National Assembly for Wales

I call the National Assembly to order.

The first item on our agenda this afternoon is questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Education, and the first question, Angela Burns.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Angela. The ‘All Wales Attendance Framework’ provides standards and guidance for practitioners in improving school attendance across Wales.

I know, Cabinet Secretary, that you and I both share the same view and priority to get as many children into school, as often as possible. But there is one small area that does concern me, and that’s the area of children who are persistently sick. I have had a number of constituents come to me, where their children have either had the bad luck to have a series of tonsillitis bouts, where they’ve been off for one or two weeks at a time, or have some kind of condition, such as irritable bowel syndrome. And, because those children’s attendance records are therefore plummeting—these are parents who are involved in their children’s care, involved in their education—they’ve been receiving letters threatening them, telling them that they will need to have strong words with their children and, basically, implying that they are bad parents, and their children are not pulling their weight. Could you please just clarify the guidance that goes out to schools, so that we target those who don’t go to school because they don’t want to go to school, as opposed to those who would like to go to school but can’t go to school, so that these children do not feel under even more pressure? The attendance book has a smiley face on it, and when that smiley face no longer smiles, those children do feel very, very hard pressed.

Thank you, Angela, for raising that point. As you said, both of us would agree that the best thing that we can do for our children’s education is ensure that they attend school on a regular basis. And there’s a direct correlation between regular attendance at schools and outcomes, although, sometimes, it is absolutely necessary for a child to stay at home if they are unwell. And we would not expect those children, or the parents of those children, to be treated in a way that made them feel alienated from school. This is an area that has not been raised with me previously, so I will commit to you this afternoon to have a look at that guidance, and to ask officials whether there is anything more that we can do to supply advice to schools about how they manage the absence of children who are genuinely unwell.

Last year, the Welsh Government published data that showed persistent school absence at its best-ever recorded level, and it’s well known the correlation between attendance and attainment, on many levels. The Cabinet Secretary’s predecessor reported that the Welsh Labour Government had introduced a series of measures in recent years to address school attendance, including for those pupils eligible for free school meals, including the increased pupil deprivation grant, and the Welsh Government’s attendance grant, which supported education consortia in their work within the authorities and in the schools to develop and embed the effective practices to secure longer term improvements in school attendance. Can the Cabinet Secretary outline how the Welsh Government intends to build on this good progress and ensure that no child is left behind because of lack of attendance at school for genuine reasons?

Thank you, Rhianon. As you say, I’m very pleased to acknowledge that the latest data shows that absenteeism from our primary schools remains at the lowest level since the Welsh Government started to collect these figures, and attendance at secondary school continues to improve all the time. And the biggest improvements have, indeed, been for those children who are on free school meals. Their rate of attendance is improving faster than that of the general population. And a lot of that is down to the very hard work of individual schools and the innovative ways in which they work with families to address issues of school attendance. I have asked my officials to work with key stakeholders to identify what more support and what additional guidance we can give to schools, local education authorities, and consortia so we do not lose momentum on this very important aspect of education policy.

An accessible and inclusive physical learning environment is vital for all learners, including those with autism. Through the twenty-first century schools and education programme, we are investing £1.4 billion over the five-year period ending in 2019 in schools and colleges across Wales. These will include specialist facilities for children with autism.

I thank the Minister for that question and commend him on his work on the Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal (Wales) Bill, which I know we all hope will lead to improved outcomes and experiences for children with autism on the school journey. I know he shares my sense of priority about making sure that the physical environment in schools is also appropriate for children with autism. The Welsh Local Government Association developed a programme, Learning with Autism, which stipulates some criteria for the school estate to make it more accessible for children with autism. To what extent is that guidance being followed by schools generally and, to the extent that it’s not, is there anything that the Welsh Government can do to mandate that?

Thank you very much. I know that the Member takes a very close interest in these issues and has done a considerable amount of work in the area. I think all of us are aware of the Member’s commitment to this agenda. Can I say, in terms of the twenty-first century schools programme, this is a programme that is delivered in partnership with local authorities and the technical guidance does exist with local authorities to ensure that there’s an appropriate learning environment for all schools? This takes consideration of learners and pupils and all their needs, including those with an autistic spectrum disorder.

