersey very closely—and, of course, places like Manchester and London. We believe that the model that we have presented in the Bill is a model that suits Wales best. Investment will be a matter for future governments, of course, but we can take great comfort from what has happened where we do currently have control over a bus network, that being the TrawsCymru network. I was in Corwen yesterday, and I learnt that the local bus stop there has seen a 22 per cent increase in patronage in the space of just one year because of the introduction and enhancement of TrawsCymru services. They're reliable, they're punctual and people can depend on them for the long term. That's the whole point of franchising—to give certainty to passengers. Some of those TrawsCymru network bus services have seen an increase over the last year in excess of 40 per cent in terms of patronage. So, I do believe that we can demonstrate that when you take control of a network and a timetable, and when you construct services that meet the needs of people, you attract more people to the network. Now, that means that, in the future, in terms of the investment that will go into buses, I would hope that future Ministers would have a choice to be able to deliberate. One, they could reduce the subsidy in bus services. I wouldn't go for that, personally; I would prefer to see any increase in farebox reinvested in expanding the network still further.

In terms of contracts, I think Peter Fox makes a really important point about sustainability. The contracts are going to be awarded on a gross cost basis, and that means that we can then reinvest ticket revenue in providing more services—that’s what my hope would be for any future Minister—and offer simple multiservice tickets. Revenue from local bus services can be redistributed as well across all of Wales—not just focusing on commercially focused routes, but ensuring, I think, a more equal provision of bus services across the country. This is particularly important, again, to rural areas and areas where commercially viable services do not operate.

Llywydd, in closing, I would also say that, in response to Peter Fox, we are working very closely with the industry to ensure that the innovation and the best practice from SMEs and larger operators can be maintained and enhanced in the future. I’ve outlined some of the methods by which we’ll ensure that there is a mixed market of all types of operators, large and small. We wish to make sure that we can grow the sector through franchising, that we can grow the economy through franchising, and that we can better connect communities.

A bit like waiting for a bus in Wales, after a long wait and, at times, wondering whether it would ever arrive, I’m very glad to finally see the statement today on the bus services Bill. This is a historic moment.

If we take a moment to look at Manchester, we can see how franchising has transformed public transport, improving connectivity and service reliability, introducing a more eco-friendly fleet, lowering fares and creating more jobs. These are the kinds of benefits we should be striving for in Wales. However, my concern lies in the Government’s delivery. I regularly hear all the right words from the Cabinet Secretary in this Siambr during questions and debates, but then I am disappointed when the delivery doesn’t always match up in reality. If you speak to people across Wales, they’ll tell you time and again just how poor our transport system is.

There is also a concern about funding. Bus Users UK and others have raised concerns, in particular regarding how much funding will be available to make the franchising work. Right now, the Welsh Government spends only £2 on buses for every £5 on trains. This has got to change for this Bill to be successful. Buses are the most widely used mode of public transport in Wales and are a lifeline for our most vulnerable communities. Without adequate investment, bus franchising simply won’t succeed.

Under franchising, we want to see more routes restored and the damage from years of service cuts reversed. Deregulation definitely has not worked. We need clarity on how route planning will be carried out, how local voices, businesses and communities will be engaged in the process, and how this will contribute to economic development and prosperity. Maybe the Cabinet Secretary can explain how this will work in practice in our local communities in his response. Mapping commuter patterns, as well as housing density around bus stops, should play a key part in this strategy, and I welcome the news about the collection of data. This data should drive some of those decisions.

The Cabinet Secretary knows I’ve been particularly concerned with learner transport, as we highlighted in the debate last week. I expect he will point to the reduced fares scheme for young people aged 16 to 21, but this is a short-term measure and a pilot scheme and it cannot replace a more consistent and reliable approach to learner travel. There is a real risk of blurring the lines between statutory provision and more informal schemes. The Government itself has acknowledged the link between bus reform and learner travel, so I want to know how will the provisions in this Bill improve transport for children and families. This legislation must align with other commitments the Welsh Government has made, such as its child poverty strategy.

Finally, I want to see a reserved number of contracts for the SMEs and local bus providers. I heard what you said about the instruction to Transport for Wales to develop an approach that attracts a range of operators. This is an area where Manchester has not done as well as it could, and I urge the Cabinet Secretary to support procurement policies that use franchising as a tool for local development and Welsh business growth. Can you say a little bit more about this in your response?

In summary, my colleagues and I in Plaid Cymru are broadly supportive of the Bill. We are committed to securing the best possible version of it through this Senedd, but ultimately the devil is in the detail and the Government must ensure that the legislation delivers real, lasting improvements for the people of Wales. Diolch yn fawr.

Can I thank Peredur for his questions and the indication that Plaid Cymru will be, broadly at least, in support of the Bill? I do admire the development of the Manchester Bee Network. It has been quite a considerable success in terms of providing regular, reliable franchise services for the people of greater Manchester, but we've also learned from some of the challenges that have been faced in that part of the UK, principally with the award of contracts not necessarily to SMEs. I think market engagement and industry engagement is hugely important in this regard.

We know that there are in excess of 100 bus companies in Wales, many of them very small indeed, but they provide a very considerable benefit to the communities that they're embedded in. They're part of the foundational economy and they know their communities as well as anyone can possibly know them, in terms of where people move around and the individuals who use the services. So engagement with the industry at every level is going to be vitally important. I outlined how we're looking at packaging contracts to ensure that SMEs, as well as the larger bus companies, have an opportunity to succeed in a world of franchising.

Delivery is vitally important, and I've already outlined how TrawsCymru is delivering more passenger services and attracting more passengers as a result of being able to better match up what people need with the routes. It's an astonishing fact that 190,000 bus journeys are taken every day. I want to see that figure only rise. Of course it will be for future governments to determine how much money is invested in public transport. My view is that public transport is the third public service, and bus services in particular are those that speak loudest to social justice, for the reasons that I gave in my response to Peter Fox.

I can say that, by the end of this Senedd term, we'll have invested £600 million in support for bus services. That excludes the money that we invest through learner travel, which this year I believe is in the region of £204 million. So the investment in bus services is enormous, but we don't get maximum effect for it, and by taking back control of the routes and the timetables and the fare regime, I believe that we will be able to gain maximum impact and benefit for communities.

I do think that data sharing is going to be vitally important, so too new and emerging technology that maps movements of people. That's going to be very important indeed when we come to devise solutions for challenges around learner travel. So too local authorities and corporate joint committees will be vitally important in shaping the routes with us and the timetables and the fare regimes. We want to make sure that we collaborate very effectively indeed in putting together the network across Wales.

The Member is right: the £1 cap on bus fares for young people is a pilot, but it's going to make a very significant difference to a considerable number of people. It will be, again, a decision for future governments whether to maintain that, but I think that it's going to be vitally important that we learn from that pilot scheme. I'm confident that it will reap benefits. I'm confident that it will help encourage more young people to choose bus services over acquiring a private vehicle. It will certainly give young people better options and more affordable options for accessing employment and training. So I am very proud that we are taking forward this particular initiative, and I do hope that in some form it can be retained for the future, but of course we will learn from it before decisions are made to that effect.

In terms of bus reform and how it interfaces with learner travel, I've already mentioned some of the benefits, but I think one of the principal benefits is that it will better enable us to take full advantage of regularly planned services with home-to-school provision, so the two aren't in conflict, so the buses, the vehicles themselves, can be better used, so that bus drivers are able to be employed throughout the day to ensure that we can get movement of people wherever they want to go. But certainly interfacing learner travel with regular scheduled bus services is something that we'll be able to do once we've got the legislation through and once franchises have been agreed.

I really welcome this bus Bill coming forward now. I submitted a petition nearly six years ago calling for buses for people, not profit, because at the time we had operators competing for the same lucrative passengers in the urban areas while they were cutting the less profitable but equally important ones in the rural areas. There were people devastated in communities. I was going to meetings in village halls and it was awful to hear them really concerned that they were going to be left at home and not be able to get out. 

I know now that many operators are struggling and they do welcome this, but I know it will take time to build the network and funding, as happened with Transport for Wales, the roll-out of the new services, £800 million invested in new trains and carriages, and it's been transformational. We've seen passengers increase by about 25 per cent. So, it's really important that we get that network right.

Will there be extra help and resources for local government, who know the network and residents so well? I know in Flintshire there's 450 different contracts, so it's very complicated going forward. How important is it that we continue to have Governments that invest in public service funding going forward so we can build it and make sure it's there for our most vulnerable residents? Thank you.

Can I thank Carolyn Thomas for the way that she's welcomed this piece of legislation? You've long fought for it and it's my view that you probably have greater expertise in this area than anyone else in this Chamber, given your previous role as lead member in Flintshire. This is part of our aspiration to deliver better transport for all. You highlighted the £800 million of new trains, the increase in patronage on Transport for Wales services, which is considerable indeed, and we hope to replicate this through franchising. 

I can assure the Member that local government will have a central role in designing and forming the network and the timetables, and local government will be supported in that endeavour by Transport for Wales. So too corporate joint committees will have a vitally important role to play as well. We're looking at how perhaps a memorandum of understanding will give greater strength to the role of CJCs, but the local knowledge that comes from local authorities and from bus operators themselves will prove invaluable when we put together the network. 

Thank you for your statement, Cabinet Secretary. There is no doubt that bus services and bus stops in Wales need to see improvements, especially in rural areas where transport links are vital for the economy, for people to live their lives and for school transport. However, I do have some serious concerns about this franchising model.

It's clear that improvements in services and investment in public bus stops need to be made. However, spending an enormous amount of money on a massive reorganisation will actually result in minimal difference in output unless you have an endless amount of money at your disposal. Is it really the right use for this enormous amount of money to be put into this pet project? I understand the aims and welcome some of them, but surely some of them could be better spent on improvements to the current system and to routes. 

Having visited local bus operators recently, it's clear to me that wholesale change of how buses operate in Wales has a huge risk attached to it, and an even bigger price tag, and amounts to little more than a power grab by Welsh Ministers, taking away—

You need to ask your question now, please. 

—local decision making and the ease of adapting to local need.

Cabinet Secretary, you talk of new stock in your statement. What is happening to the old stock? Are you proposing that there be a hard border for any new ticketing scheme for young people between England and Wales? And importantly, can you guarantee that all these changes will result in lower costs for users, and that there'll be more rather than fewer services? Diolch.  

Dirprwy Lywydd, this is not a power grab; this is just taking back control. This is something that I'm sure will prove to be—[Interruption.]

Cabinet Secretary, two seconds. If the back benches will keep quiet, I can actually listen to the Cabinet Secretary giving a response to the question. 

Dirprwy Lywydd, I'm confident that the people of Wales will welcome franchising, will welcome addressing the failures of deregulation in the mid 1980s, which I'm afraid have, yes, led to great benefits for some in terms of operating very profitable services, but where profit can't be achieved it's left to the taxpayer forking out for bus services that will otherwise simply not operate. And in many circumstances, bus operations have ceased because they are not commercially viable and because of austerity as well. Local authorities have been stretched to the limit due to austerity, and yet in some cases, have still maintained a contribution, even though it's not statutory. I think they are to be congratulated. They've supported some of the most deprived communities in Wales by ensuring that bus services are subsidised. But the system as it is at the moment is not sustainable, it doesn't provide value for money at all, and there's a big difference between cost and value. Yes, the amount of money that we put into public services and specifically, in this regard, into bus services is considerable. It comes with great cost—I admit that—£600 million is going into bus services this Senedd term. But the value—the value—to the people of Wales is even greater. And we can see from the impact assessments and the benefit-cost ratio that accompanies this piece of legislation that the value is considered to be very high. That's because this will provide opportunities for young people to get to and from work. This will better connect communities. This will ensure greater accessibility as well, because we'll be able to create training standards that ensure that drivers are able to welcome and accept and help people who face disabling barriers in their everyday life.

This legislation will also help to address the climate emergency, because we'll be able to utilise Transport for Wales as a purchaser of electric vehicles, who would then be able to lease them to small and medium-sized enterprises. So, in so doing, it will actually also help small and medium-sized enterprises that would otherwise not be able to afford expensive, new electric buses. I believe that pretty much everybody wins in this scenario. Perhaps—perhaps—those who seek the greatest profit may lose out, but the people of Wales, and I believe the vast majority of operators in Wales, will benefit from this legislation.

In 2022-23, over 61 million bus passenger journeys were taken in Wales. Prior to the pandemic, the figure was over 91 million. At the moment, when bus passenger numbers are low, either services have to be cut or more investment found to maintain services, and when I questioned many Government Ministers on the plans to increase passenger numbers, I've always been told to wait for the bus Bill. Well, here it is, it's finally arrived. But given concerns that have been raised regarding the level of investment required to fulfil the ambitions of the Bill—ambitions that I wholeheartedly welcome—and the length of time it'll take for its full implementation, can I ask again what efforts are being undertaken right now to increase passenger numbers across the bus network?

I've spoken to many constituents across my region who don't have any other means of transport. They rely on buses every day, they have a wealth of knowledge and experience, and, more often than not, they are the most keen to want to help build a better service. So, you said this Bill will ensure local bus services are planned and co-ordinated, in consultation with key partners, local government and industry, but can I ask exactly how bus users, those who don't have access to cars, not just the CJCs, not just the local authorities, are meaningfully involved in the design and delivery of this Bill?

Well, the citizen's voice, you're absolutely right, will be at the heart of this. That's why we're ensuring that local authorities are at the heart of planning the networks and the timetables. We are increasing bus funding this year to support the network ahead of franchises: between capital and revenue, we've increased it this coming year to £170 million, and as I said previously, over the course of this Senedd term, the sum will exceed £600 million. So, it is a huge sum of money that is designed at stabilising the network after COVID and preparing bus services for a world in which we franchise.

There is a very strong link between the farebox and service provision. When the farebox falls, as you've rightly said, the risk is that without subsidy, services will be withdrawn, and that's what we've seen in all too many circumstances. But where we've got control—full control—we've seen the opposite happening recently. As I mentioned, TrawsCymru services have seen a very considerable increase in patronage on most of what they operate, and that's because, with TrawsCymru, we are able to match up people's needs, passenger needs, with the network itself, with the timetables and with the routes. So, I am very confident that, with that local knowledge, with a system that is fully responsive to passengers, we will be able to drive up patronage, and in so doing, drive up the farebox, whilst also making sure that we have a fair fares regime. And in so doing, I would hope that future Ministers will then choose to use that additional fare box revenue to increase the network.

I just have a couple of points to raise. You rightly talk about the regional approach and the role of the CJCs, which is incredibly important. We know that buses don't stop at county borders; that wouldn't make for an effective service connecting our communities. But can I ask how that will work on a cross-border basis? People in my part of the world, which you know well, want to stop at Saltney or Broughton, but they actually want to get to Chester and beyond as well. So, what means is there for making that work in practice? And on that practical point, can I ask how the Welsh Government has engaged with the workforce through trade unions to date in the development of the bus Bill, and what mechanism is in place to make sure there is meaningful partnership working, not just as the legislation progresses, but, all importantly, at implementation too, because I'm sure you'll agree with me that social partnership isn't just about walking the walk, it's actually about talking the talk.

Yes, I'd agree entirely. Considerable engagement has been undertaken with trade unions over the course of putting together this piece of legislation and in the years that preceded this particular work as well, as a result of what trade unions were telling us as we embarked on this particular path. So, I'm confident that the legislation does recognise the desires and the needs of trade union members, but we will go on working in social partnership with trade unions and with bus operators. Through the contracts, we'll be able to ensure that there's the best possible relationship between operators and trade unions, and my view is that we will be able to encourage best practice in the process that we are following—best practice in terms of provision for customers and also how the workers are treated.

Now, I fully respect the importance of cross-border services to our border communities—cross-border services across local authorities within Wales, but also cross-border services across the Wales-England border. We've worked pretty extensively with Liverpool city region, with Manchester city region and with Dee area councils to ensure that we can share best practice, innovation and route planning. We've also worked with the Department for Transport on this matter, and we are looking at using permits that will enable and ensure that cross-border services can be not just maintained in the future, but that they can be enhanced and that they can fully integrate with the franchise network here in Wales, and indeed with our rail services as well.

This Bill is a step in the right direction; there's no way other than putting it that way. And I think, actually, the very valid point the Cabinet Secretary made was around value for money, because right now the system encourages us to use public money to subsidise shareholder profits. Now, that isn't a good use of public money, that doesn't provide value for money. So, it's a good thing that we're getting to grips with that issue. And of course, it allows us then to get over the catch-22 situation where those services that aren't profitable are being cut, making it so that buses aren't then considered to be a viable option for people because they're not reliable—they're not even present in those communities. So, this really does give us the basis to actually create a system that is reliable, that is frequent and becomes a real option for people.

I think there is a valid question, though, to ask around the delivery aspect of this. Now, of course, it's taken six years for this Bill to get to the Chamber in its current form. Reports out there are showing, or suggest, that it could take an additional five years to deliver. Now, there's no wonder that communities are disillusioned with the Senedd and politicians when that is the timeline for delivery on something so important. So, would the Cabinet Secretary outline what the explicit barriers are here? I take on board what he said around the phased approach and the complicated picture, but is there an issue in terms of capacity within the Welsh Government to deliver this project? An important thing that needs to happen now is that we actually do deliver this, because there are needs in communities right now that aren't being fulfilled.