In addition to this, Estyn will consider the school environment and whether the school is physically able to meet pupils’ needs and whether specialist resources are used well to meet pupils’ needs as well. So, I hope that, through the construction, design and building of a new estate, the technical guidelines deliver the sort of ambition that you’ve described. Then, within the school environment, whenever there is an inspection with Estyn, that school environment will be a part of that inspection and, clearly, if there are areas that need improving, this Government will take action to ensure that it is improved alongside local authorities. But I know that Members across the whole Chamber have raised concerns about these matters, and if there are particular areas of concern in particular schools, I’d be grateful for any Member to write to me and I will certainly take this forward.

I’ve just hotfooted it over with some of your colleagues from the cross-party autism group meeting in the Pierhead. At our previous meeting, we took a presentation from the Autistic Women’s Empowerment Project, discussing the different presentations of autism in women and girls and suggesting that the ratio—the accepted ratio of five boys to one girl—should actually be a lot closer. We were told that many females are left undiagnosed, misdiagnosed or without support, and while autistic girls face many of the same challenges as autistic boys, boys explode and girls implode. How, therefore, will you and your colleagues address the very real problem, evidenced by a large body of casework that I have, of girls being denied diagnosis because of schools reporting that they cope so well in school, despite the fact that they’re then going home, melting down and, in many cases, self-harming and, in one of my own cases, even attempting suicide?

I fully appreciate, understand and accept the point made by the Member. I think many of us are aware that diagnosing girls with autism, particularly younger girls, is far more difficult than that with boys. The Member will be aware that the autism action plan—the refresh of that—which was published by my colleague Minister at the end of last year, does include a timetable for diagnosis and does include demands on the health service to ensure that diagnosis is pursued with an urgency, which, I agree, has sometimes been lacking. But, I will say that, in terms of education, we do also have the Learning with Autism programme, which is directly funded by the Welsh Government, which is part of our autistic spectrum disorder strategic action plan, and that is a comprehensive package of resources for mainly primary schools, which takes a whole-school awareness approach. I would hope that delivering that whole-school approach will ensure that children with autism have the education they need, but that that is contextualised within an environment that is supportive as well.

Questions now from the party spokespeople. The Plaid Cymru spokesperson, Llyr Gruffydd.

Thank you very much. The ministerial taskforce for supply models published a report last week on the possible options for supply teaching provision in the future. Of course, this is the second report to be published on the issue in some 18 months. So, can I ask you how much progress the Cabinet Secretary believes has been made in tackling the problems surrounding the provision of supply teachers since the original report of the Assembly’s Children, Young People and Education Committee back in 2015? Are we any nearer the shore, or, as some of the unions and other suggest, have the last few years been wasted, to all intents and purposes, and is this report another missed opportunity?

Thank you for that, Llyr. As you’ll be aware, this report has been done by people independent of Government but was commissioned by Government. If interested parties had been hoping that the task and finish group would produce a definitive answer to the issue of a single supply model, then I accept that the report does not do that. In meeting with the chair of that group, they have said that they felt it was impossible to, at this stage, be able to recommend a single model going forward. I accept that some people will be disappointed. This is an important area of education policy. We need to ensure that those who are providing supply teaching have the qualifications, the support, the continuous professional development and the terms and conditions that they deserve, and I will be looking again at how we can make progress in this area.

I am pleased that you acknowledge, perhaps, that the report didn’t meet some of the expectations out there. There is certainly a feeling of frustration that another 18 months’ work is going to take place before we get to a point where we will see a very real difference. Of course, you are also right in recognising that there is increased pressure in terms of the provision, because we are aware, from the most recent workforce census, that the number of teachers in Wales has fallen annually for a period of some six years. We also know that, over the next few months and years, there will be significant change within the education system in Wales, with a number of reforms from the curriculum, as you mentioned, to CPD, and so on. Therefore, the demands on our teachers and the need to take them out of the classroom will increase, at the very same time as the number of teachers is reducing. In such a situation, it is inevitable that there will be an increasingly important role for supply teachers in supporting our schools. Can I ask, therefore, how you intend to ensure an adequate supply of supply teachers not in two years or three years, but in the crucial interim period?

Thank you, Llyr. What the report does not show is that we have a difficulty in providing supply teachers. Interestingly, the report shows us a picture of supply teaching that perhaps some people would find unusual, where a great number of teachers that are employed on a supply basis are not for one, two or three days to cover absence or to cover the continuous professional development of a professional colleague, but are actually people providing supply on a termly basis, for an entire term or more than two terms. So, this is new data that we have got, which demonstrates to us how complex the supply teaching model is, and we will need to come up with a model that does have the flexibility to allow for those one, two days to cover sickness, or to the longer term.

Can I just say that teacher-pupil ratios have moved very slightly in the years between 2010 and now, from 18 to 18.5? So, there isn’t a crisis, but we do know that there are some specific areas where we find it difficult to recruit and retain teachers, particularly in some science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects, and particularly in some Welsh-medium provision. Those particular pressure points will have to be factored into a solution for supply teaching.

Well, I don’t think I used the word ‘crisis’, but we know that some 68 per cent of the recruitment targets for primary schools have been achieved—sorry, 90 per cent in primary schools, and 68 per cent in secondary schools. So, it is a problem and it does store up problems for ensuing years, and I do understand that you have acknowledged that risk, of course. There are some 5,000 teachers registered as supply teachers with the Education Workforce Council. But, interestingly, there are also around 5,000 learning support workers who are also registered as supply staff. It appears to me that no consideration has been given to this group in looking at the future of supply staff in Wales—something that the taskforce, as far as I can see, didn’t consider. Is there a risk, therefore, that this important group of people is undervalued, and can you tell us how and where the Government sees the position of learning support workers in considering the future of supply provision?

Well, I certainly don’t undervalue the contribution that learning support workers bring to the Welsh education system. Many classroom teachers and headteachers tell me that their schools would not function as well as they do without the ability of those individuals in their schools to help, especially in the foundation phase. This Government is committed to expanding the number of higher level qualified learning support assistants because we value them. Only last week, we passed the regulations with regard to their registration with the Education Workforce Council. We regard them as important, that’s why we want them to be a registered profession, that’s why we are supporting them by lowering their fees for registration, and they will be an important part of how we plan the workforce for our schools and colleges going forward.

Welsh Conservatives Spokesperson, Darren Millar.

Diolch, Lywydd. Cabinet Secretary, Estyn’s annual report, which was published recently, identified the quality and variability of the quality of teaching as being a major issue here in Wales. In fact, the chief inspector said:

‘The most important factor in how well learners develop and learn is the quality of teaching. However, teaching is one of the weakest aspects of the provision in most sectors.’

Can you tell us what you’re doing to address this particular problem, and when we can expect to see change?

Thank you, Darren. It is concerning to read the chief inspector’s comments regarding the consistency of excellent teaching across Wales. There are some excellent practitioners, but too often there is a level of variability that I do not think is acceptable. I want every child in Wales, regardless of where they are studying, regardless of which school they attend, regardless of which class they are in within a school, to have access to first-quality teaching.

What are we doing? You are aware that we are radically reforming our initial teacher training programmes, so that the teachers coming out of our universities are the very best that they can be. Later on this spring, I will be publishing new teaching standards, new professional standards, by which we would expect teachers and their managers—headteachers—to manage their staff by. We continue to work with our schools and our partners to improve the continuing professional development opportunities for teachers who are already in the workforce.

Thank you for that answer, Cabinet Secretary. I’m pleased with some of those developments, but, of course, it’s not just the quality of teaching and the variability of it that the chief inspector found problems with. He also found problems in our pupil referral units. He said that the provision in pupil referral units remains particularly poor, and, of course, you and I both know that many of those individuals in pupil referral units are vulnerable learners. What specific action are you taking to raise those standards in pupil referral units?