Can I thank Luke for his questions and for welcoming the legislation? I'd agree entirely with him that this does offer the prospect of us gaining greater value for money for the services that we invest in. Particularly, it enables us to take revenue from the most lucrative routes in Wales and then distribute it more fairly across Wales, particularly those areas that rely so heavily on subsidised routes.

In terms of the delivery time frame, we're actually working right now in mid Wales, because all of the routes are subsidised, pretty much, so we're looking at how we can implement a franchised system in mid Wales that other regions can then learn from. I do want to get this right. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to correct the failures of deregulation in an area of public service that matters so much—so much—to the people that we serve. So, I accept that it might seem a lengthy process, four years, between now and 2029, but I do want to make sure that we get it right, and phasing it across the regions is, in our view, the best way to do it and the safest way to do it. We're going to be able to learn as we go along, but some of the regions are more advanced than others, so we need some time to be given, to be afforded, to those regions that have a more complicated ecosystem of bus service provision and bus operators. But we don't want to hold back those regions that are more advanced in the meanwhile, so we're going to go first with south-west Wales—even though we're using mid Wales right now as, if you like, a trailblazer—then north Wales, then south-east Wales. And mid Wales will be formalised with their franchise services as well by the end of this decade.

I warmly welcome the introduction of this Bill and congratulate the Cabinet Secretary for getting it over the line. There will be critics of this, as we've heard, but nobody can accuse the Welsh Government of having rushed this. And it's right that time is taken, because this is probably the most complex change to the public transport system in more than a generation. This is more far-reaching reform than in any part of the UK—more radical than that in Manchester and more radical than previous plans brought forward. And it is going to be tricky to get it right. So, I completely support the Cabinet Secretary in what he just said about taking the time to implement this properly.

Just on a couple of points of detail. He quite rightly said the revenue risk now will fall to the Welsh Government, and there are critics, we've heard, mostly from the corporate sector, who are trying to use this to cause some concern. But will he confirm the flip side of that is now there's going to be an absolute direct interest in the Welsh Government in driving up bus use? It's going to have a direct financial link and stake in doing that, which will see us have improving bus services. To do that obviously requires the skill and wherewithal within Transport for Wales as a guiding mind to link together train and bus planning so you have an integrated one-ticket, one-network system, and that is a big change for Transport for Wales. So, can he just provide us with an update on how they're getting on with that? Because even though the legislation has been slow in coming, the work has been going on in earnest within Transport for Wales.

And then finally—

You need to be quick, Lee.

—the other crucial point for this is the work of local authorities in working in a trusted relationship with TfW and the Welsh Government. So, again, it's just some reassurance that there is full buy-in from that. But I look forward to supporting this legislation as it goes through this Chamber.

Well, can I thank Lee Waters for his contribution and for the work that he did over many years with regard to this piece of legislation? I remember us speaking about—. I think we called it, at one point, a 'Martini approach'—any time, any place, anywhere with the same ticket. That then evolved into 'one network, one timetable, one ticket'. And were it not for COVID, I think, probably, we would have seen this legislation passed some time ago. But with COVID, our objective was to save the bus network. It was on its knees because there were no passengers, and in a deregulated environment, I'm afraid, if money isn't being made, it's lost. So, our objective during COVID was to rescue the bus network. We did that, and now we're at the point of being able to legislate. And for the reasons that Lee Waters has outlined, it is important that we take proper time to deliver on the franchises across Wales.

And you're absolutely right, the revenue risk for this particular piece of work also provides us with an opportunity. I don't consider it so much of a risk, because where we have had control, in the way that we're going to have control if this Bill is passed, we've actually seen success. We've seen a remarkable increase in terms of patronage on Transport for Wales rail services, which Carolyn Thomas outlined—25 per cent. And we've seen that remarkable increase in patronage on TrawsCymru services, because we've got skin in the game, because we want to maximise value for money and the benefit—the value to people—of these services. So, I am very confident indeed, moving forward, that future Ministers will have an opportunity through this legislation to expand the bus network, rather than preside over it contracting.

TfW has undergone considerable change over the years, growing from something that we created to manage the procurement process for the Wales and borders franchise to now being a planner, operator, manager of multimodal transport provision in Wales. And it’s grown in expertise quite considerably. We’ve also learnt from other transport authorities, like those in Manchester and London, and, as a result of that, we’ve been able to carefully consider so many different models for supporting a future bus network.

We believe we’ve got the right model in front of us in this legislation. I’m looking forward to Members supporting it, and I’m also looking forward to Transport for Wales continuing to provide expertise and invaluable support to local authorities, not just on bus services, but across all modes.

South-east Wales is at the bottom of the list, unfortunately, for this phased implementation. I understand there are reasons for doing it in this phased way, but I really hope that we can roll this out with the minimum delay required, particularly for those suffering in areas where the paucity of services really restricts their ability to get to work or social opportunities, or even to get the shopping in, and also people who live in transport poverty being forced to have a car, even though they can’t actually afford to run it, but they simply have no other means of transport to get to work or fulfil caring responsibilities.

So, I want to understand how we’re ensuring that there’s no unnecessary delay in terms of the discussions that the CJC covering Cardiff is having in preparation for the bus network plan, and how they’re using data, for example, from mobile phones, to track where journeys to work and school are taking place, so that we can, as quickly as possible, get that modal shift from car to bus or other public transport or active travel, because otherwise we’re all going to drown in the air quality problems that we have.

Well, can I thank Jenny Rathbone for her questions and for welcoming this legislation? Yes, south-east Wales will see its franchise network emerge in 2028-29, but, in the meantime, we are delivering an enormous ambitious metro programme in south-east Wales, also the dualling of the Heads of the Valleys road, which comes with a huge investment tag as well, and so we are doing a huge amount for this particular region. But, as I said, some of the other regions are more advanced and developed and less complicated to roll out franchising in. We wouldn’t wish to conduct this on a parallel basis, because it is such a complicated process to follow, but, in terms of discussions with the CJC, Councillor Andrew Morgan, of course, is an observer on the Transport for Wales board, and has contributed to bus reform quite considerably. So, the discussions are very advanced and ongoing.

Jenny Rathbone rightly raised the potential benefits of new and emerging technology. Recently, we discussed in this Chamber the mobile tracking systems that TfW are able to utilise and the innovation that we’ve seen from some of our higher education institutions, which will be fully exploited as we put together the network maps and timetables in the future.

Jenny Rathbone also raised the vitally important point of transport poverty still being prevalent in Wales. This actually probably relates more appropriately to my next oral statement on travel for all, but we are acutely aware of the need to make sure that we have a fairer fare regime for the bus network, and that we maintain concessions if the public purse allows it.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, I warmly welcome the statement this afternoon, and it’s good to see the Welsh Government clearing away the last vestiges of Thatcherism from this country. The privatisation of bus services has been an unmitigated disaster for the people that I represent in Blaenau Gwent. And let me tell you, people across the borough, and across the country, will be welcoming this statement from the Government today. Because when I speak to constituents—. I spoke to a lady in Tredegar on Friday, who was speaking to me about the difficulties that she has accessing train services, whether they be in Rhymney or Ebbw Vale, accessing town from another part of town—small, very local services and also, then, the wider scale services going to Abergavenny and Cardiff and the rest of it. To ensure that people are able to travel easily by public transport, these are the sorts of improvements that people want to see. But also accessing public services: we've seen the creation of the Grange hospital, the opening of the Grange in Cwmbran, but also services being delivered from Nevill Hall and Ysbyty Aneurin Bevan in Ebbw Vale, but also—

You need to ask a question now, please, Alun.

—hospitals and clinics elsewhere. So, what we need to be able to do is to ensure that people are able to access public services easily and to be able to ensure that they themselves can live the lives that they want to lead.

Can I thank Alun Davies for the points that he raised? I saw Joel James nodding at those very points—or perhaps it was something else that was on his screen. But, yes, you're absolutely right: this will sweep away one of the most contentious pieces of reform that Margaret Thatcher introduced in the 1980s, and, in its place, it will create a far more beneficial scheme, with social justice at its heart, for the people of Wales. Now, I don't think deregulation at all failed because of the drivers or the operators or the directors of those companies. Deregulation failed because it's inefficient, it leads to a fractured market, it prevents cross-subsidisation, and it also places the most vulnerable at the greatest risk of losing their services. So, we will address all of those failures.

In regard specifically to better connecting services with people, I know that Members have raised in the Chamber the example of the Grange hospital. Just recently, I had an example of the hospital in Gobowen raised with me, which, of course, is across the border. The lead official for this particular piece of work in Transport for Wales is acutely aware of the need to make sure that the networks and the timetables meet people's needs, not just in terms of accessing employment centres and education and high streets, but also, crucially, hospital services and medical centres.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. People and communities across Wales use our transport system every day—to see friends and family, to get to work, to access healthcare, education and leisure activities. The ability to travel is something a lot of us take for granted: driving a car, catching a train or bus, calling a taxi, or taking a walk or cycling—overall, a pretty uneventful part of the day. Sadly, travelling is anything but uneventful for some. Since my appointment to this portfolio, I have met many people from different parts of Wales who have shared their poor experiences of using our transport networks. I was left feeling deeply saddened and disappointed. I was struck by how this affected their lives—losing confidence, their independence and their ability to access employment, education and vital public services.

Now, barriers to travel are wide ranging, from a lack of level boarding on trains to not enough blue badge parking, fares that people struggle to afford, or something as basic as not having access to a toilet. The House of Commons' Transport Select Committee's 'Access denied' report, published last week, echoed this. It found that, of the disabled people who responded to their survey, just under 90 per cent experienced access challenges or barriers that make it difficult to travel either often, most of the time, or always. That's why I'm committed to changing the way that we do transport policy in Wales to ensure that access and inclusion is genuinely at the heart of everything that we do.

Now, we're already taking a range of measures to break down those barriers. Our £800 million investment in new rolling stock, combined with over £1 billion of transformation of the core Valleys lines, is providing customers level boarding access from platform to train for passengers using services on the part of the network that we fully own and control. For the first time, many customers will be able to board trains independently, without having to book assistance in advance. They too will be able to turn up and go, moving freely across our country and beyond.

We will undertake a rapid accessibility audit of rail stations in Wales, and work in partnership with UK Government to address the physical barriers facing people, ensuring those affected are involved in designing solutions to those problems. We'll seek to harness innovative ideas and technology to empower more people to travel. Transport for Wales has embarked on a comprehensive digital programme to provide accessible journey planning tools to anyone travelling in Wales. And, as bus reform is implemented, passengers will benefit from further integrated ticketing and joined-up services across public transport. This will not see the death of non-digital options, which will continue to be available to support everyone to travel.

As we’ve just heard, buses are a vital public service and a lifeline for some of the most vulnerable and isolated people in our society. The bus Bill will help lay the foundations of a network that prioritises the people who rely on these services. It will allow us to prioritise making services more accessible, helping people feel safe and welcomed as a result.

Our new TrawsCymru vehicles are compliant with public service vehicle accessibility regulations and the latest accessible information regulations. Passengers benefit from bilingual next stop displays and audio announcements, as well as induction loop functionality. We’re also working to increase the number of wheelchair spaces available. We’ll build on these successes and renew the bus fleet in Wales to the level of the latest accessibility regulations as we implement bus reform here in Wales. I was delighted to visit Cardiff bus interchange in the new year and see the range of accessibility features, including tactile paving, improved signage, accessible seating and inclusive toilets. Building accessibility into our infrastructure right from the design phase not only saves time and money by avoiding retrofits, it also means accessibility is always at the forefront of everyone’s minds. I thank the Transport for Wales access and inclusion panel for their ongoing involvement and expertise in such projects.

To build on this approach, Transport for Wales will establish a dedicated travel for all team to work across all transport modes to embed accessibility and inclusivity in all aspects of our work. It will become a centre of excellence for transport professionals across Wales, including local authorities and corporate joint committees, to get professional advice and support in designing and delivering accessible schemes, seeking out best practice from around the world. This will include how to better involve people with a wide range of lived experiences in our work. Without a full understanding of the barriers people face every day, we will never be able to eliminate them. The team will support local government to ensure that they have genuine involvement so that, as they deliver their regional transport plans, they thoroughly assess the impacts of their plans on people and communities, and involve them in designing and delivering their transport schemes.

I’m keen that we engage and involve all voices at all levels to ensure that we capture lived experiences and encourage a diverse range of views in the design of our transport policies and strategies. We will establish an inclusive travel board, which will work across transport modes and include representation from all protected characteristics. It will work with our existing active travel and road safety boards to support officials and Transport for Wales in making our transport networks feel safe and welcoming, and, importantly, improve accessibility. This work will include our first dedicated disabled people’s inclusive travel panel during 2025-26. This will help ensure that the rights and voices of disabled people are central to shaping transport policies. By integrating their perspectives and expertise, we aim to create an inclusive transport infrastructure that respects and upholds the rights of all disabled people.

Now, our 10-year disabled people’s rights plan, set to be published for consultation this spring, aims to remove barriers and create long-term positive change for disabled people, placing the social model of disability at the core of our vision for Wales. We’ll set up an external advisory board to provide advice and support on the implementation, delivery and impact of the disabled people’s rights plan, which will work closely with our disabled people’s inclusive travel panel and the Transport for Wales access and inclusion group.

Of course, accessibility can mean different things to different people. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. Our approach to blue badges in Wales has been one guided by enforcement and reducing fraud, but this has left many people having to share the same information time and time again to obtain one, only to start the process again within three years when they need to re-apply. I’ll convene an expert group working in partnership with local authorities and the WLGA to explore all options to better share data and cut down on the burden facing people with a real need for accessible parking and a blue badge.

Listening to and acting on the views of children and young people is something that I’m passionate about. I’ve met many young people in particular who have found the cost of using public transport a barrier to them seeking work or just getting out and about, seeing friends and family. The budget recently agreed by this Senedd includes plans for the introduction of a £1 cap on single bus journeys and a £3 cap on multiple journeys for all 16 to 21-year-olds, investing £15 million over the next two financial years. Young people have been calling for help, so that they can access education, employment, training and services, and this scheme will help them to do so simply and affordably.

Our travel for all approach extends beyond public transport. Our streets, pavements and crossings are an important and sometimes overlooked part of transport networks. Barriers, such as cluttered street furniture, a lack of pedestrian crossings and poor lighting can discourage people from using them. Places where pedestrians and other modes of transport like cars, vans, cyclists and buses mix can also make people feel anxious, unwelcome and unsafe if they aren’t designed well. We have a responsibility to make sure that people are safe using our streets, and we can’t do that if people are recklessly using modified e-bikes or e-scooters alongside pedestrians, travelling at speeds that you’d expect from a car.

The £45 million that I've allocated to local authorities this year for walking, wheeling and cycling includes £15 million of core funding—the same level as last year. I have asked local authorities to use at least 60 per cent of their core active travel funding to make tangible improvements on the ground quickly, like fixing or widening footways, dropping kerbs, installing seats, to create safer and better streets for all. Transport for Wales are using their design expertise to further strengthen accessible design principles in the refresh of the Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013 guidance. This will be based on extensive involvement of people with lived experience in solving the problems they face.

I have clear ambitions for transport networks that work for all. These measures seek to put people at the centre of our policies, planning and delivery of transport services and infrastructure. We recognise that accessibility is both a non-negotiable matter of human rights and discrimination, and a health and safety issue. It is not an optional customer service matter. It is my ambition to see the next Senedd make travel for all a shared priority. Together, we will break down systemic barriers and make everyone feel safe and welcomed when travelling in Wales.

Can I thank you again, Cabinet Secretary, for this statement? I really do welcome this statement. It's comprehensive; there's an awful lot in it, and it's difficult to reflect on all of it in such a short period.

Inclusive transport is key, if we are to ensure that Wales is a fair and accessible place for everyone looking to travel for any reason. In this day and age, it should be a given that all parts of society can access all transport modes. It's a sad fact that we are where we are at the moment. I welcome much of the statement, and I'm glad that we've seen that investment in our rail system, especially the rolling stock, which was far too old.

And you are right, that, sadly, barriers to travel are wide ranging. One of the barriers, as we've talked about to date, is to education and employment, and part of that is the lack of transport availability for everyone. I recognise that you are taking steps to ensure that new infrastructure is put in place and more suitable, but, as you recognise, it has to be suitable for all. On a broader point, Cabinet Secretary, while I'm glad you are taking action to improve accessibility, the fact is that far too much of our transport infrastructure is creaking, and it's a shame that it's taken until now to implement more opportunities for access for all.

Transport for Wales has been long criticised for its delays and poor customer service, which are improving now, but still frustrate passengers. Indeed, complaints about accessibility and TfW have more than doubled since 2021. You mention undertaking an audit of rail stations in Wales. When can we expect to see that come to fruition? And how long do you envisage it will take to put right the shortfalls that are found relating to access for all? 

Furthermore, Cabinet Secretary, the bus services continue to diminish, as we've talked about just before, especially across our rural communities, restricting movement for those who are most vulnerable in our community. And while I know the bus Bill, as we've discussed, has come forward, and I look forward to scrutinising it, the truth is that the bus Bill may not be the magic bullet and the core issues that many operators and passengers are facing will not change. But let's hope that they will. 

However, you have an opportunity through the use of this legislation to improve accessibility for disabled people. So, with this in mind, Cabinet Secretary, what steps will you take to use this legislation to drive improvement? And as we know, it's not just the disabled in society who face barriers; many elderly and vulnerable people do also. I wonder what assurance you can give to this important demographic. Many bus stops, for instance, lack essential facilities, like just benches for people to sit on while they're waiting for their buses. I welcome the establishment of the inclusive travel board to work across all areas of transport and modes of transport. I think that that's a good thing. I think it will be a good thing.