Thank you, Darren. It’s not just pupils who attend pupil referral units we have to be concerned about, it’s all children who receive their education other than at school. You will know that Ann Keane is chairing a group that is looking at EOTAS provision to ensure that we will see the improvements that we need in EOTAS, whether that’s in a PRU or in another particular setting, and we are working very closely with Ann to implement changes that she feels are necessary.

I am currently considering looking at the use of pupil deprivation grants with regard to pupils in PRU or EOTAS, looking at options, whether we can target additional resources to the education of those children, as well as ensuring that there is quality provision and outcome and that children do not have their life chances and their educational chances narrowed by being outside of mainstream school, because there is evidence to suggest that pupils who could go on to achieve a wide range of qualifications are not having that opportunity because the curriculum is narrowed so much for them if they find themselves outside the mainstream classroom.

It’s not just those in pupil referral units outside mainstream schools; we’ve got problems in our mainstream schools as well. Again, the chief inspector’s findings correlated very well with the Programme for International Student Assessment findings, which demonstrated that those children who are more able and talented—those high-flying kids—are not achieving their potential in our mainstream schools, and are probably not getting sufficient access to the support that they need to develop that potential. What action are you taking to support those pupils who are not receiving the attention that they deserve at the moment, in particular those high-flying kids?

Thank you, Darren. You’re quite right; PISA and Estyn raised concerns about what we’re doing for our more able and talented children. We need to ensure that our teachers are equipped with the ability to differentiate within the classroom so that they are able to provide lessons in a way that stretches our more able and talented.

Working closely with my colleague, the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, we are supporting the Seren network. Only this morning, on a visit to Merthyr College, I met a number of young people from Merthyr who were studying A-levels at the college who were part of that Seren programme, who have ambitions to go and study veterinary science and medicine later on in life and are receiving the additional support that they need to make those things happen for them.

We have also refined our accountability and our performance measures for schools. One of the unintended consequences of a heavy focus on level 2+ inclusive has been to concentrate on those pupils and, quite rightly, to move them from a D to a C grade, but that has had consequences for our A* and our A and our B performance. We have changed that. We now use capped point scores as well as level 2+, so that schools have to concentrate on ensuring that each individual pupil reaches their full potential.

UKIP spokesperson, Michelle Brown.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Cabinet Secretary, you recently published the categorisation of schools in Wales. Classification of the schools will only be of use if that information is used promptly and effectively to help schools improve; otherwise, children will continue to languish in schools that are not performing to standard. Are you prepared to give a personal assurance to the Assembly and to parents of children in schools that are in need of support, in particular those in the red category, that you will take personal responsibility for supporting and assisting those schools to green status?

Thank you for that question. The good news from the publication of the schools categorisation data last week shows that the number of schools moving out of red categorisation is improving. We have fewer schools in a red categorisation than we have ever had, and that is down to the hard work and commitment of headteachers, individual classroom teachers, and governing bodies who support those schools, as well as our regional improvement services. For each school that has had a red categorisation, I have asked the regional consortia to provide me with a written plan as to what they will do to support that school. The primary purpose of our schools categorisation process is to identify schools that need the most support, and I will be personally receiving a plan for each school that has a red categorisation.

Thank you for that. As far as the red, amber, and green classifications are concerned, can the Cabinet Secretary tell us how many children live in catchment areas where both primary and secondary schools are deemed as either amber or red? I’m sure the Cabinet Secretary agrees with me that subjecting a child to a school that requires improvement is unacceptable and it would be a national disgrace if we were to sentence a child to failing schools throughout their educational life, so it’s vital we know the scale of any situation where both levels of schools need improvement.

I do not have the data to hand, but I'm happy to supply those data to the Member. As I have said in answer to a question to Darren Millar, I expect all our schools, wherever a child happens to be, to be excellent schools. The data from the schools categorisation process show that the number of schools entering into a yellow or green category is improving. There are more Welsh children going to more green schools than there have been since this system started, and I will not rest until we see progress in all of our schools. This system allows all schools to be green, should their performance be of that standard, and I’m sure that the headteachers in all of our schools would want to aspire to that for their children.