The statement highlighted the importance of affordable travel, but the simple fact is that a 2022 report found that, since 2012, fuel prices have risen by less than 10 per cent while rail, coach and bus ticket prices have increased by between 33 per cent and 56 per cent. Bus fares increased by 3.5 per cent from 2019 to 2020 alone, and a 3.8 per cent increase in rail fares was announced in 2022. Higher fares have a greater impact on people who rely heavily on public transport as well as people on lower incomes. For the 23 per cent of people in Wales who do not have access to a car, public transport services—as I know you said earlier—are relied upon to access the basic and essential services. So, it's incredibly important that we keep costs low as well as getting reliability right. I hope, in the emerging bus Bill, that we're not only looking at integrated ticketing, but the price of those tickets, because it's quite fundamental to all demographics within our country to make sure that public transport is not only accessible, it's affordable. 

Well, I'm very grateful for Peter Fox's response to this oral statement. I also recently asked Transport for Wales to ensure that the access and inclusion panel, which has proved so valuable in advising on the whole array of modes in which Transport for Wales has an interest—to make sure that they have their full support in discharging their invaluable advice and support.

The audit that I mentioned concerning train stations I would hope will be completed over the summer. And on the future of rail investment, we're in discussions with UK Government on the future specifically of the access for all programme. But I think it's well recognised now that Wales has a disproportionately large number of stations that still, unfortunately, do not have step-free access. And in many circumstances, such as with my local station at Ruabon, if you're not able-bodied, it's incredibly difficult to gain access to the northbound platform. So, we'll undertake that work rapidly between now and the summer. I'll obviously report back to Members with the results of that particular audit. 

I would agree entirely with Peter Fox that the bus Bill in itself is not a panacea for the problems that the bus network faces, but it will provide significant help in driving benefits for people who wheel, people who are deaf, partially sighted, blind, who push pushchairs, because what we're going to be able to do with contracts is to ensure that driver training is of the highest standard. When we acquire new buses, as we have done with the TrawsCymru network, we can make them far, far more accessible. And that can apply because Transport for Wales may be in a position to be able to purchase and then lease the buses. That would apply to SMEs, not just the larger operators who, perhaps, have deeper pockets to purchase those incredibly advanced vehicles. So, the bus Bill will go a considerable way, but it's not the only solution that needs to be pursued in this regard. 

I would agree entirely that some of the simple things really matter considerably. Leaking bus stops, information that is not up to date, lighting that isn't working, these are all combined factors that prevent people, inhibit people from accessing public transport or from being active in their daily lives. And, as I outlined in the statement, we're getting to grips with them. 

Integrated ticketing as well will be hugely important—integrated ticketing across the network and also integrated with rail services. But a fair fare regime is going to be vitally important in driving social justice and enabling those who simply can't afford any other means of transport to get from A to B for whatever purpose.

There's very little to disagree with in your statement, and I too have had those conversations with people the length and breadth of Wales, and it saddens me too that our systems aren't up to scratch. Of course, we wholeheartedly support the principle that transport must be inclusive. Everybody should have access to safe, accessible and affordable transport options. Unfortunately, it's not the case for all people across Wales, and I raised this very issue with you just a few weeks ago, so I won't go into those details again, but I want to stress an important point, that active travel and inclusive travel must not be seen as competing priorities. They go hand in hand.

Investing in better pavements, fixing dropped kerbs and potholes, tackling e-bike misuse and making roads safer are all essential steps in making active travel more accessible. My colleague Delyth Jewell, when she was transport spokesperson, was particularly focused on improving safety and infrastructure in public spaces, ensuring that women and vulnerable people feel safer when travelling. Given the new focus on transport for all, I'd welcome a meeting between the Cabinet Secretary, myself and Delyth to explore how that work can be continued.

You mentioned on BBC Politics Wales this Sunday that money was being made available to fix potholes. A promise to repair 100,000 potholes is very welcome, but fixing roads alone doesn't deliver the transformative shift that Wales needs in transport. And what is a bit of a concern for me is the transparency. Where does the money come from to back up this statement today? And maybe you could give us a breakdown of what's been defunded to be able to afford some of these payments. That would be of great interest.

We know that active travel funding will no longer be ring-fenced, but I note that you've asked local government to spend 60 per cent of their core active travel funding on walking, wheeling and cycling. So, what discussions did you have with local authorities on the practicalities of doing that? Are they in a position to be able to deliver on that, and are you confident that the funding will meet the need and how that's been split across local authorities? But does it mean that the Government is shifting funding away from active travel towards road maintenance, which is a concern for some cyclists and walkers and wheelers? So, can you be clear on those priorities and address some of those concerns that cyclists and wheelers and walkers may have in some of this statement?

Plaid Cymru will always continue to strive for a transport strategy that is both inclusive and ambitious, and that truly delivers for our communities, so I welcome this statement today. Diolch yn fawr.

Can I thank Peredur for his statement and for the questions that he raised? I think, from what I understand, the Member has heard from people with lived experience, and from what I've heard it's pretty obvious that more needs to be done to provide better transport for all, particularly in terms of accessible transport. Members may have recently read about the experience that Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson had on the railways—thankfully not a Transport for Wales service, but it was a pretty disgusting example of how a modern rail service is failing people, failing people who are the most vulnerable. And that's why it's absolutely vital that we pursue a travel for all agenda. And it doesn't just apply to active travel.

My point about travel for all is that it applies to every mode. We must address every single mode and make each and every one of them more accessible. And transport modes are largely interfaced and integrated as well. Still, the single most popular active travel journey is the walk to the bus. And so, the condition of the street, the condition of the pavements, the condition of the street lights and the bus shelter will determine whether or not someone is active in getting to the bus stop. If they're not active in getting to the bus stop, in many cases, as Peter Fox has already outlined, because they don't have any other means of transport, they remain isolated. They don't go on the bus. 

It's quite simple stuff, but just bolting everything together and making sure that we deal with the fundamentals is vitally important. The feedback that I've had from local authorities is that utilising 60 per cent of the core active travel fund this year will lead to on-the-ground, pretty simple, straightforward, easy, quick solutions to some of the issues that you and other Members have raised. That doesn't mean that it comes at the expense of the development of a long-term pipeline, because the funding allocation ensures that that takes place as well.

There are other areas that I think need action—as I mentioned, illegal use of e-bikes, e-scooters. Some of them actually look more like motorbikes these days. I wouldn't know at a glance what is a legal bike and what is an illegal bike. On enforcement, we have to give our credit to the police. They do an amazing job on stretched resources, but trying to enforce this new culture of using e-mobility devices when some are illegal and others are legal is really difficult. I've been working with UK Government Ministers, Scottish Ministers and Northern Ireland to discuss how we can collectively deal with this pretty recent emerging challenge. It's a challenge that impacts not just on blind and partially sighted people, deaf people, parents pushing a pram, dog walkers, but it also impacts on other cyclists, it impacts on motorists as well, and it certainly impacts on people who use a wheelchair. I've heard that personally from the access and inclusion panel. So, we need to get to grips with that as well.

Likewise, pavement parking, for various reasons that have been outlined over months and years. This is a hugely challenging, complicated issue to get to grips with. I met with UK Government Ministers recently about pavement parking, and there is recognition that it has to be addressed. It's been in the news, I think, nationally, that Ministers want to deal with this particular problem. My understanding is that the Department for Transport is considering amending regulation 103 of the road vehicles regulations to create a specific offence of unnecessary obstruction of the pavement. Longer term plans may also include considering a wider ban on pavement parking, which is a menace in many communities.

I will also continue to work very closely with the access and inclusion panel as we develop different ideas and innovation and try to identify each and every hazard and barrier to moving safely and securely within our communities and across our communities. But I'd very much welcome a discussion with you and with Delyth, who I know was keen to pursue a piece of backbench legislation aimed at making movement and travel safer. It was largely focused, I think, on women, who feel incredibly vulnerable at times for some of the reasons that I've outlined, but I think the same issues apply to many individuals that we represent.

In terms of fixing roads, the potholes that we'll be filling, the roads that we're going to be resurfacing, they'll be of benefit, obviously, to motorists, but also to cyclists; I think around 15 per cent of cycling accidents occur because of potholes. And of course, this money for local authorities, the local borrowing initiative, won't just apply to roads; it'll apply to pavements as well. Because—I'm afraid to say it—creaking infrastructure and pavements is a massive barrier to the elderly and the frail getting out of their homes. So, that money will support improvements in terms of pedestrian infrastructure as well.

There are seven speakers who still wish to contribute, and we are limited in time, so I expect all speakers to stick to their time, please. 

Given the focus of the statement this afternoon, it would be remiss of me not to recognise the investment into Flint station at the outset and the difference that's going to make in finally making Flint station fully accessible. I know many of us that were involved in campaigning for that for many years will be pleased to see it completed.

Cabinet Secretary, I've written to you previously about my transport forum I held last year in Flint, and there were a number of concerns raised there about issues that disabled travellers may face. That was about infrastructure in terms of stations not being staffed or having toilets available, and the impact that has, but also more broadly about the infrastructure in terms of rolling stock. If there isn't any toilet suitable for disabled passengers on the train, many often struggle to use toilets because they're unable to get off the train at stops, because there isn't that assistance there.

The final point around infrastructure I want to raise is what I could term digital infrastructure and potential exclusion from that. At the forum, concerns were raised about systems for accessing help on trains being online and via an app, which not every person has access to. They felt that there should be perhaps more accessible call stations for disabled people as well. So, can I ask what assurances you can give on this and how that can be addressed moving forward? Diolch.

Can I thank Hannah Blythyn for her questions? The work that's been done at Flint station is very welcome indeed, it's quite considerable investment we've seen at that particular station, but it is one of the most regularly used stations along the north Wales main line, vitally important, not just for Flint itself, but for surrounding communities. It would have been in the past, when I lived just outside of Mold, the go-to station for myself, so it does have quite a significant draw from the wider community. When I visited Flint station to see the work, it wasn't completed at that moment in time, but it did strike me that it had been designed and was being delivered in conjunction with the needs, hopes and desires, and ideas of people who face disabling barriers.

The new trains that we have ordered and that are being delivered are a world apart from the ones that we inherited in 2018. We're taking the fleet from being one of the oldest in Europe to one of the newest, 270 trains to 484, and they include, of course, provision that is compliant with modern-day regulations.

I do recognise that the issue of cash in an increasingly cashless environment is very challenging for some, but it is still possible on TfW trains to purchase a ticket on board with cash. That's something that I don't believe all transport operators are offering at present. Certainly a lot of airlines have gone to cashless only, I see, these days, but TfW are determined to make sure that inclusion and accessibility are at the very heart of the services they provide.

Thank you for the statement, Cabinet Secretary. It is very welcome, as there is so much to do, isn't there, in terms of making travel truly accessible for all in Wales. It is absolutely right to place that emphasis on accessibility when it comes to public transport, and I'd like to just say I welcome what you said about making improvements to the blue badge scheme as well. That's excellent to hear.

When I visited Newport Bus recently, it was great to see the changes that they've already made to their fleet to fall in line with the new UK legislation to make buses fit for purpose for the hard of hearing, with those bilingual next stop monitors that you mentioned in your statement. But I also heard from Newport Bus and constituents how unsuitable some bus stops are in my region and across Wales for people with disabilities. My son and I spent the day on the bus on Sunday, as you do, and had a lovely time on our bus adventure, but I was quite shocked by the state of some of the bus stops, with no timetables, no seating, as my colleague said. Also, there was one bus stop that essentially dropped passengers off in a hedge in Penallt in Monmouthshire, which I didn't think was very good—

You need to ask now, please.

Yes, I will do. My question to you is this: obviously, this is mainly on local authorities, so will the Government be making more money available to local councils to ensure essential works can be carried out, or what conversations is he having with councils to push changes for the aims he outlines in the statement? Because without those safe, adapted bus stops, they will continue to be a barrier for people who require accessibility improvements across Wales. Diolch.

Can I thank Laura Jones for her questions? The blue badge scheme is something that I know that Carolyn Thomas's Petitions Committee have considered quite extensively, and I've received a lot of correspondence, as you can imagine, over the years, regarding the scheme. I'm not comfortable with where we currently are on it, because it's basically designed with fraud in mind, and levels of fraud I don't think justify having to make every single person reapply and go through that tremendously bureaucratic process. So, I'm looking forward to convening local authorities, the WLGA and other organisations to discuss how we can share information and data.

In regard to improving bus stops, the condition of our bus stops is largely an illustration of the effects of austerity over the years. As we move forward, we're looking at how Transport for Wales can work more closely with local authorities, not just in terms of improving bus stops, but in ensuring that we have them at a consistent high standard when it comes to the form of bus stop that is installed. Some bus stops simply don't prevent people from being subject to the elements, I'm afraid. There has to be a consistent approach that protects people and that provides up-to-date information, and in terms of lighting that ensures that people feel safe. So, we're looking at how we can support local authorities in that regard.

As I said, the core funding for active travel will see immediate effect this coming financial year in terms of improving access to and from bus stops. I think there are in the region of 20,000 bus stops across Wales, so modernising them and improving them is going to be a significant piece of work. But they're an integral part of our streetscape, so doing this work on bus stops right now, looking at how we can utilise the most modern technology for information—and that might not be screens, it might be QR codes and so forth, or a combination of the two—we're going to do it through the eyes and lived experience of the most vulnerable in society so that we provide bus stops and other stations that can serve every single citizen's needs.

I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary, again, for his statement. It'll be no surprise to him that I'm going to raise the Ebbw valley line with him and invite him to Abertillery to see where the potential is for the Abertillery spur to be completed and to connect the town to the overall rail network. But also, of course, he's aware of the issue with the use of bus passes on the Ebbw valley line, with the new service to Newport not a part of the overall concession scheme. I'd be grateful if he could—I know he's aware of it—continue to look into that. But there is a fundamental issue—it was touched on by Laura Anne Jones, in fact—in terms of the quality of service offered to people in different parts of the country. I'm very aware that, as you go further north or perhaps into the Heads of the Valleys, you do see lower quality vehicles and lower quality infrastructure. And what I think we need to be able to do if we are to achieve the modal switch that I think we all want to see is to ensure that there is an equality of access and an equality of infrastructure to support public transport across the whole of the country. I hope, also, that—

Thank you, Alun.

—he can look at blue badges to ensure that there is equality of access there. I was speaking to people in my constituency on Friday who pointed out that where there is a separated family and a blue badge for the child, quite often that can lead to some significant problems. I will write to the Cabinet Secretary on that matter, but I think it would be useful for us to review those things.

Can I thank Alun Davies? I look forward to receiving his letter on that very important point. I think what the Member was saying about different standards of infrastructure and services largely goes back to the way that we've been dealing with investment decisions over many, many decades, where we utilise a Treasury Green Book that will always see more investment pumped into the most affluent areas, because that's how you get the biggest benefit-cost ratio.

My understanding is that the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, wants to move away from that, wants to reform that approach so that we can truly level up. But it's something that I and others in the Welsh Government have been acutely conscious of over many years, and that's why we've pursued—. And my goodness, we've faced some challenges with the dualling of the Heads of the Valleys road in terms of the cost of that particular scheme, but we pursued it because we knew that it would make a huge difference to people's lives in those communities that it serves. And we're acutely aware, as well, of the role that the metro will play in driving social justice and employment opportunities.

We inherited the concession scheme that Alun Davies refers to. It's certainly always under review. The future of it is largely based on the cost and affordability, but as the Member said, we are regularly looking at that. And I would very much enjoy a visit to Abertillery with the Member to see where the spur could go.

Thank you for your statement today, Cabinet Secretary. As Chair of the active travel cross-party group, I'm aware of some great schemes across Wales to get more sections of society involved in cycling, including Pedal Power in Cardiff and Cycling 4 All in Wrexham—schemes and organisations that enable people with a wide range of disabilities to enjoy riding a bike or trike.

My Newport East constituent Rhys Holmes is very involved with Pedal Power and sits on the board of trustees. He had a brain tumour as a child and has had to live with the effects ever since. Now in his 30s, he has a rare chronic neurological condition called superficial siderosis. Through Pedal Power, Rhys has been a great advocate of the importance of being active, in particular through cycling, and wants to help others with neurological conditions. Cabinet Secretary, would you congratulate Rhys for his advocacy and also the work of Pedal Power and other such organisations across Wales in getting more people active, especially those with disabilities, and enabling them to take part in cycling?

Can I thank John Griffiths for what he shared with us today about Rhys. He sounds like a pretty inspirational person. I may be wrong, but I think I've visited Pedal Power in the past, albeit it was in regard to a youth employment scheme at the time. I'm pretty sure that I did visit them, and I found it a really welcoming place—a truly welcoming place. But what John Griffiths raises about physical ability in regard to cycling is vitally important, but so too the financial ability of people to be able to get bikes. That's why, when we look at the cost, I think it's really important that we recognise the work of various organisations, and I have one in my constituency in Llangollen, which, effectively, recycle cycling equipment, including bikes, at very low or nil cost, and that makes it accessible for all.