Okay. Thank you. Having asked about the scale of the problem, it’s, of course, wrong to treat anyone, especially children, as statistics. So, I’d like to hear some reassurance from the Cabinet Secretary that any school requiring help will be treated equally compared with other schools needing help, regardless of the size of the school.

The categorisation is an indication of how much level of support a school can expect to receive, and that will be regardless of the size of the school. My expectation is that the regional consortia, our school improvement service, work closely with the headteacher and the governing body of said school to ensure that there’s a package of support that is relevant. But the size of the school will be immaterial to the level of support that that school will get.

Thank you, Mike. Band A of the twenty-first century schools and education programme will see an investment of over £51 million in schools in Swansea over the five-year period ending 2019. Of this, over £34 million will have been spent in the Swansea East constituency.

Firstly, can I thank the Cabinet Secretary for both her answer and visiting the newly built Burlais school, especially as Burlais school replaced two schools that needed replacing, with very serious problems with their buildings—they had internal running water every time it rained. I’ve also invited the Cabinet Secretary to visit Blaenymaes school, which is on the council’s rebuilding programme. Can the Cabinet Secretary confirm that the twenty-first century schools programme will continue?

Well, Mike, I was very pleased to see the new Burlais school and the difference that that building is making to the education of children in the area. I am also very pleased to receive an invitation to visit Blaenymaes school. My late grandma, Mary Hall, was the senior cook at Blaenymaes school for very many years. She peeled a lot of spuds for those kids in her time. So, the opportunity to visit Blaenymaes is one I very much welcome indeed. I’m also pleased to confirm that work is currently being undertaken to develop band B of the twenty-first century schools and education programme, and the next wave of this investment is scheduled to begin in 2019 and run over the five-year period until 2024.

You mentioned the forward look plan there, but, according to officials, Swansea council’s admittedly rather controversial local development plan is likely to be delayed now, and part of the twenty-first century schools programme aims to address the issue of capacity, of course, in schools that are both overcrowded and those that have surplus places. If the local development plan is delayed, what impact do you think this might have on the planning for those school locations and capacities in Swansea? It’s a local authority, who, to me, seems still to be trying to get its head around Welsh language medium provision, let alone anything else, and that’s despite being able to use the LDP as an opportunity for promoting Welsh-medium education as well as a threat. Thank you.

Well, it’s disappointing that the local development plan will be delayed, because one of the core principles of the twenty-first century schools programme is to ensure that we have the right number of school places in the right place. Often, the proposals to develop a particular conurbation or town or village are instrumental in the process of approving a twenty-first century school’s grant, which might have capacity bigger than is currently needed, because we know that housing is to come on stream. My officials will continue to work very closely with Swansea council to ensure that delays in their planning department will not affect our ability to do what I want to do and, I’m sure, what the Member wants to do, which is see continued investment in the Swansea schools.

Following on the same theme, really, what discussions have you specifically had with the City and County of Swansea to try and ensure that the current education planning requirements are not unreasonably delayed or vague as a result of these delays in the local development plan?

Well, as I’ve said, Dai, officials continue to speak regularly with Swansea city council. We want to ensure that the proposals that are currently in band A of the programme are delivered upon, and we want to ensure best value for the Welsh Government’s money when band B comes into operation. We do this in a partnership approach, so, therefore, we need a clear understanding of the aspiration Swansea council has, and we would not expect any delays, as I said, in the planning department to impact upon our ability to invest in the school capacity that Swansea needs, regardless of whether that capacity is in the Welsh or the English medium.

Cabinet Secretary, the majority of Welsh-medium primary schools in Swansea have pupil-to-teacher ratios greater than 25, and all bar one are in the yellow and amber support categories. This, coupled with recent news highlighting the difficulty in recruiting Welsh-medium teachers, and news about the severe delays in rolling out the curriculum, is a concern. Cabinet Secretary, what will you be doing to reassure parents within my region about the future of their children’s education in Welsh-medium primary schools? Thank you.