I really welcome today's statement. I also welcome the fact that you responded recently around Eastbrook railway station, where there's a campaign currently, and I know they'd very much welcome you and welcome today's statement. I just wanted to ask: how do we ensure that some of the investments that are taking place are actually accessible? You've mentioned the inclusive travel board, but recently we've seen Porth transport hub open—obviously, really welcome—but accessibility being an issue and reviews having to take place. Surely, that should never happen—things that are brand-new should be accessible. Also, pavements—still, when there have been upgrades with pavements, they're not the right ones, leading to people tripping and injuring themselves. We don't want to be spending this money twice, do we—once to have the improvement and then to correct things? So, how are we going to ensure that expenditure in future is the right one and when do you foresee that this vision of having all transport being inclusive for everyone becoming a reality? Are there any targets in place for this?

Well, these are very early stages of an agenda that I hope, after the Senedd elections, we'll have a consensus on and we'll be able to move forward collectively. But I think you raise a really, really crucial point about monitoring and, indeed, determining how investment is going to contribute to this agenda. Now, you're probably aware of how submissions come to Ministers. They're very lengthy and then, near the end, you'll have impact assessments outlined, including an equalities impact assessment. I've heard from the access and inclusion panel their concerns that it's a box-ticking exercise and that, as you say, failure to actually consider equalities issues and access issues at the very start actually leads to retrofitting solutions later on, and that can come at great cost.

What I've asked officials to do, and I guess this could apply across portfolios, is maintain the equalities impact assessment—that's absolutely fine, I'm happy with that—but at the start of a process, and at the top of a ministerial submission—we call them MAs—have an equalities optimisation assessment, so that the Minister will be able to determine whether or not all consideration and all opportunities have been sought when a particular policy or a political investment project is being devised. That way, right at the outset, you have that vision of how to deliver something that will suit everybody's needs, rather than having to retrofit solutions after you've actually delivered.

I welcome this statement. My question is about blue badges. We've had many meetings recently to resolve issues for people with lifelong conditions so that they don't have to reapply every three years—to resubmit the form, all of the medical details and evidence, then incorrectly face rejection, and being told that they can't appeal when they're not going to get better. Would the Cabinet Secretary agree, across all local authorities that deliver it, we need the not-for-reassessment option to be available on a shared local authority database and used so that just an updated photo and proof of residence need to be submitted? There needs to be a consistent, more sympathetic approach, with mandatory training. And would you agree that, when you set up this expert panel, it's not just Welsh Government officials and the Welsh Local Government Association? Could you also have experts from disability groups and the excellent Stand North Wales community interest company, who have been leading on this and sent a petition to the Senedd on it—that they can be a part of this expert panel? Thank you.

Can I thank Carolyn Thomas for her questions today and for the ongoing interest that she has in this subject area? It's one that I know she is passionate about. Given my indication that I am not comfortable with where we are on blue badges and my decision to convene local authorities, the WLGA and other organisations together to look at how we can better share data and information, I'd very much welcome a further discussion with the Member about how we can move forward with a scheme that enables people not to have to go through a very, very heavily administrative process, often filling in 15 pages of information only to find that their application has been rejected because one part of it hasn't been filled in correctly.

There are over 280,000 blue badges in Wales. Obviously, a very significant number of people who have blue badges should not be for reassessment, but what's happening is that the fear of fraud and the lack of data sharing is driving a system that actually puts those people that you've just outlined, the people that you've called for action on, at a disadvantage, and we want to end it.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. 'Travel for all' is a fantastic statement and there have been many, many improvements over many years to give physical accessibility to railway stations. One of the latest ones is the installation of lifts in the Newtown station, making that station a step-free station, so, therefore, allowing that accessibility for all people, and Network Rail, of course, were key partners in that. The delivery, of course, of your proposals will indeed need partnership working, and I'm quite interested to know how you're going to engage with the partners who are going to deliver the change, and also interested in whether you are going to welcome the step-free railway station in Newtown.

Well, I very much welcome the step-free station in Newport that Joyce Watson campaigned so much for. I think it may have been signed off—[Interruption.] Sorry, Newtown. What did I say? Newport. Apologies. I'm glad that you corrected me; thank you. I know that you campaigned tirelessly for Newtown train station to have step-free access, and I think that the sign-off was provided by Peter Hendy in Network Rail, who, of course, is now rail Minister. I know Peter Hendy is determined to ensure that we get more inclusive elements of infrastructure included in our rail network, principally on our stations, but also on our trains. That will be driven by Great British Railways, and rail reforms are being pursued by Peter Hendy at the moment. I'm working very closely on this particular area of work, and as I said earlier, we're going to carry out that rapid audit of all rail stations to look at which stations need support and need investment as soon as possible.

Thank you very much, Dirprwy Lywydd. If I may just begin, before I read my statement today, by saying that I will be discussing topics such as self-harm, suicidal ideation and suicide today. So, that is a trigger warning, and also I will be adhering to the Samaritans's sensitive reporting guidelines in my responses. 

I am very pleased today to launch Wales's new 10-year suicide prevention and self-harm strategy, 'Understanding'. This ambitious strategy seeks to create a more compassionate Wales where we try to understand the many causes and reasons why people experience suicidal thoughts and self-harm, so that we can, ultimately, better support them. Our aim is to reduce the enduring rates of suicide that we have seen in Wales and across the UK in recent years, and to save lives.

In developing this new approach, I am indebted to the great many families and people across Wales who have bravely shared their experience so that others may benefit from improved services and support. And I also want to pay tribute to my Cabinet colleague Lynne Neagle, who prepared the foundations of this strategy and its sister strategy, the new mental health and well-being strategy, which will be launched after Easter recess. I know that she will welcome me also thanking our Welsh Government officials, who have done a tremendous amount of work on this.

Dirprwy Lywydd, the new suicide prevention and self-harm strategy builds on its predecessor, 'Talk to me 2', and the developments in support and services that we have put in place over the last few years. These include the appointment of a national suicide and self-harm programme lead for Wales, and regional leads to drive national and local partnership action; the launch of the real-time suspected suicide surveillance in 2022, which collects data directly from police forces related to sudden or unexplained deaths that are suspected to have been suicides—that was also launched, and enables us to respond more quickly to suspected suicides; and the National Advisory and Liaison Service Cymru, which is a single point of contact and support for everyone who has been affected by suicide.

But with the enduring rates of self-harm and suicide in Wales, we know we need to do more. As I said in my introduction, we want to create a more compassionate understanding of suicide and self-harm, and the strategy will ensure that people who self-harm receive holistic and person-centred support, and all relevant services where people may present with self-harm or suicidal ideation will provide timely, compassionate and evidence-based support and interventions. If we are to better understand suicide and self-harm, we need the knowledge about who is affected, why, and what support is needed.

Alongside the strategy, we are also announcing the launch of the national centre for suicide prevention and self-harm research for Wales, which will provide the infrastructure to help improve our understanding. An action in the delivery plan spoke to establishing the national centre as the Welsh Government's advisory body, and I am pleased to announce that those arrangements have now been formalised. Central to this will be involving people with lived experience, and this is being taken forward by the Samaritans, building on its existing experience and established networks across Wales. This means we have established a direct link between lived experience, data and research, with national policy and delivery. Everything we do will be based on our most up-to-date understanding of what is happening around us, and people's experiences, which will help us develop more timely and effective responses.

However, understanding is also about shifting people's perceptions, and increasing understanding in the general population that suicide and self-harm are often responses to difficult emotional situations such as grief and trauma. By increasing wider understanding, we can change attitudes, reduce stigma and allow people to open up sooner without fear of being judged and labelled. This will help allow people to access more timely support and prevent escalation to the point of crisis.

Dirprwy Lywydd, this strategy has been developed following extensive engagement with people and stakeholders across Wales. Listening to people affected by suicide and self-harm has been fundamental. We have also worked across Government to ensure the new strategy builds and strengthens work under way to tackle the risk factors for suicide and self-harm. This includes specific, joined-up work in key areas such as education, employability, substance use and housing. This strategy has been written alongside the new mental health and well-being strategy, which will be published later this month.

Suicide and self-harm are not mental health conditions, but they share a range of underlying risk factors, such as unemployment, low socioeconomic status, peer victimisation, substance use, a history of trauma or abuse, relationship breakdown and chronic physical health conditions. Both strategies, therefore, have a focus on prevention and collaborative, cross-Government working to tackle these risk factors.

Also, people who experience self-harm or suicidal thoughts, as well as those caring for them, often rely on mental health services, among other services, for advice and support. There is an interdependency with the mental health and well-being strategy to improve mental health services to ensure people who self-harm or experience suicidal ideation get timely access to support when and where it's needed.

However, at the heart of this strategy is a recognition that people do not always need to access specialist services. Often people need someone to talk to without the fear of being judged or labelled. We are adopting a whole-society and whole-system approach to breaking down that stigma, which will help people to access the support that they need sooner.

We have done our utmost to ensure this strategy and the accompanying delivery plan are accessible to everyone. They are available on our website alongside easy-read versions, and we have developed a children and young people’s version, which is available on request. A British Sign Language version will also be published shortly.

This is a 10-year strategy. It continues the work that we have done to improve services and access to support for people across Wales. I look forward to the journey ahead to creating a more compassionate Wales, where we can face self-harm and suicidal ideation with a greater understanding and more tailored support for all of those who need it, as well as their loved ones. Diolch. 

Thank you, Minister, for your statement today. One of the most consistent issues that gets repeated to me as a Senedd Member is that mental health intervention doesn't happen quickly enough. When those who are suffering reach out, appointments just take too long and this then manifests itself in preventative self-harm and suicide. Minister, we know that most people do not seek help until they reach crisis point, the moment that they can no longer cope, so the speed of access to mental health services is critical to the overall outcome. Yet, according to StatsWales, in November 2024, just four months ago, over 1,400 people in Wales were waiting over 56 days between their local primary mental health support service assessment and the start of a therapeutic intervention. I think I speak for everyone here in saying that this is a major contributing factor for poor outcomes of treatment and for prolonging the mental health issues of individuals, and is contributing significantly to the number of suicides and self-harm incidents. So, with this in mind, Minister, how does this plan help substantially improve waiting times for therapeutic treatment? 

We talk a lot in this Chamber about waiting lists, but, for those waiting for mental health treatment, time is a critical factor. You said in your delivery plan that you want to improve access to and the delivery of services, and improve multi-agency rapid responses, but you make no mention of how you're going to do this. Do you believe health boards will recruit more trained staff to deliver this? In the delivery plan, there is no specific mention of any targeted approach towards men, other than of the Samaritans running a male suicide prevention campaign. But, as you know, men make up 77 per cent of suicides in Wales, and they are predominantly in the construction and agricultural sectors. Minister, you have set out to improve the accessibility of universal suicide and self-harm awareness, as well as supporting information and resources so that everyone will be empowered with the knowledge and awareness to recognise those in need. However, this doesn't necessarily help those specific groups that we know have the highest suicide and self-harm rates. It seems your plan is to spread the resources. Minister, why haven't you made any targeted approach to improve empowerment and access to mental health services in the specific industries that I have mentioned? 

Unfortunately, I find the lack of defined actions in this plan frustrating. It talks too much about review boards and how to be clearer in terminology. Like many others, I would argue that this plan needs clear and well-defined actions about when, where, who and how it will engage with those who are at risk of suicide and self-harm. It is widely known that the influence of certain groups on social media and the fact that social media is used as a tool for bullying are major factors in causing self-harm and suicide, yet there is almost no mention of this other than the Smoothwall service, which allows schools to block sites that are deemed inappropriate. Minister, why is it not mentioned? Why is there no specific aim to improve understanding by children and young people of the dangers and the predatory nature of people on social media? Why is there no mention of viral self-harm trends and how they target specific vulnerable people? 

Where is the strategy for helping to prevent self-harm and suicide? I do not think that your proposals for raising the visibility of suicide and self-harm, with Government establishing and maintaining governance arrangements that facilitate effective communication or reviewing processes for considering suicide and self-harm in policy development will mean very much to those people in our communities who are exposed and need help. 

Minister, this plan seems to be weighted entirely towards reviewing and improving current methodologies and strategies, and training and ensuring consistent approaches to the co-production with regard to clarity of roles and responsibilities, but it lacks any mention of reaching out into communities to identify specific needs. You may be aware that studies have shown that, in society as a whole, 15 per cent of adolescents engage in self-harm. This risk of self-harm is six times higher for bully-victims, five times higher for the bullied and three times higher for those who actually do the bullying. This risk of self-harm as a result of being bullied is significantly greater for girls than boys. Depression, anxiety and parental conflict has accounted for some of the association between the bullied and self-harm, and between bully-victims and self-harm. Moreover, Minister, the relationship between those who are bullied and then self-harming is found to be significantly reduced when they have improved parental support and school well-being.

Sadly, I think your vision is unambitious. You aim to continuously decrease suicide by making those who self-injure, self-poison, have suicidal thoughts, or who have attempted suicide, feel safe and understood by informed and compassionate communities. But I would argue that your vision should also include helping to reach out into communities, improving support at every stage of life, improving parental knowledge and awareness, and helping schools to provide better and more appropriate support.

So, finally, Minister, what efforts are you going to take to improve early-stage intervention in schools and industries that are known to have a higher prevalence of self-harm and suicide, so that every possible step is taken to help people before their mental health deteriorates to a state where they contemplate self-harm and suicide? Thank you.

I don't know, really, where to start with that statement, Joel James, because I don't feel like you've read the entirety of the strategy and the accompanying delivery plan. I'm really perplexed by your saying that there are no actions. There's literally a delivery plan that goes through the listening and learning, prevention, empowering, supporting, equipping and responding. And then what it has is that it has very clear action points underneath it, and then it also says how it's going to cross over into each of those areas. So, I'm genuinely baffled. I really don't know what to do other than stand here and read you out the delivery plan, which undermines absolutely everything that you've just asked me.

So, instead, what I will do is that I will actually push back on some of the I would say potentially harmful misconceptions and generalisations that you've made about self-harm and suicide in that statement. So, just to say that the facts about self-harm are that it increases the likelihood that the person will die by suicide by between 50 and 100 times, and over half of young people who die by suicide do have a history. We know this. Three quarters of people who have self-harmed cited relieving unpleasant feelings of anger, tension, anxiety or depression as a reason for doing so, and a third reported self-harm in order to draw attention to or to change their situation. I hope you can understand that, through the absolutely incredible research that we have, we're not just saying, 'Oh, well it's bullying.' We're actually getting to the heart of what makes that person feel, and why they then might self-harm.

We've also done an exhaustive list—well, a non-exhaustive list, sorry—of the risk factors as well, and these do include, actually, females and people from a low socioeconomic status, alcohol and substance misuse, but it can also be situational. It can be because of job and financial losses. It can be that there are clusters of self-harm that have an element of contagion. We also know that there are sociocultural issues as well, the stigma associated with poor health, and help-seeking behaviour.

I also wanted to say that, talking about online, social media and images, it's actually not as simple as to say that everything online is dangerous or can be damaging. What we've found is that there are harms and benefits; it's not a dichotomy. Actually, some of the good is that people find it a source of empathy and support. They find a sense of community; it's a coping mechanism. But, yes, there is the bad: the normalising of self-harm behaviour, online bullying, internet addiction. I have a wealth of research here that is also looking at self-harm in older people, which doesn't get talked about an awful lot.

But I will just come back to that this is a strategy with a very, very clear and comprehensive delivery plan that I will remind you has been co-produced with people who are experts in their field—expert researchers, people on the ground. You dismiss it as if the Samaritans campaign and the work that they're doing is not enough; it's huge, what they're doing, trying to get men to reach out and speak more. They're also doing a tremendous amount in rural communities as well. So, I would ask that you please read it and try to address some of those questions that you put to me yourself. Diolch.

Thank you very much for all of those questions, Mabon. I'd just like to start by just reiterating that our vision is that the annual rates of suicide in Wales will continuously decrease. People who self-injure, self-poison, who have suicidal ideation or who have attempted suicide will feel safe and understood. They will belong to informed and compassionate communities and will be able to access support and services that meet their needs when and where they need them. That is what we're trying to achieve and committing to here.

I really thank you for welcoming it. I agree with you; we need to see this 10-year strategy through, whoever that may be with. And also thank you for sharing your own experience as well. I've actually had many people reach out to me today. It's something that people want to talk about when they want to talk about it, and I feel that, even myself.

So, yes, our rates of suicide are higher than England, about the same as Scotland—both nations are struggling at the moment. And I also wanted to say that a lot of what you asked about, in terms of the prevention and people seeing somebody in the mental health services, I do have the mental health and well-being strategy coming at the end of the month, and that is the sister strategy to this. What I'm really passionate about and what I would really like to see is more parity, which we talk about, with physical health. When you go and see somebody and you initially do that reach out, which is so difficult to do, particularly difficult for men—I know this from men in my own life—to get them to actually go and ask for that help and try to explain how they're feeling, it's absolutely essential that they see somebody really quickly, if not immediately. We're seeing an awful lot of research to suggest that that single session, just having a chat with somebody immediately, makes all the difference, and that is where I would like us to get to, and I'll be talking about that more in the mental health strategy. But I believe that that's true parity, true prevention. I think that it can do an awful lot to prevent people reaching crisis point. So, that's a big part of this.

Yes, you scrutinised me in the Health and Social Care Committee over the funding. I'm very pleased, the two people sitting on the front bench here—Mark Drakeford, Cabinet Secretary, and Lynne Neagle—are very big on the fact that we do have that parity and we have that ring fence for mental health, which we absolutely, as a Welsh Government, are committed to: whenever the health budget goes up, the mental health budget goes up with it. It is £820 million at the moment. I think that what I would suggest is that not that it's not enough money, I would always welcome more money, but it's not that it's not enough money, it's just that what we really need to do now is to shift it into the prevention space. And that is not easy to do. I wish that we could just do that overnight, but it's not. For example, trying to move £100,000 from a tier 4 service in mental health to tier 3, even with the modelling to tell us the difference that that would make, you're still going to have to do that in a transition, in a phased approach, but that is where we need to be, and that's what I'm trying to do at the moment. So, yes, I would say it needs to be much more in prevention.

You mentioned about the statistics as well. So, thank you for raising this. It is important to remember, though, when we talk about data and statistics, that we are talking about people. As I always say, behind every number is a person. But, yes, the Office for National Statistics, last August, reported 386 suicides registered in Wales. This is 14 per cent more than in 2022. The real time suspected suicide surveillance report, published in December 2024, is complementary to the ONS figures, and does allow for more timely monitoring of trends in suicides in Wales, but this only covers suspected suicides, not those confirmed by a coroner inquest, as reported by the ONS. So, I would say that we have the ability there. I think that we just need to join that up a little bit more, but I'm really pleased that we do have that surveillance in Wales, and it does allow us to make faster decisions and see what's happening. Many people have observed today that the highest rates are in males; residents from the most deprived areas; those who are unemployed, who are over 12 times higher than any other employment group; those known to the police; and those with pre-existing mental health conditions, and that's the same across both data sets. And I think, really, the most important part here is that we're identifying those demographics that we then need to target with support.

I'd like to very much thank Mind Cymru. With the funding that they've had from the Welsh Government to do Time to Change and raising awareness about the stigma of mental health, they've done absolutely tremendous work, and they've really embedded it in communities, and I'm very, very grateful for that, and a lot of what they've done has contributed to both of these strategies.

The stigma is still very real. I would say that people have become more comfortable with talking about depression and anxiety, but when you get into talking about psychosis and talking about the more serious episodes that people can have, that is still very, very difficult, and there is still an awful lot of stigma. Because we have to remember, people can recover and, with the right support, people can really get better. It can be very similar to physical health, and they're very intertwined, and that's where we need to get better. I think more people talking about their recovery is actually one of the most empowering things that we can do.

I work extremely closely with the Cabinet Secretary for Education. We're doing work now around schools, of course, which we know is so important, and the child and adolescent mental health services' in-reach programme is going to be coming under the NHS executive for delivery. So, we're doing so much work in this area, and we will continue to do so. Just to say, these two strategies have been done so cross-Government. I think everyone is a bit fed up of seeing it coming through all the time, but it's been updated and constantly added to, even up until last week, and it really has had that collaboration. Everyone has taken responsibility for this, because it is cross-Government. It really is.

And then just in terms of that transition period, I remember when I was on the Health and Social Care Committee and we did the 'Sort the Switch' scrutiny, and I heard from the young people in that, making that transition from CAMHS to adult, and you know, it's very, very difficult. We're still doing a lot of work on that, but I would say it's one of the reasons we've done all-ages strategies. It hasn't been popular with everybody, but we've done all-ages strategies for both of them, because at the end of the day, it's about everybody receiving that timely care, person centred. But I will take on board the work that we need to do around that cohort and that age group. There's an awful lot of good in here, specifically targeting that group. One of the key things that I found very interesting was that so much, again, is related to education and attainment. The rates are higher for people who don't go on to university, for example. So, there's something that we really need to look at there, and that's where the cross-Government comes in as well. So, diolch.

Minister, it's good to hear you mention your work with Samaritans Cymru, and it was very good to have you at the launch of their impact report at the Norwegian church last week. We heard there about the 386 lives lost in Wales to suicide in 2023, and the fact that that was an increase, as you described, and the ripple effect, which makes suicide so damaging, not just for family and friends—important though that is—but for communities, work colleagues. And of course, as I mentioned at the event, here in the Senedd we had the experience of Carl Sargeant, father of our current Member, Jack, several years ago. I think those of us here at the time are familiar with that ripple effect, you know, of how far those ripples extend, and over a great extended period of time. Some understanding, nothing like the family and friends of Carl, obviously.

But it was really good to hear about the work of Samaritans Cymru and how important it is: the helpline, the outreach, the work with schools, the work with prisons, the work with the rail network. It's so extensive, and I'm sure that I know you will join me in paying tribute to all the volunteers involved in the services, the vital services, provided by Samaritans Cymru. And I know very well you're so committed to working with the organisation into the future, for the benefit of so many people in Wales, in terms of that vital prevention policy and active listening, which they explained at the event.

Thank you so much, John Griffiths, and for sponsoring that event and for your commitment as well, and highlighting the work of the Samaritans. We did hear about that ripple effect after you lose somebody, and that grief, and how that goes on through the years. It really does. And then conversely, we heard of the kind of positive ripple effect as well, from people who have become volunteers with the Samaritans. We heard from somebody who stood up and said that he became a Samaritan when he went to prison. He was in Parc prison, and he got trained up there, and he was the person then that all the other prisoners went to to talk to. Even now, afterwards, after he's been released, he continues to do that work. They really stressed, didn't they, how important it is to really, really listen and to really understand, and often that's what people need. So, I absolutely pay tribute to everything that they have done. Their helpline is absolutely amazing, but also the work that they do in rural communities.

I'd actually just like to say as well that when we went down to do the launch of this at Swansea University, because that's where Professor Ann John is, and many of her colleagues who are doing research in this space, I got to speak to Neil Ingham from Samaritans Cymru, and, 'The thing is', he said, 'we always talk about the lived experience and the co-production, but what you have to remember when you're doing something around suicide like this is that there's a lived experience that we'll never hear.' And he said that in everything that he does, he always remembers that often it's the people who have tried and are still with us, it's the people who have been bereaved, and he said it's always important to mentally, or physically even, leave that empty chair there and remember that there's a lived experience that we will actually never hear, as well, and to leave space for that too. And that's where I think we can learn not to be judgmental and to be as understanding as we possibly can of something that is very difficult sometimes to understand. So, I really do pay tribute to the Samaritans for that. Thank you.

Diolch, Deputy Presiding Officer. And I'd like to thank the Deputy Minister for the strategy that's come forward today. I think it's a really positive strategy, and one life lost across Wales to suicide is one too many, and anything we can do to address that should actually be encouraged and welcomed.

Deputy Minister, given that suicide is more prevalent in males between the ages of 30 and 55, and self-harm is a lot more prevalent in young females, I've been hastily reading through the delivery plan now, as I've been sat here and earlier upstairs, and I can't see any specific mechanisms or programmes around that specific group, so I'd be interested to know what exactly the Government's going to do on targeting that area to try and drive down suicide rates within those groups.

Secondly, can you also explain how the Government is breaking down silos as well? Because, as the previous Minister in this area always used to say, mental health is everybody's business. It's a complete cross-governmental matter, and I'm just interested in how you're bringing everybody together, because I've seen in the delivery plan a lot of different groups across Government are leading on certain areas, from the NHS executive to others, so I'm just interested in how you're going to pull all that together and drive the delivery that we want to see. Because these plans are lovely written down, but it's actually the delivery on the ground that makes a big difference, and I'm just interested in how you're doing that and working across Government in those areas.

Of course. Thank you very much, and thank you so much for welcoming this as well. You've always been so passionate about mental health and about men and men's mental health as well. And I always remember, again, people have said to me—men in particular have said to me—'You did so much to encourage us to speak up and speak out and ask for help, and then when we have, it's not always there.' And that's something that really, really stays with me. So, you are right; it's about having that support that is person centred and exactly what they need at that moment. I do think that a lot of this does come through from the third sector, truly. I think that we have groups within our communities that are really immersed, and I think of Men's Sheds, like I said, like Lads and Dads, I think of the Jac Lewis Foundation now, which started in that way and now offers bereavement support to people all across Wales.

I think that those things are really important and we are seeing a big improvement, but the key thing about this and the next steps that we're going to be doing is that, first of all, they need to be heard in terms of what they're seeing on the ground, but also we need to be ensuring—and this is what I hear as well—that we really do have these services all joined up, because they're seeing people when they get to crisis, and by that point, it's really, really hard then to get people back to the place where they need to be, where they're actually kind of having a chat and talking about their issues and their problems. So, the equipping part, I think, of objective 5 is really important. We're now going to be mapping services that encounter people at high risk of suicide and self-harm, and that's going to be doing a service mapping exercise and that's also going to take into account other substance misuse services, the job centres and the domestic abuse services. We're reviewing the current provision and need within the wider settings, and identifying those opportunities. We're also going to enhance the offer available, so directing services to available resources for understanding and skills, and we're also going to enhance the offer of support in children's services and ultimately create those multi-agency mechanisms for collaboration.

So, I know that sounds like a lot of words and not exactly what's going to be happening, but I have my well-being and mental health boards as well. We're now going to have a new advisory group to the Government, like I said, where all of this research is going to be coming through and it really is just going to take that multi-agency work.

So, that's why I think that this is so important, but I think the key thing it comes back to is that we called the suicide prevention and self-harm strategy, 'Understanding', but we don't understand enough and we've got to do so much more in this area and with those demographics. And I keep asking people in my life, 'Why is this happening? Why aren't people asking for help?' People who self-harm, actually, they don't reach out for help. The stigma's too high. The data is showing this. They're just not letting anybody know that this is happening, and so like I said, when we're saying that it increases the likelihood that a person will die by suicide by between 50 and 100, and it's not something that anybody knows where to ask for that help, that's one of the key things, and that's why it's a suicide prevention and self-harm strategy. The two are very linked.

I would also say, though, that this is very, very cross-Government, because it has to be. We all know that if you're stressed, if you're lonely, if you're sad, if you're grieving, it's going to impact your mental health and well-being. We know that there's that life course approach that will come out more in my mental health and well-being strategy. We know where there are going to be these pressure points.

Some of the things that have been found in the research are what we can do as a whole society. We know that active labour market programmes make a big difference, we know that debt relief makes a big difference. We know that provision of adequate welfare benefits makes a big difference. We know that staff in NHS and social services and the advice sector who can access regular, updated information on key advice agencies to signpost people make a difference. Front-line staff are most likely to be in contact with vulnerable people, and they should receive training to recognise that.

The near real-time monitoring of changing suicide rates is essential, and we need to monitor the impact of policy changes and prevention measures and ensure timely signposting to bereavement support. Those are all the things that we know that we have to do. They'll make the biggest difference. I don't have many of those in my portfolio, and that's why I work with my colleagues here to ensure that we do.

I'm really hopeful, honestly, that this is going to make a difference now and we're going to achieve that vision of seeing that rate of suicide in Wales come down across all demographics, and especially men, who seem to be particularly in pain at the moment.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move the motion before us today. Following on from Medr becoming operational last summer, I am now seeking to make the necessary provisions so as to deliver the next phase of Medr's functions, as provided for in the Tertiary Education and Research (Wales) Act 2022. The 2022 Act provides for amendments to the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013 in relation to the reorganisation of school sixth forms. These amendments remove the Welsh Ministers' powers to make proposals to restructure local authority-maintained school sixth form education, replacing them with similar powers for Medr.

Through the provisions, we are establishing a legislative framework that enables Medr to take a strategic approach, offering a wider perspective to school sixth form provision and ensuring it can provide support, choice and progression and avoid unnecessary duplication. The amendments made to the 2013 Act do not remove protections or safeguards, for example in respect of Welsh language provision. These remain as requirements within that Act, and also within the statutory school organisation code. The consequential regulations before you today will ensure that existing primary and secondary legislation accurately reflects the legislative changes brought about by the amendments to the 2013 Act. I'd like to thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for their scrutiny of these regulations, and ask Members to approve these regulations today.

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. I move the motion to approve the Children Act 2004 (Children Missing Education Database) (Pilot) (Wales) Regulations 2025 today. As you know, I am and always have been passionate about ensuring that all children in Wales can thrive and are supported to do their very best in an education system that puts their welfare first. Above all, it is essential that all children receive their right to an education, regardless of where or how this is delivered.

In September, I agreed to trial the children missing education database arrangements with seven local authorities. The pilot will start on 8 April, and will run for a year. When local authorities receive the information from their local health board, they will review and compare the one-off data set with their existing data to identify children previously not known to them and those children where the suitability of education is not known. Local authorities will then follow up with those families to make sure that every child is in receipt of a suitable education. An independent evaluation will test the effectiveness of the database and inform our next steps.

I want to be clear that these arrangements are not about home education and they are completely separate to the provisions in the UK Government's Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill—the two should not be conflated. The children missing education database is simply a mechanism to help local authorities undertake their existing duties. We already have statutory children missing education guidance; this sets out what local authorities should do to identify children and ensure that appropriate education provision is in place for each child. Whilst I know that local authorities follow the guidance as far as they are able, there is not a system that ensures that they know about all the children they are responsible for.

This is not a new issue, but the need to address it is now critical. The numbers of children who have been deregistered from school following the pandemic have increased, and sadly, the reasons behind this are not always positive. With the increase in children not in school comes the inherent risk that some of these children will fall through the cracks and not receive a suitable education. Even if a child is receiving a suitable education at home, local authorities need to know that this is the case. Ultimately, these regulations are about promoting the welfare of children and I am grateful to local authorities and our local health board partners for the constructive way they have worked with us to develop this pilot. I would also like to thank the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee for its careful scrutiny of the regulations and I ask Members to approve the regulations today.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee considered these draft regulations last week, and yesterday afternoon we considered the Welsh Government's response to the committee’s report.

The committee’s report contains three technical reporting points, all of which highlight matters that we consider need further explanation. I will comment on the first and third points this afternoon. In the first technical point, the committee notes that, in the preamble, it is unclear if the enabling powers should also cite section 66(1) of the Children Act 2004 as only some of the local authorities in Wales are included in the list of pilot local authorities in Schedule 1 to these regulations. Section 66(1)(b) of the 2004 Act provides the power that enables regulations to make different provisions for different cases or areas. The Government does not consider that a reference to section 66(1)(b) of the 2004 Act is necessary. However, to assist the reader and subject to approval of the regulations this afternoon, it will be amending the preamble to include reference to that provision prior to making.

In the third technical point, the committee has sought clarity about the use of the same term in the Welsh text to mean both 'usually resident' and 'ordinarily resident', which have different meanings in the English text. The committee’s report notes that this approach could be potentially problematic in future legislation if both the terms were being used within the same provision of an instrument as there would be no way of distinguishing between them, and any difference as to their meaning, in the Welsh text. The Government is content with the drafting but has confirmed that it will give appropriate consideration to the use of the terms in future legislation.

The committee’s report also contains three merits reporting points, and I will just highlight the last of these. The committee noted that the regulations will be made using powers contained in section 29 of the 2004 Act. The explanatory memorandum laid alongside the draft regulations on 11 March stated in section 2 that a commencement order is required to bring section 29 of the Children Act 2004 into force. However, section 29 of the 2004 Act was brought into force on 10 March by the Children Act 2004 (Commencement No. 10) (Wales) Order 2025. The Government has since withdrawn the EM originally laid alongside the draft regulations and a new version has been laid that corrects the error.

Safeguarding our children is absolutely paramount. We must do all that we can collectively to avoid truly tragic cases such as Sara Sharif's murder from ever happening again. But we have to get the balance right. We must take people on that journey, ensure that they are listened to and engaged with.

Cabinet Secretary, these proposals, mixed with the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which I'm sure we'll talk about at a later date, have sparked a lot of concern amongst home educators, with many of them contacting my office over the last few weeks. Concerns range from the proposed data sharing being a violation of privacy to the plans putting extra pressure on families who home educate their children. Every step must be taken to make sure we do not stigmatise or unduly burden parents who have made a positive and legitimate choice to home educate their children.

In light of that, Cabinet Secretary, I'd really like to know if you could please kindly outline how the Welsh Government has been engaging with some home educators across Wales over the CME database. Could you also please clarify and explain why the Welsh Government is pushing towards these regulations to start a year-long database trial when it has already asked the UK Government to legislate in this area through its Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which also includes the need for a database? You did say in the introduction that you did not want the two to be conflated, but could you please, for the benefit of this Senedd, just clarify today?

The regulations say that home-educated children who receive a suitable education will not be included on the database, so could you please clarify what constitutes a suitable education? Will the criteria to check its suitability be universal across all seven local authorities taking part in the trial or will it differ from council to council? What commitments can you make that this pilot is truly a pilot, Cabinet Secretary, and not merely a smokescreen for a Wales-wide roll-out, which was exactly what we saw with this Government's shambolic 20 mph speed limit policy?

Cabinet Secretary, as Welsh Conservatives we are pro parental choice, and I certainly do agree that children should be safeguarded at every single opportunity. But I firmly believe that you do need to strike a balance and ensure that home educators and those impacted by these regulations are not alienated. That's why, Cabinet Secretary, the Welsh Conservative group will be abstaining on these regulations this afternoon. Thank you.

As my colleague Natasha Asghar has just outlined, child safeguarding is of the utmost importance for all public bodies, including, of course, Cabinet Secretary, yourselves as a Welsh Government and local authorities, and, indeed, also, for parents—the safeguarding of their children is the No. 1 priority that any parent would have. I'm speaking from a place where I was a child who was home educated for a number of years myself.

I appreciate today, Cabinet Secretary, that you're seeking to draw a distinction between, as you described it, children missing education and home educated. I guess the difference you'd outline is those who would elect to inform a local authority are those being home educated and those, perhaps, not electing to inform a local authority are those children missing education. But, of course, you'll recognise that many of those children deemed to be missing education will actually be home educated. At the moment, it's parental choice as to whether they involve the local authority in that information or not.