The Member will be aware that the planning of Welsh-medium provision falls to my colleague, the Minister with responsibility for the language, who is currently considering how best we can ensure that the Welsh in education plans that have come forward are adequate and are ambitious. We understand that if we’re to meet the Welsh Government’s target of an additional 1 million Welsh-speakers then education has a crucial role to play in that. I know, from my own family’s experience, where the language was lost in my generation and the generation of my husband, that the ability to attend a Welsh-medium primary school has brought the language back to my family, and I am incredibly proud to see children whose parents are English being able to speak to their parents in English and speak to their ‘mam-gu’s and their ‘tad-cu’s in Welsh in the same conversation. That’s why we are absolutely committed to ensure that local authorities are as ambitious as we are for Welsh-medium education in Wales.

Thank you, Hefin. I expect teachers to exercise their professional judgement in ensuring planning, preparation and assessment time is used effectively to support their teaching. Arrangements should be designed to allow teachers to use their judgement based on their needs and the needs of the school and their learners.

It’s good to hear that the Cabinet Secretary supports that flexibility. At the Children, Young People and Education Committee last week, the NUT said that PPA is a big issue in primary schools in particular. It was Neil Foden of NUT Cymru who said that schools were freeing teachers for the required 10 per cent of their teaching time and releasing them from their workloads, which is to be welcomed and a good thing. However, he also said that many schools are achieving this by using staff without qualified teacher status, such as classroom assistants or higher-level teaching assistants. This can mean—and this is what he said—that pupils are not being taught by a qualified teacher for the equivalent of one month in an academic year. We need to find a solution to this if that is the case. So, where there is a need, perhaps, to reduce teaching capacity in some schools, wouldn’t it be more appropriate to use that teaching capacity to cover PPA, perhaps as a floating teacher with responsibility for covering PPA, or find other creative solutions to this particular problem?

Thank you, Hefin. If I can be absolutely clear, because I believe the regulations governing who can teach in Wales are clear: only qualified teachers—those with QTS—can undertake specific work, i.e. teach. That is a very different situation that we have in Wales than you would see across the border, and a differentiation that I am very pleased about. Schools can employ a suitably qualified floating teacher. Like you, I recognise that there are benefits to continuity and quality assurance from having floating teachers who are employed either in a single school or, perhaps, in a cluster of schools to provide cover for absent teachers or to ensure that those teachers have the PPA time that they need. I would see that as good practice. Ultimately, staffing structures, however, are a matter for individual schools, governing bodies and the LEA.

Cabinet Secretary, as the chair of two governing bodies, I often think that teachers have a similar working lifestyle to us. They need to do a lot of preparation. They have to do a lot of work in the evening and in what people refer to constantly as the holidays. But, sometimes, you need to have that protected time—when we are in the office environment but when they are in the school—so that they have access to colleagues and sources of advice, and so that they can plan. It’s really important that there is that 10 per cent or so of time protected for them.

I agree with you absolutely. We have a commitment to allow that time to be made available. Members will be aware that I recently visited Finland, which is a nation that is constantly held up as the bastion of great education. One of the things that they are trying to do in Finland to improve their education is to ensure that there is PPA time in school for their teachers. They recognise that teachers currently don’t have the opportunity to sit down together to discuss individual pupils or to plan and to look to see how they can take their schools forward. So, PPA is an important aspect. We have looked at ways in which we could increase PPA. You would know that an independent report—independent of Government—recently talked about a shortened school week that would then allow a single day for PPA. It was not welcomed with much enthusiasm by members of your own benches, I must say, but we need to look at creative ways to ensure that teachers do indeed have that PPA time.

Thank you, Hefin. I announced my intention last week to consult on setting up a new strategic authority to oversee post-compulsory education and training. This would promote collaboration, remove barriers to progression and create seamless learning pathways across all elements of post-compulsory education and training, including further and higher education.

I welcome that statement and the measures that she has just identified in response to the Hazelkorn review. In her evidence to the Children, Young People and Education Committee on 10 November, she stated that, in the more immediate future—before that further consultation takes place—when she submits her annual remit letter, there'll be an expectation that, of the money that has been going to the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, part of that is used to enhance the relationship between FE and HE. She said she’d include that in the remit letter. At the same meeting, the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language said he doesn’t want to see a boundary between FE and HE. How, specifically, will the Cabinet Secretary ensure, in her next remit letter, which is due very soon, that that’s the case?

Thank you for that. This desire on behalf of Welsh Ministers has already been expressed to HEFCW in an additional remit letter that went out earlier this autumn, and future remit letters would seek to build upon this.

I am struck by how important these opportunities are. Again, this morning, with Dawn Bowden, I was in Merthyr Tydfil college. We met students there this morning who were undertaking the first two years of their course at the campus in Merthyr and who will then go on to study at the University of South Wales to complete their degrees. Many of their students who study A-levels, for instance, then move on to progress to study at a higher level within the same institution, and what’s been crucial for raising aspiration levels in that community, which has had a very difficult time, is that close linkage between the FE college and the HE institution.

I will continue, as we work towards the single tertiary education authority, to express my desire, and how important I believe it is, to HEFCW in my regular meetings with both the chairman and the chief executive, and my officials will be monitoring what evidence there is from HEFCW to see that the spirit of the remit letter has indeed been fulfilled.

Cabinet Secretary, the issue of student tuition fees and funding arrangements for higher education has occupied considerable attention. However, further education occupies an equally if not more important role in terms of providing skills for local economies and their learners, and deserves equal attention. Does the Cabinet Secretary agree that a continued decrease in funding for lower-level skills will place in jeopardy the ability to provide the fundamental learning that supports our communities in Wales?

Thank you for that. I don’t regard any element of the sector to be more important than any other, and I expressed that quite clearly in my statement on Hazelkorn last week. The purpose of the new tertiary education authority will be partly to ensure we can have that parity of esteem between the different forms of study, and the resources that will help drive not just the life chances of the individuals who are studying, but will drive the economy of Wales forward, will be fundamental to their work as they commission programmes of study, work-based learning and skills provision.

According to the latest data for January 2016, there are 8,804 pupils aged 5 attending a Welsh-medium school. This therefore represents a quarter of all pupils aged 5.

Can I thank the Minister for that response? As someone who has been learning Welsh for many years, I know how difficult it is to learn as an adult. The Minister has said there are 8,804 five-year-olds in Welsh-medium schools currently, which equates, assuming a life expectancy of 85 years, to something in the order of 850,000 or so—perhaps slightly under—Welsh speakers in 2097. That is, unless more five-year-olds commence Welsh-medium education over future years. Does the Minister recognise these numbers, and can he indicate how the Government intends to increase these numbers so that by 2097 we reach 1 million?

Presiding Officer, I have learned to my cost never to challenge Mike Hedges on his numbers. I did so once and I’ll never do it again. I recognise both the numbers he quotes and the broader point behind that. Can I say this? I am considering at the moment the Welsh in education strategic plans. We have not received all of them yet from local authorities, and I will make a statement on the way forward when I have received all of those completed plans. However, I will say that I am disappointed by the lack of ambition that has been demonstrated by some to date. The ambition that Mike Hedges clearly describes is one that this Government is absolutely committed to, and that means that, when we do look at our strategic plans for the future of Welsh-medium education, we will do so with a view to achieving the target of 1 million speakers. That does mean a significant increase in the number of pupils attending Welsh-medium education and that means a significant increase in the provision of Welsh-medium education. When I’m in a position to do so, I will make that statement to this Chamber.

Minister, I’ve been pleased with the robust tone that you’ve expressed in respect of the Welsh in education strategic plans, which are being developed by local authorities across Wales. You and I both share the ambition to drive up the number of Welsh speakers here in Wales, but we will never achieve that ambition unless there are sufficient Welsh-speaking teachers in our classrooms. We have a huge problem at the moment, which is beginning to develop, and is going on developing, with a massive reduction in the number of people coming through into the teaching profession who are proficient in the Welsh language and able to teach through the medium of Welsh. What action are you taking, along with the Cabinet Secretary, to entice people into the profession who are going to be able to deliver this magnificent ambition that we all share for Wales?