We all appreciate that children are home educated for a number of reasons, one of which is outlined in your impact assessment, which is those children being bullied at school, which may cause a traumatic experience for them and their families. As a result, there can be suspicion towards authorities that those families feel may have failed them through the course of their education. So, I'd be interested to understand how you plan to ensure that parents who feel that they have that suspicion towards local authorities in particular at the moment, and, perhaps, where relationships have broken down over a number of years—how there will be partnership working there, rather than a potential for a hostile relationship between those local authorities and parents who choose to home educate their children.

I was disappointed that within the explanatory memorandum for the proposal here before us today there are only two options presented. It does feel like a bit of an all-or-nothing proposal. I'd be interested to hear from the Cabinet Secretary whether other options were considered, because the option that is the preferred one, which is proposed here today, does seem to lump a number of things together that could have been broken down differently, I suspect. In particular, the choice to require local health boards to share information and including general practitioners to share information as well—that could have been a separate option within the proposals here today. So, I'd be interested to understand why we've only been presented with two options, as they've been outlined today.

On the point of health boards and medical practitioners having to share information with local authorities, there is a recognition that this could discourage vulnerable children or their families from attending medical practices—those, perhaps, who are currently avoiding those interactions with their local authority. There is a risk that they may go on to avoid attendance at those all-important medical appointments if they feel as though there's going to be an element of suspicion towards them. So, I wonder what assessments you've made of any potential risks in that area, and any additional workload for GPs in particular, and their training to identify, perhaps, those children who they would be required in this to flag with the local authority.

And additionally, Llywydd, there are data-sharing measures contained within these regulations here today, so I wonder what measures are in place to ensure that the privacy and security of children's information are safeguarded in compliance with data protection laws, particularly during that process of information transfer between those medical or health professionals and the local authorities themselves. We know of the challenges around data sharing across public bodies here in Wales, so I'll be pleased to hear assurances that that has been properly considered and is being properly dealt with.

My overriding plea, though, Cabinet Secretary, is just to—I'm sure you are—walk really sensitively through this, recognising there are often very serious reasons why parents choose to educate their children at home or in different circumstances, and I think it has to be dealt with really sensitively. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and can I thank Natasha and Sam for their contributions? Natasha, I'm very grateful for your stated commitment that the safeguarding of our children is paramount. I wanted to repeat again that this is not the same as the measures we're taking with the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. This is a tool to ensure that local authorities can fulfil their existing statutory duties in relation to children missing education, and we've chosen to do that pilot so that we can examine some of the very issues that your colleague Sam Rowlands has raised in his contribution. There has been an extensive consultation on this, and home-educating parents and children were involved in that consultation. The consultation was supported, which is why we have brought forward the regulations and why we are having this debate today, and that's why they've been brought forward in their original state.

Sam Rowlands raised some issues around the health service. Can I assure him that the information that will be collected from the health service will be minimal and just involve the name of the child so that local authorities can fulfil their statutory duties? We are, of course, mindful of the risk of parents choosing not to register with a GP. That's something that I've raised myself with officials, but the assessment that we've made is that the risk of this is low, because parents who don't want authorities, such as social services, to know about a child will have likely already taken separate relevant steps to remain undetected. The potential risk cannot be fully measured at this stage, but can be more accurately assessed following the pilot by comparing census data with the completed education sets for the pupil level annual school census, education otherwise than at school, independent schools, children missing education and elective home education lists, so it will give us the opportunity to triangulate that information so that we don't have children slipping off the radar. So, thank you, Llywydd, and I urge Members to support these regulations.

So, Llywydd, dealing with the principles behind the Bill, the first principle is that this is intended to be an enabling Bill. It allows local authorities to decide whether or not to introduce a visitor levy in their areas, reflecting local needs and circumstances. It delivers a commitment made in Welsh Labour's manifesto, reaffirmed in our programme for government. Participating councils will have the option, but of course not an obligation, to apply a levy on overnight stays in visitor accommodation.

In a second principle, the visitor levy before you is grounded in fairness, ensuring that the costs of maintaining the infrastructure and the services that help make Wales such a compelling destination are shared by those who benefit from them. Visitor levies are common across the world, with many destinations reaping the benefits from applying a small but fair charge, and this Bill allows Wales to join that global community.

Will you take an intervention, Cabinet Secretary? I appreciate that you're making progress with your speech. You made reference to the norm, with visitor levies being prevalent in some parts of the world. I don't dispute that. But do you also accept that it is the norm that value added tax levels tend to be significantly reduced for visitor accommodation, and therefore that offsets very significantly the visitor levies that are in place?

Llywydd, Wales will be the fiftieth country in the world to introduce a visitor levy, should this Bill proceed. Some of those countries have VAT, but many of them do not. It is one of the many variables, and it is not an argument. It is not a compelling argument against the measures in front of the Senedd.

Now, in Wales our local authorities will have an ability to ensure that visitors will contribute towards sustaining the very qualities that attracted them to an area in the first place. If all 22 local authorities were to implement a visitor levy, we estimate that it could generate up to £33 million in a full year, a significant investment in the future success of the industry.

Thirdly, Llywydd, the Bill is designed to meet the Welsh Government's core tax principles. It is simple, straightforward and fair. A flat rate levy, as we propose, is simple to understand, it's clear to visitors and providers alike. Moreover, it is straightforward to administer. Most small businesses will only be required to submit one annual return, and all businesses will have the choice of making that return through an agent.

And finally, it's fair. It’s fair because the levy is based on how many visitors are staying overnight and how many nights they stay, ensuring a proportionate contribution. And in a further effort to ensure the fairness of the levy, we have also provided for a lower rate—a lower rate that applies to stays in shared accommodation on campsite pitches, recognising that these are often provided on a more affordable basis. And, Llywydd, in any case, the broad base of the levy means that the proposed rates are lower than comparable levies applied in other destinations and represent a small percentage, and in most cases a very small percentage, of the overall cost of a visit.

In a fourth key principle, the Bill strikes a balance between national arrangements and local discretion. The Bill requires that the levy be applied to destination management and improvement wherever a visitor levy is implemented in Wales. Transparency is the tool that will ensure that this takes place. Any principal council that wishes to introduce a visitor levy must consult on that proposal, must keep the revenues in a separate account and must publish a report annually, demonstrating how those revenues have been spent in accordance with the requirements of the Bill.

Now, Llywydd, before turning to committee reports, I should say something about the new national register for which the Bill also makes provision. The register will record both visitor accommodation providers and the accommodation itself. The register will be an important foundation stone for multiple policy areas. It will support the efficient collection and administration of the levy, provide valuable data to inform tourism development and enable local authorities to better understand how accommodation in their area is used. The register will be set up and maintained by the Welsh Revenue Authority, bringing its well-established expertise to this new policy area. It will also bring its collaborative approach to working with the sector, helping providers know where and how to access information and support for registration and the levy itself.

Llywydd, I turn now to issues raised during Stage 1 scrutiny. A number of witnesses proposed that the Bill should require participating local authorities to establish a visitor levy forum to enable communities, businesses and organisations operating in the tourism sector to influence how revenue from the levy would be allocated. In their report, the Finance Committee endorsed that proposal. I hope to work with the committee so that an amendment can be brought forward at Stage 2 to ensure that there are effective partnership arrangements between principal councils, businesses and local communities in deciding how best to allocate visitor levy revenues. 

Secondly, I can confirm this afternoon that the regulation-making powers included in the Bill in relation to the registration provisions will be subject to a Government amendment at Stage 2, as indicated in my evidence to the Finance Committee. The Bill, as introduced in November 2024, included provisions for registration but also had significant regulation-making powers in Part 2, where further policy development was required. That development has now taken place and I will table amendments to replace or amend the regulation-making powers under Part 2(7) of the Bill. My officials are due to meet the Finance Committee on Thursday of this week to provide a briefing on the approach taken in the proposed amendments, and those amendments have been shared with the committee this afternoon.   

I turn now to the matter of principal council discretion in relation to the levy. The Finance Committee heard competing views about the power in the Bill for principal councils to levy an additional amount according to their local circumstances. At the final Finance Committee session in February, I committed to reviewing the flexibility of principal councils to apply such an additional amount. My conclusion is that the Bill should make such provision, but that the use of these powers should be delayed until the levy itself has been introduced and has had an opportunity to bed in. I will therefore introduce an additional regulation-making power at Stage 2 that will permit principal councils to levy an additional amount, but sequential to rather than contemporaneous with the introduction of the levy itself. 

Llywydd, probably the most common theme debated during the committee's Stage 1 scrutiny was whether it is fair to apply the levy to children and young people. This is, of course, an entirely proper debate and I've been grateful to the Finance Committee for its careful consideration of this issue. I'm glad to have been able to respond positively to the committee's recommendation to provide the Senedd with data on this matter. However, I can inform Members this afternoon that, having read the committee's report and having considered again the evidence presented to it, I have decided to go further than the recommendation itself. At Stage 2, I will bring forward a Government amendment to exempt under-18-year-olds staying at lower rated accommodation from the levy altogether. This will add to the progressive nature of the Bill and will, I believe, go a long way to respond to the case made by youth organisations and others to amend the Bill in this way. But, Llywydd, I must emphasise that any reduction in the broad base of the levy has to be made up by higher charges on those visits that remain in scope. The Stage 2 amendment will therefore also increase the levy on those on whom it will be charged from the 75p originally proposed to 80p, and from £1.25 to £1.30 per night for the higher rate.

Llywydd, during Stage 1, many suggestions have been made for exemptions from the levy. The changes to the treatment of children are the only ones I intend to introduce. Exemptions inevitably cause complexity. They erode the principle of simplicity, they add administrative costs to those who provide accommodation, they reduce the revenue raised by local authorities, or, as I've illustrated this afternoon, cause the levy to be increased for remaining payers. For all those reasons, the Government does not intend to go beyond the changes I have just indicated, and I note that the Finance Committee made no recommendation that I should do so.

I’ll begin with our views on the general principles. Although the Cabinet Secretary told us that the idea of a tourism levy had been in train for some time, witnesses told us about the cumulative effect of Government policies on the tourism sector, as well as the challenges being faced following the pandemic, and questioned whether the proposed levy could deter visitors and result in a detrimental impact on the tourism industry. To ensure the levy’s success, it will be essential to gain the trust of these stakeholders, and our report seeks to take this into account throughout its recommendations.

We did not reach a unanimous decision on the Bill’s general principles, with three of four Members supporting them. The majority of the committee agreed that the introduction of the levy has the potential to improve infrastructure and services within local areas, to the benefit of both tourists and the local economy. Sam Rowlands did not support the Bill progressing beyond Stage 1, and I’m sure he’ll outline the reasons for this in his contribution. Nevertheless, we agreed on a number of areas where improvements should be made to the Bill, which I will outline today.

A key element for the long-term success of this policy will be understanding the impact of mandatory registration of visitor accommodation providers and the effectiveness of any initial visitor levy schemes. For this reason, we call on the Welsh Government to amend the Bill to commit to undertaking a review of the operation and effect of the whole Act, and for this review to take place no later than four years after Part 2 of the Act comes into force. I welcome the assurances from the Cabinet Secretary, in response to our recommendations, that the Welsh Government are considering how such a review should be undertaken.

We recognise that the Bill may present challenges for organisations seeking to establish whether its provisions would apply to their specific arrangements. That is why the Welsh Government and the Welsh Revenue Authority must ensure that guidance for accommodation providers is appropriately targeted, and we recommend that the Welsh Government should clarify the applicability of the registration requirements.

We agree that the establishment of a register, as provided for in Part 2 of the Bill, has the potential to improve the data available and better inform future assessments of its impact. However, we believe that this could be strengthened further, and have called for the Welsh Government to amend the Bill to commit to publishing periodic reports, including such data as the number and types of providers and accommodation across local authorities, in order to shape future policy decisions. I note the Cabinet Secretary's commitment to publishing reports on data and welcome this as a step in the right direction. However, I am disappointed that this is not going to be enshrined in the legislation. We also note that the work is still to be done on the Welsh Revenue Authority's approach to enforcement and compliance, and look forward to hearing more from the Welsh Government about how this is progressing.

A recurring concern raised during our scrutiny was that the Bill would create an additional administrative burden for Welsh businesses, particularly as a number of accommodation providers are often microbusinesses, who often manage without additional administrative support. The Cabinet Secretary told us that the Bill creates a system for operating the levy that is proportionate. Nonetheless, we call on the Welsh Government to take proactive steps to ensure that providers are aware of the support and the guidance available to them.

Turning now to section 14, which enables a principal council to add a premium to the lower and/or the higher rate of the levy, some witnesses suggested that the premium could add complexity, and that further information was needed. We welcome the Cabinet Secretary's commitment to consider a stronger framework for this element of the Bill, and ask him to provide further details on his intentions. I welcome the Cabinet Secretary's further clarification on this section and his commitment to work with stakeholders to ensure that any amendments made at Stage 2 are evidence-based.

We heard support throughout the evidence for various exemptions to the levy, particularly for children and young people, education trips and charitable organisations. The Cabinet Secretary told us that the decision on any potential exemption would be a trade-off, and that if the base is narrowed, as he explained earlier, the levy would need to be raised. While we accept this argument, it was apparent that the Welsh Government had already carried out some modelling, particularly in the case of potential exemptions for children. We have asked the Welsh Government to share this analysis with the Senedd, and I am grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for agreeing to this, and for his comments earlier. I look forward to working on that, or looking at that amendment, at Stage 2.

I'll move on now, with the levy to be used by principal councils. We heard a range of views on the list of areas in the Bill where the proceeds of the levy can be spent, and concluded that the approach allows for the necessary flexibility to deliver the policy intention. However, we also heard repeated concerns that the levy could be used to displace existing funding by local authorities. While we note the assurances provided by the Cabinet Secretary that the proceeds of the levy will provide additional funding, we agree with views that bringing local industry representatives together on this issue would be an effective and positive way to garner trust.

The Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024 provides for the mandatory establishment of visitor levy forums where principal councils decide to introduce the levy, and, having listened to some of the strong views expressed during scrutiny, we believe that such an approach could be beneficial in Wales. This would allow for a collaborative and constructive approach to agreeing levy spending priorities, which would, in turn, strengthen relationships between principal councils and their stakeholders and shine a light on the decisions being made. I'm pleased that the Cabinet Secretary will work with the committee to bring forward amendments to provide for the creation of visitor forums, and look forward to working on the detail of these amendments in due course.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee's report drew four conclusions and made 16 recommendations. It's the committee's view that Welsh Government was not ready to introduce the Bill to the Senedd when it did. The committee has acknowledged the spirit in which draft provisions for Stage 2 amendments have been shared with committees, and has welcomed the Cabinet Secretary's good intentions.

The committee has concluded that the regulation-making powers in sections 2(5) and 9(5) are significant powers, changing the meaning of 'visitor accommodation', and changing the circumstances in which an overnight stay in visitor accommodation takes place and whether the levy is chargeable. Both have the potential to extend taxpayer liability under the Bill. As such, recommendations 5 and 9 asked the Cabinet Secretary to confirm whether the Government considered making the regulation-making powers subject to a superaffirmative procedure.

The committee believes that section 7 represents a clear illustration of the difficulties for the Senedd when considering legislation that is still actively under development by the Government at Stage 1. The Government's intention regarding a registration system has been confused by releasing indicative drafting for new provisions shortly after Stage 1 scrutiny began. As such, in recommendation 6, the committee has said that the Cabinet Secretary should explain any additional proposed powers the Government intends to bring forward at Stage 2 regarding the registration of visitor accommodation providers and associated data.

As regards the coming into force of Part 2 of the Bill, the committee has noted that it is the Cabinet Secretary's intention to commence Part 2 by principal council areas on a phased basis. The committee believes there should be certainty in law as to when the register will be operational. Recommendation 8 states that section 44 of the Bill should be amended so that Part 2 of the Bill comes into force no later than 31 December 2029, and the Welsh Ministers should retain the ability to bring Part 2 into force at an earlier date by Order.

The Cabinet Secretary has described the power in section 37 to impose advertising and billing requirements on visitor accommodation providers as an intentionally wide power. The committee has concluded that it is inappropriate to seek such an intentionally wide power with no intention to use it.

The committee also has concerns with the justification provided that section 40 is needed for futureproofing reasons. Futureproofing in this way, which would enable any Government in the future to act in a manner that has received no consideration by this Senedd, falls below the standard of what many would consider to be constitutionally appropriate. Should section 40 remain in the Bill, recommendation 15 states it should be amended so the regulation-making power is subject, again, to a superaffirmative scrutiny procedure.

Can I move on to my view on the Bill now, as opposed to LJCC's? I very much support the visitor levy. Tourist taxes are introduced by Governments to battle the issues that come with overtourism and ensure people visiting the country are keeping its economy thriving and paying the additional costs that they create. The question is: why have we waited so long? In the UK, Edinburgh is set to introduce its inaugural tourism tax for the visitor levy. This charge will be added to any accommodation booked in the city for trips reserved after 1 October 2025 and taking place from 24 July 2026. It will apply to all visitors, including Scottish and UK citizens. Manchester has one, the Peak District is proposing one. I expect more in Britain to follow. Many countries and cities introduced a tourism tax in 2023, and many more are due to launch theirs in 2024. Tourism tax is not a new thing. We have probably paid one before, tied with the cost of a plane ticket or the tax paid in your hotel. We know that France has had one for over 100 years.

We also know what happens when we have major events. Hotels are charging over double the regular rate for Oasis concert nights. Cardiff hotels are at least three times more expensive for the first reunion gig—

Will you take an intervention?

Can I just finish this sentence? Of the 25 hotels analysed, the Parkgate Hotel in Cardiff led the price surge, increasing rates by 319 per cent for the 4 July opening leg of the tour. Certainly.

Thank you. I was at the National Tourism Awards for Wales on Thursday, and a professor was there who had spoken on stage during that summit, mentioning exactly what you have mentioned, Cabinet Secretary, that 50 countries have imposed this. I asked him, 'Which one of those 50 countries has the same rate of VAT as we do here in this country?' Not one. Would you not say that this is just a further burden of tax collecting on these businesses for the Welsh Government, and it's not going to help our tourism industry one little bit?

But they all have substantially lower income tax—sorry, substantially higher income tax. We are substantially lower in income tax; they're substantially higher. [Interruption.] You can't just look at one tax or two taxes. They vary. They vary from country to country.

Fans were shocked at how much the prices had increased. One person on the social media blogging site X wrote:

'the @oasis tour madness kicked in already one night a hotel in Cardiff for the first gig £424 !!'

Another person said that if you check the hotels, the location and the dates of the Oasis tour, they are all either mysteriously sold out, or the prices have tripled. One chimed in that within five minutes of Oasis announcing their gigs, at a very ordinary hotel in Swansea, prices increased ridiculously. This is not just hotels; Airbnbs and guest houses increased their prices. Whilst the increase was not of same size, many hotels in between Newport and Swansea also increased their prices.

There was also the Taylor Swift effect. The luxury hotel, the Parkgate, which is very close to the Principality Stadium, hugely increased their prices for June 2024 when Taylor Swift was there. Comparing the price, one room for one adult was £115 on the cheapest date I could find; for Taylor Swift, it was £588. These major events cost the local council money—a considerable amount of money. Additional portable toilets are needed to be installed and removed. A major street cleaning exercise is needed to clear up after a major concert. These are expensive.

And finally, I'm not going to run through them all, because you won't let me, Presiding Officer, but there's a long list of countries throughout Europe who have this tax. It's normal. Why do we want to be different?

I'm grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for outlining the proposal here for us today, and for his notification of intended amendments to come forward as well. I'm also thankful to the Chair of the Finance Committee for outlining the committee's view and my personal view in that committee as well. I'm grateful for the work of the committee in terms of the number of witnesses we had during those sessions over the last few months.

The context of this proposal here today, though, is really important to understand. These are difficult times for our economy in the UK, and certainly here in Wales. After 26 years of Welsh Labour, Welsh workers are taking home the lightest pay packets in the United Kingdom. Wales also has the lowest employment rate of any part of the UK, and the lowest levels of gross disposable income per head. And what's the answer to these problems? Well, for Welsh Labour, as ever, it's a desire to introduce a new tax, and this one is aimed at people who actually put money into the Welsh economy.

Now, there is a basic principle truth of taxation, which is, whatever you tax, you get less of, and that's why we tax things like smoking, because we want less of it to happen. Whatever you tax, you get less of. This tax will cause tourism levels to reduce. This proposal today is the very definition of biting the hand that feeds. [Interruption.] Certainly.

You've just pointed out that in Wales there are many people on low wages. Do you think then that it's acceptable that they pay the council tax to provide for visitors, rather than the other way around?

I'm not entirely sure what the point of that was. 

There is a point.

Council tax is for domestic rates for people living in a home. We're talking about a taxation on visitors coming into our area. 

Tourism providers up and down Wales are deeply worried about this tourism tax. It's clear that tourism is a core part of our economy in Wales and supports a large number of jobs, particularly in north and west Wales. Data from 2022 shows that the tourism sector accounted for about one in eight jobs and a significant proportion of GVA. It employs people across the whole of Wales, providing jobs at a time when far too many people in Wales aren't working. Even the Welsh Government's own figures highlighted the multi-million-pound risk to the economy as a result of the tourism tax, and the figures show the potential for significant job losses as well. An annual economic hit of around £47.5 million is something that the Welsh economy can ill afford, particularly when tourism is one of the areas that has been a real success story for Wales. I think it's brilliant that people want to come to visit Wales and take in our breathtaking scenery or epic historical and cultural sites. I want more people to enjoy Wales rather than trying to push them away with a tourism tax.

We've already heard from the parties here opposite that this type of tax is used in other countries around the world, and colleagues on this side of the Chamber have highlighted that Wales is already amongst the highest taxed countries in the world when it comes to this sector. Indeed, of the 115 top-destination countries in the world, the UK is number 113 in terms of the tax level paid by the tourism and hospitality sector. We've heard comments already that sound as though this sector does not pay into the system. It pays significantly into the system, through VAT, through national insurance, through corporation tax, through non-domestic rates—every tax going. This sector is paying into it and should expect the services in their areas to reflect this contribution.

We've also heard from parties opposite today that this is just a few pounds, a small proportion or a small percentage of a family's or an individual's holiday. This is a completely misunderstood perspective. The truth is that this is going to hit people from all sorts of backgrounds going on holiday. I'm grateful that the Cabinet Secretary recognised the impact on under 18s in particular. It's family holidays on those pitches. The Caravan and Motorhome Club, of which I am a member, have shared that, for a family of four, under the initial proposals, on a £30 pitch, the tax would mean a 12 per cent increase to the cost of their holiday. And the Professional Association of Self Caterers estimates that, for an October half-term, it would equate to 17 per cent of the cost of a family visit. So, I'm grateful that the Cabinet Secretary has listened to the impact on families, and I'll be interested to see the proposals for the amendments as they come forward, because this is a significant proportion of some families' costs for their holiday.

There are a multitude of specific concerns detailed in the Bill that I will be raising as we go through this process: the lack of flexibility is one; there still continues to be a charge for children, although an element of that has been adjusted, as we've heard here today; I'm concerned that educational and voluntary institutions are being hit with this tax; the potential issues around the premium, which the Cabinet Secretary again has acknowledged here today, which was not part of the consultation that went out in respect of this legislation; and the added burden on small accommodation providers, who are already overstretched in terms of the additional administration that this will impose.

So, in closing, Llywydd, the Welsh Conservatives are clear that we oppose this tourism tax, because we believe that the Welsh tourism sector needs encouragement and support. It needs a Welsh Government that welcomes visitors to Wales and the money that they spend in our hotels, our restaurants, our cafes and attractions, supporting jobs, supporting our communities, making Wales an even more vibrant place to be. So, I would call on Labour and Plaid Cymru here today to actually listen to tourism and hospitality businesses. Stand with us as Welsh Conservatives, as we want to axe the tax and oppose the general principles of the Bill today. We make no apologies in opposing the Welsh Government's assault on our tourism sector. Diolch yn fawr iawn. 

We support the general principles of the Bill. The Conservative spokesperson—[Interruption.]

Can I please hear what Luke Fletcher has just started to say? Can we have some silence, please, for that? Diolch, Luke.

Diolch, Llywydd. The Conservative spokesperson was completely right, we need to listen to the voices of the people in the industry. There are, of course, two voices that need to be listened to, though: those in the industry and those of our local communities. And the reality is that the current way in which we do tourism isn't sustainable in the long term. There really does need to be a balance between visitor experience and then the experience of local people, because for too long, we have seen an extractive model that places unsustainable pressures on our communities, particularly in those areas, of course, where tourism is at its most intense. Essentially, what we want to see is an economy in which tourism is a sustainable and value-added feature, and that can only happen if we look to get the balance that I mentioned earlier, and that that balance is struck.

There's no escaping this, and I know it's difficult to accept, but this kind of measure is standard practice across much of the world. Cities in countries across Europe and beyond have long operated visitor levies without any detrimental impact on their tourism sectors, so it can be argued that this is a trend that highlights a growing recognition of visitor levies as a sustainable way to support local economies and tourism infrastructure. And guess what? In Scotland, all local authorities now have the power to introduce a visitor levy. Some will progress with that, some will choose not to. It will be the same situation here in Wales. Manchester has implemented a city visitor charge and London is actively considering a similar approach. So, Wales isn't acting in isolation here, but is moving in step with many places both in and outside of the UK.

But implementation matters. A fair, effective levy must be introduced in collaboration with the industry, as I said, and with due consideration for any unintended consequences, and I look forward to working with the Cabinet Secretary as we work through some of those amendments that he mentioned earlier. I would particularly welcome the exemption for those under 18. I'd be interested just to understand how that would interact with educational trips in the long term, and whether or not that also means that educational trips themselves are exempt. If not, that would be something that I'd be very interested in exploring with the Cabinet Secretary.

We're also interested as well in discussions around a potential amendment about how we can ensure that persons using emergency and temporary accommodation are exempted on arrival to that accommodation, rather than being required to apply for a refund. There are lots of concerns there around, potentially, those people not applying for that refund and therefore spending money when really they shouldn't have to.

And I'd also be interested, actually, in having that discussion with the Cabinet Secretary around how we might be able to look at a tiered approach to the levy, so considering differentiating between small independent accommodation providers and larger accommodation chains, which I accept would be complicated. As the Cabinet Secretary outlined, the way in which the current levy would operate, as proposed, is a simpler way of doing things, but a lower levy for local businesses would incentivise tourists to support independent establishments, and then help to retain wealth within our communities, ensuring that the economic benefits of tourism remain in Wales rather than being extracted by some of the larger cross-border providers.

Ultimately, the success of this Bill will be in how it supports sustainable tourism while benefiting local people. So, the funds raised must be used transparently, as the Cabinet Secretary rightly argues, and effectively to invest in destination management, improve that infrastructure and enhance the visitor experience in a way that aligns with our communities' needs. That must be the bottom line.

I just want to come back to the difficulty that Sam Rowlands was having about understanding the link between residents paying domestic rates and the cost of clearing up after visitors. In Cardiff, we have to pay for the additional cost of policing these very large events that occur either at the Millennium stadium or at the Motorpoint arena, where there are large concerts, or indeed down here at the Wales Millennium Centre. There is no additional money coming to the police service in south Wales because of Cardiff being a capital city where we have regular large events as well as large numbers of demonstrations; that's something that does occur in London and in Manchester and in Edinburgh.

Thank you for taking the intervention. I don't have difficulty in understanding what it is you're trying to explain; what I'm outlining is that these businesses already pay significantly into the tax pot, and therefore, it's an issue of the funding formula then, not of them paying tax. They pay multiple amounts of taxation, which I've already outlined, which needs to come back to the areas to be redistributed appropriately to have the services that they deserve.

Well, good luck talking to the UK Treasury. Of course, everybody's paying VAT when they're buying meals or anything, just like the rest of us, but that money doesn't necessarily come back to Wales. But this is enabling us to pay for the clear-ups that have to take place, because we don't want our city to be an eyesore.

In addition to that, let's look at rural areas where we haven't got the large numbers of people who live in Cardiff who possibly can more easily absorb the cost of having visitors. Let's just look at what happens at the Eryri national park. They have 5 million visitors a year, and it's worth quite a lot of money, the tourism industry, to the area, but the money for the clean-up of the mountains where people chuck their litter, that isn't paid for by the people who are providing the accommodation and restaurants. It's being done by volunteers at the moment, because it's a very difficult task and—

Will you take an intervention, just on these issues?

Yes.

Look, I accept that there are challenges with some irresponsible people who drop litter. Many of those are irresponsible residents of Wales who drop litter and go to our national park, not people who necessarily always come and stay overnight and spend a lot of money in the local economy. What you've described in terms of national parks is—. Many of those individuals will be day-trippers who are not going to be making any contribution whatsoever for the clean-up costs of their sandwiches, packed lunches or whatever they're taking. We know that the most lucrative part of the tourism industry is those people who stay overnight in Wales. That's what puts money into our economy more than anything else, especially more than day-trippers. So, why do you think it's a good idea to penalise people who stay overnight, rather than those people who actually do drop the litter, who might be day-trippers, or in the main will be day-trippers?

I wouldn't disagree with you. We need to penalise anybody who drops litter, because, obviously, it's an absolute eyesore as well as environmental damage that's created by the plastics that are going into the rivers, et cetera. But it's not really a penalty to make a contribution towards the footprint that visitors are making, and, yes, it would be nice to be able to charge day-trippers, but, as the Cabinet Secretary has already pointed out in the Finance Committee, that's practically not possible. Yes, Trash Free Trails are talking about a deposit-return scheme, and I agree, but we haven't got a deposit-return scheme at the moment to enable those polluters, i.e. those companies who produce these drinks, to pay for them to be cleared up.

My point is that we absolutely have to see businesses making a tiny contribution. We're talking about 80p a day. For 10 nights, that's £8, or 14 nights, £11.32, I think, is the correct figure. And so this is not a substantial sum of money in the overall cost of the accommodation. There is no way that I can find that we could charge day-trippers, unless we put some money on the petrol that's being sold in Wales or something like that. But this is a simple way of having a very small sum of money contributed by visitors to the costs of the environmental thing. So, I support the principle.

Can I say at the start that I and we as a group are absolutely, totally in support of our hospitality businesses, our retailers, and we are totally against this? Well, to be honest, it's quite disgusting. We haven't yet come out of COVID, and businesses really are—. And I say, 'Shame on you, other Members.' I'm really proud to represent a constituency that has some fantastic tourism. It's practically the only industry we've got, and there are many Members I see around here who also have several tourism businesses within your constituencies, and you are letting them down.

We know that this proposed visitor accommodation levy Bill—

Will the Member give way?

I certainly will for you. [Laughter.]

Sometimes I feel like I'm on Candid Camera. You often tell us about localism and the importance of local democracy. This is a choice for local authorities to opt into if they choose to, for which they'll be accountable to their local voters. This is not an imposition on anybody; it's up to local people to choose it or not.

Just like your second home council tax premium that, actually, most of the local authorities have implemented, and is now seeing people who bring strength to our local economy saying that Wales is a no-go area for tourists. And that's nothing to be proud of.

So, this is going to be detrimental to Welsh tourism businesses, such as self-catering businesses. We've noticed already a decrease in the number of days that people are staying. It will also affect our retailers who, as a result of fewer people staying overnight, will have fewer people going over their doorsteps. And I have to be honest with you, you're quite brave standing up and challenging me. You were the man who brought in 20 mph. It is a fact that, when people, visitors are asked why would they come to Wales or why would they not, your 20 mph policy is actually detracting—[Interruption.] Yes, of course it is. I mean, you couldn't be more anti-business and anti-tourism if you tried. So, as you put it, Jenny, about adding a proposed 75p or 80p to £1.25 per night—with the added VAT, remember—'Oh, that’s not a lot of money', well, I'm sorry, but not everybody is on the same salary as you or me, as a Member of this Senedd.

With ScoutsCymru in an evidence session with the Finance Committee noting the lack of exemptions and considerations for non-profit, volunteer-led accommodation providers, where overnight stays are not their primary purpose, I'd like a little bit more information from the Cabinet Secretary. On top of this, as I say, tourism in Wales is still struggling. I interviewed some people—we had a fantastic policy forum on Saturday in Llandudno and, along with my colleague, the leader of our party in Wales, Darren Millar, we interviewed people and the stark reality is that they said, 'This is the final nail that could be in our coffin now, of remaining in business'. The Wales Tourism Alliance commented that—[Interruption.] Do you want to ask me for an intervention?

I'm just simply pointing out that Darren is not the leader of the Welsh Conservatives.

Well, in my eyes he is [Laughter.]

The Wales Tourism Alliance commented to the Finance Committee that Welsh tourism provision is more fragile than it has been for many years, and the timing of this proposal—the visitor levy—is adding to the pressure rather than being a small part of relieving it. It's further emphasised by the Federation of Small Businesses. They've said that Wales is the only UK nation not to recover visitor spending levels from 2019, according to the tourism barometer. It's just unacceptable, what you're doing. Instead of introducing a Bill that could support the Welsh tourism industry, you are now actually doing all you can to ruin it. By doing this, it will naturally deter any significant economic benefit to our Welsh economy. If this Bill progresses, in the first 10 years of operation, the levy and the registration scheme are forecast to cost from £313 million to £576 million. And it's interesting, First Minister, who has just sat down, you said to my colleague over there, Rhun, this morning, 'You're not listening'. Well, you're not listening, First Minister. On the actual surveys that have been done on this, you have had overwhelming results that say, 'We do not want a tourism levy in Wales', yet you have completely ridden roughshod and actually ignored them. So, you're the one who's not listening.

There's a potential loss of £250 billion in the worst-case scenario. The Bill is not the best way to support our tourism businesses, as we all know. And anybody watching this, tell your friends, tell your family that we, the Welsh Conservatives, will support businesses across Wales in whatever they do. As we've seen from the start the impact this Bill will have, and the potential it has to act as a factor for families, couples and even lone travellers when deciding on coming to Wales for a visit, it is for these reasons that we will not be supporting this. At what stage, Cabinet Secretary, will you realise that if you make your private sector businesses stronger, they employ more staff, they pay more tax and we have better services? At what point will the Welsh Labour Government, both here and in the UK, understand that quite simple and fundamental process?

My job, of course, is to represent the best interests of Mid and West Wales's residents, so this is a straightforward one for me. The Bill will do that and support the development of one of our key sectors.

We know that visitor levies—and we've heard it here multiple times today—are used very successfully in over 40 countries around the world and other parts of the UK. We would be the twenty-fifth country in Europe to implement such a scheme. We know it'll be up to local authorities to implement that, and also to decide on that spending, because the money raised will be ring-fenced. It will be invested back into the local community to deliver better services for visitors and residents alike.

There's no surprise that, from the opposition, I hear the echoes of the minimum wage debate of decades ago. The Tories seem to be locked in a doom-monger approach to absolutely everything. They do live up to their name as being the party of opposition. They oppose just about everything, including the budget, which would have actually given an awful lot of money to each one of their communities. I wonder how you sell that back to those communities.

I fully support this. It's a small broad-based tax. It is a nominal amount for individuals, but it has the potential of raising millions of pounds. It won't affect the businesses, because the businesses aren't paying it, as you would have believed from Janet Finch-Saunders's contribution. [Interruption.] In a minute. If this is properly implemented in collaboration with businesses and local stakeholders, it will enhance the appeal of the destinations by tackling the challenges of tourism. Who wanted an intervention? 

Joyce, I spoke to many businesses in my constituency that are going to be impacted by this tax, and they tell me quite clearly that this tax is going to have a detrimental effect on their businesses, and they're not quite sure that any of this money raised is actually going to improve the visitor experience either. It could be swallowed up into other council services and not reinvested into the communities. So, what do you say to those businesses in Brecon and Radnorshire, which you also represent? Are you saying that they're lying and the Government is right?

I think that's a ridiculous word to use. What I will say to you is that you're misrepresenting them if you haven't pointed out that this money is ring-fenced to be used for tourism. You could have told them that and you could have asked them, because they will be asked by any authority that decides they're going to implement this. They will have to ask those businesses and local people how they want that money spent. But it will be ring-fenced, so they can only spend it to enhance the tourist industry. You will be coming back here with a shopping list asking for things, and, at the same time, not only did you oppose the budget, but you want to oppose this, living up to the name of opposition: 'We'll oppose anything.'

I'm a little bit disappointed, on behalf of the people you represent, that you don't want to boost the businesses, that you don't want to enhance the tourism experience for visitors and their host communities. The details have to be worked out, and if it's properly implemented, it will make a significant difference. I think that proper scrutiny—and we've heard a lot about that, as we're going through the different stages—proper monitoring and evaluation have to be at the forefront going forward to make sure that the levy is effective but also fair.

The proposed register for accommodation, I agree with Siân Gwenllian, is absolutely pivotal in all of this, because if you collect that data, it can inform policy, it can identify opportunities also for growth. Wales has an outstanding tourism offer, but there is room for improvement in terms of economic growth, employment and sustainable communities. This Bill represents an opportunity to deliver on all three counts.

I just want to put on the record to start that the Welsh Conservatives don't oppose everything. We're a low-tax party who oppose this tourism tax. We believe in lower taxes. We always have done. The Conservative Party are a low-tax party. Anybody who knows an iota about politics knows that the Conservative Party is a low-tax party and we support more money in people's pockets. It's no big mystery. Everybody seems to turn round with some element of excitement when the Conservatives say things that are conservative. We support businesses and we make no apology in doing that. 

This toxic tourism tax is symbolic of a Government that has grown complacent and more radical in its destructive policies. It's fair to say that this is another ideological policy cooked up with the Welsh nationalists that has overwhelming opposition amongst the sector. What's more, it is humiliating seeing the rest of the United Kingdom look on with astonishment as we prepare to inflict this bizarre act of self-harm. The tourism sector—

Will you take an intervention?

Certainly.

There are other parts of the United Kingdom that are implementing a tourism levy.

There are other parts of the United Kingdom, but they're also subject to the same party, under Labour metro mayors, who have done the same. So I go back to my original point that the Conservatives, as we do, oppose higher taxes in terms of what we're debating here today.

Nineteen per cent of tourist businesses—[Interruption.] I want to make some progress, Mike. I will come back to you.

I was going to say I'm glad Labour has now got control of the Peak district. That's probably the first time ever. 

I don't know the political landscape of all areas of the UK, but I'm sure that's a correct comment that you're making there in terms of its colour.

But 19 per cent of tourist businesses had more customers in 2024 than 2023, but 39 per cent had fewer. For self-catering accommodation providers these figures are worse, with 16 per cent of businesses seeing more customers but 45 per cent seeing fewer. In a PASC UK survey, businesses ranked Welsh Government policies as the fourth biggest reason for the downturn in trade. I suspect this will rank higher once this toxic tax is introduced.

One of the most harmful consequences of this tax is the message it sends to those thinking of booking a holiday in Wales. It sends the message that Wales is closed for business and tourists are not welcome, playing into harmful stereotypes the sector have worked hard to shake off for years. It signals a Welsh Labour Government more interested in indulging a radical anti-tourist minority rather than supporting the tourism sector, which employs over 11 per cent of people in Wales and pumps more than £3.8 billion into the Welsh economy.

It does sadden me that the Member for Ynys Môn is chattering away there against tourism—[Interruption.]—when he represents a constituency that is rife with tourism, and a very healthy tourism trade. What you're proposing and what you're going to be voting for tonight is exactly against your constituents. I hope you're proud of that, by the way.

The Cabinet Secretary for Economy—

Will you take another intervention?

Yes, I will.

I have a huge amount of optimism and faith in our tourism offer in Ynys Môn and the rest of Wales. I have confidence that people will still want to come and enjoy what is a massively important export for us in Wales. Where's your support for businesses on export in Wales? 

We'll have to see. Time will tell. But you’ve got many business operators on Ynys Môn who are probably at the far opposite of relishing these proposals. If I was a business who just struggled through the swells of COVID-19, the cost-of-living crisis and whatever else, I think I'd be very apprehensive about this Bill's proposal. When business owners in your constituency are reflecting on that, I'm sure they'll look at your voting record.

Yet the Welsh Government still wishes to tax when confidence among the sector is at its lowest ebb. The managing director of Seren, which operates several hotels and restaurants across the country, said that the introduction of the levy could, and I quote,

‘needlessly exacerbate existing pressures on the hospitality sector, which is already navigating significant economic challenges.’

Concerns were also raised by a variety of other organisations in the Finance Committee report, such as Scouts Cymru, the Wales Tourism Alliance and the Federation of Small Businesses. The timing of this Bill is staggering given the condition of the UK economy more broadly, and, indeed, the policies coming from Westminster with Rachel Reeves's latest spring statement, but particularly the Welsh economy, which is in a worse state.

The amount of money this tax will raise is also miniscule. If every local authority in Wales opted to impose the levy, it would only raise £35 million. To put that into perspective, the Vale of Glamorgan Council, which indicated it will not impose the levy, spent £25 million on the Welsh Government's nation of sanctuary scheme, another wasteful vanity project. If the Welsh Government are looking to find money, there's millions more it could raise by cutting the masses of taxpayers' money frittered away and wasted. 

The Bill is also estimated to cost between £313 million and £576 million. I know there's very little business experience on the other benches, but most Members in this Chamber recognise that a tax that costs over £300 million and, at best, will raise £35 million is a very poor deal. I'm pleased, however, that the Welsh Government are reviewing the 182-day rule, but I hope you go further and adopt the Welsh Conservatives' policy in reducing 182 days to 105 days. 

To conclude, Llywydd—I won't test your patience much more—the disruption caused by second home ownership is a legitimate concern and could be mitigated through other means. We will be shooting ourselves in the foot with this levy. It gives the impression of an inward-looking Wales that doesn't need or want tourism, which is the opposite to the truth. It also gives the impression of a Government out of ideas and kicking a sector that's already down. This tax will cause millions of pounds' worth of damage to the Welsh economy for a meagre return. I urge all Members to vote against this Bill tonight.    

Llywydd, diolch yn fawr. Let me begin by thanking the Chairs of both committees that have studied the Bill. I look forward to continuing to work with the Finance Committee. We were able to accept all the recommendations and, as I say, there are ways in which the Bill will be improved as a result. I thank Mike Hedges for his powerful endorsement of the Bill. I think he asked the most sensible question of the whole evening: why has it taken so long to get to this very modest measure? 

Llywydd, I want to attend to a very small number of specific questions that I was asked. Luke Fletcher asked whether we might change the arrangement in which people arrive at emergency accommodation. I think it's a complex argument. On the whole, I'm persuaded that I do not want a woman fleeing domestic violence to have to declare that on her arrival at emergency accommodation. There may be many, many reasons why that would not be the right thing for that person to do, and if that's how this issue is to be navigated, I think we place the onus on the shoulders of the person who has been the victim of difficult circumstances, rather than allowing them to claim back the very modest amount of money that they might have to put upfront. But I understand the argument and it's not an easy one to resolve.  

Can I also explain to Janet Finch-Saunders that the phrase she read out—? Maybe I should wait for her to be able to listen. Thank you. You quoted part of the Bill and asked me to explain it further. I'm happy to say that that is there directly in response to something that Darren Millar raised at the very start of the journey of the Bill when he asked me about church halls and faith tourism. I'm pleased that the phrase that you read out gives a guarantee that those are not captured by the Bill. 

Llywydd, only Conservative voices have been raised in opposition to the Bill. I tried, in this thing, as in all other things, to follow the advice of my leader when she quoted Saunders Lewis to us earlier this afternoon. I was trying to listen carefully. I started listening carefully to Gareth Davies, but when he said in his first sentence that the Conservative Party was a low-tax party, it took me several minutes of his contribution to recover from that and listen to the rest of what he said, given that his party raised taxes to a 70-year high across the whole of the United Kingdom. What a low-tax record that turned out to be.

I did listen carefully to what Janet Finch-Saunders said, and, of course, I noticed that not once in her whole contribution did she mention the word 'residents'. It was the first word that Joyce Watson raised. She came here to speak up for her residents; Janet Finch-Saunders came here to speak up for her businesses. Not once did she talk about those people in her constituency who, at the moment, have to bear all the costs that are associated with that industry in her locality.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, of course.

Can I just tell you, in the 14 years I've been elected, I've never had a single resident ever complain to me about any overtourism or any effects of tourism? Many of our residents are employed in that tourism sector, and it's those residents who you will be now, probably, putting out of a job.

Well, I don't accept that, of course. What is absolutely clear, as others in the debate said, is that my constituents in Cardiff West have to pay for all the costs that those many tourists, who are absolutely welcome to Cardiff, who come for those special events that Mike Hedges referred to—. All those costs—. I see Cardiff Council doing an excellent job the morning after a major event—all those people out clearing up the rubbish, making sure that the streets are able to be used again. All the people who have visited Cardiff—they don't contribute a single penny to that, but my residents have to pay it all. And what this Bill does is it re-levels that playing field in a very modest way.

Now, Sam Rowlands was the main spokesperson for the opposition, and he offered us, I think, a series of misunderstandings of the Bill. He said that we should not be introducing a tax. Of course, the Bill does not introduce a tax, the Bill introduces a power for local authorities who choose to do it. Nobody in Wales is taxed as a result of this Bill, it is only where local authorities make that decision. And I think it was Lee Waters who said that, once upon a time, the Conservative Party claimed to be the party of localism—they believed the Government shouldn't make decisions on behalf of local people. That's exactly what this Bill does—it gives local people a decision. And maybe Labour-controlled Vale of Glamorgan will not introduce the tax, and that's fine, isn't it? Because they've made that decision on behalf of their residents.

I'm just interested to hear from you, Cabinet Secretary—. During the LJC report, it was raised about the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, and actually, the Office for the Internal Market are looking at levies as an area that could actually be to the detriment of the UK in terms of the internal market Act. What sort of assessment have you made of the internal market Act and its impact on this levy, and if there was a challenge, do you expect there to be one?

For four years of Conservative Government, Llywydd, that Government knew that this Bill was coming in front of the Senedd; not one Government Minister of a Conservative hue ever raised the internal market Act in relation to this Bill, and neither has the Government elected in July of last year.

Sam Rowlands went on to say that the sector is heavily taxed, but, of course, this Bill doesn't tax the sector at all. No business pays any more money as a result of a local authority deciding to introduce the tax; the tax is paid by the visitor, not by the business.

I'm sorry, Cabinet Secretary, you're being unclear with that, because it's the business that's liable to make the payment of the tax to the WRA; it's not the visitor who's making that payment. The business can choose whether to charge the visitor for that or not, as you well know, and it's the business who's liable for making sure that the payment goes through to the WRA. Isn't that correct?

The clue is in the name, isn't it? It's a 'visitor' levy. The visitor will pay the business and the business will pay the WRA. That is what will happen in practice and that is clear to anybody.

And then Sam offered us this touching picture of visitors to Wales rushing out to eat at restaurants, enjoying tourism attractions in every part of Wales, and then saying to themselves, 'I'm not going to do that, because there's a visitor levy that will cost me less than a sausage roll. And because of that 80p, I'm not going to do all the things that Sam Rowlands said that I was planning to do. I've got to pay something that is less than half a cup of coffee, less than a bottle of water, and that is going to—'. [Interruption.] No, I've taken enough interventions from Conservative Members, and I don't think another one will help me very much.

Look, it's surely true this is the most modest contribution that people will pay to make sure that the tourism industry in the place that they have chosen to visit, for all the reasons we know why Wales is such a great place to visit—that that place goes on being attractive to them. I share Rhun ap Iorwerth's optimism about Wales and about the tourism industry. I don't believe for a single moment that paying this modest levy will put people off from everything that Wales has to offer. That's the bleak view of Wales that the Conservative Party has at its core, and you've heard it time after time this afternoon. This modest Bill will do good, it will offer choice to local people, it's right that it proceeds onto the statute book, and I hope that Members will support it this afternoon.

Diolch, Llywydd. The welfare reforms announced by the Chancellor as part of the UK Government's spring budget could push an additional 50,000 children into poverty, according to the Government's own assessment. Initial analysis from the Resolution Foundation said that the combination of a weak economic outlook and benefit cuts that fall disproportionately on lower income families means that the average income for the poorest half of households is on track to fall by £500 on average over the next five years. Disability charities and campaigners have renewed their criticisms of the personal independent payment and the restricting of eligibility of PIP and the freezing of the health elements of universal credit, and say this will do nothing to help get people into work.

Whatever your view of the Chancellor's reforms, the indisputable fact is that we have no official assessment of the impact of these reforms and the impact that they'll have on the people of Wales or on the Welsh Government's budget. This is evidenced by a letter from the First Minister to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, in which she asked the UK Government to provide a Wales-specific assessment, and also in a tv interview, in which the Secretary of State for Wales defended the 'England and Wales' status of the assessment. We deserve better than this after a quarter of a century of devolution.

The First Minister has been in receipt of a response from the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions since last week, but it's taken these benches for its contents to be made public by this afternoon. And surprise, surprise, there is no assessment of the impact of the welfare reforms on Wales, no disaggregated data, no specific mitigation measures offered, considering that Wales will be disproportionately hit by these reforms. Liz Kendall's letter also refers to a substantial piece of correspondence from the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice. For full transparency, this Senedd should have sight of that letter also.

Taken together, Llywydd, the so-called partnership in power has failed its test: one end of the partnership failing in its duty to provide an assessment, the other toothless in persuading it to do so. Members from all sides of the Chamber have voiced their concerns about the Chancellor's plans, and Members deserve timely and adequate opportunity to scrutinise their impact and the Welsh Government's response to them. I've seen many Members talk about the fact that the Green Paper is the start of the conversation and, in fact, Eluned Morgan, the First Minister, says that in her letter to Liz Kendall. What we need to understand, for example, is that the Department for Work and Pensions is not consulting on 12 policy decisions through the Green Paper, including awarding the daily living part of PIP if you score at least four points in one daily living activity. I'm sure many Members have had e-mails of people really worried about that change. It's not being consulted on.

You've had your three minutes now, so if you can conclude.

Okay, I'm finishing. So, one written statement from the Cabinet Secretary for finance is inadequate. An exchange of letters by two Labour colleagues, with little transparency, is unacceptable. I therefore urge Members to vote in support of the motion, which will give the Senedd a voice on this most important of matters, which will impact so many of our constituents.

Diolch yn fawr, Llywydd. And can I say, at the outset, that we will be supporting the motion? And I would like to say a few words in response to this motion. So, I want to begin by acknowledging that welfare policy is, of course, a matter for the UK Government. But we know that the focus on disability benefits, as the First Minister has said, is causing serious concern amongst many people in Wales who are currently receiving personal independence payments. It is important that the information shared is correct, and that there is no misinformation being given. This is about people’s lives. And I want to reassure people that, in our engagement with the UK Government, we will continue to emphasise the need for those who will be affected by the welfare reforms to be properly supported. And I know the First Minister will share concerns, as she does, and has done, with the UK Government, and will always stand up for Wales. And, of course, I will share my letter as well—the letter that I wrote to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.

But we also work with the UK Government so that the people of Wales are served by a welfare system that provides meaningful support to help those who can work into sustainable employment, and which offers an effective financial safety net for people who are unable to work.

So, when we discuss benefit reforms, finally, Llywydd, it is my first priority to remember that this is fundamentally about people—people who are concerned about what the future holds. And it is important to note, as we said today, that there is an estimated £2 billion of unclaimed benefits in Wales every year, and how the Welsh Government is committed to ensuring that people in Wales claim every £1 to which they are entitled. Through our single advice fund services, people can access that advice on their rights, their entitlements, not only to personal independence payments, but to the other financial support they’re entitled to claim, on which, of course, we’ll expand tomorrow. Diolch yn fawr.