I think one of the answers of the Cabinet Secretary earlier about the sort of education system she’s looking at developing in Wales will in itself ensure that teachers want to teach in Wales and will find that teaching in Wales is a very attractive career option. We know that about a third of all teachers in Wales do speak Welsh, so there is some headroom at the moment. But I recognise that the more fundamental point you’re making is that we do need more teachers who are able to teach through the medium of Welsh. You will see that some of the funding that we’ve agreed through our budget negotiations will help achieve that in terms of investment in the workforce, but also investment in the workforce for early years as well. The Government’s childcare offer will also contribute to that. But, let me say this: it is important that we look—and the strategic plan that I’ll be publishing later this year for the future of the Welsh language will be a comprehensive plan that will include both the ambitions in terms of the headline numbers, but also a number of different elements that will enable us to achieve that. Workforce planning is a key part of that and a key element of that. And whilst, yes, we will focus in on teachers, we will also be focusing in on teaching support and childcare workers as well.

Support for STEM in schools is a key priority and we are investing in capacity-building for science subjects. Our education reforms will see practitioner-led and evidence-based changes to the STEM curriculum, with networks for excellence to support our teaching workforce going forward.

Thank you, Cabinet Secretary, for your response. ‘Talented Women for a Successful Wales’ has noted that girls are under-represented in most STEM subjects at A-level, despite performing as well or better at GCSE than their male counterparts, with particular challenges, for example, in physics, where just 20 per cent of A-level students are female. How is the Welsh Government tackling this gender divide? Also, do you think, Cabinet Secretary, that there are any opportunities in the new curriculum for us to try and reverse this trend?

Thank you for that. I’ve been taking a range of positive steps to increase girls’ engagement in the study of STEM subjects, linked to the education actions that were set out in the report that you mentioned, ‘Talented Women for a Successful Wales’. But, to make that difference, I want to see our teaching professionals—they need support to make that happen. That’s why the national networks for excellence in maths and science and technology, which I announced recently, are being tasked to consider the issues of gender equity. So, that is actually a named part of what we expect them to do. Next to parents, our teaching workforce has the greatest influence on young people’s study choices. So, it’s essential that those working in STEM in our schools, from the ages of three—because we have to have great scientific experiences early on in a child’s educational career—to 18 are supported to enhance girls’ experiences and the relevant and inclusive way in which they deliver STEM in schools.

You’re right about physics. There are many girls who study biology, a few fewer then study chemistry and then we have a drop-off in the number of girls who are studying physics, so especially with the grant to physics we are funding the Institute of Physics’s Stimulating Physics Network programme, delivering non-specialist mentoring for physics teachers: an approach which we know there is a proven track record to improve girls’ provision on to A-level study of physics.

Diolch i chi, Jenny. O’r cychwyn mae rhaglen y consortia rhanbarthol a’r awdurdodau lleol wedi gweithio’n agos gyda’u hysgolion Her Ysgolion Cymru i annog a sefydlu cydweithio priodol. Bydd fy swyddogion yn parhau i weithio gyda’r rhanbarthau i sicrhau bod yr arfer da hwn yn cael ei gynnal a’i rannu ar draws y system gyfan.

The very successful London Challenge, which obviously inspired our own Schools Challenge Cymru, lasted for a full eight years. Ours is being wound down after three years. Some of the achievements of Schools Challenge Cymru have been really quite outstanding: in secondary schools, for those who are on free school meals, there has been a 65 per cent increase in maths and Welsh or English attainment to the level required. I know that Professor Ainscow, the champion for Schools Challenge Cymru, has said there have been some staggering results. I wonder whether we are pulling the rug out too soon in terms of not just getting swift but also sustainable improvement. How are we going to sustain this fantastic improvement?

Thank you, Jenny. As you will know, the programme was initially set up as a two-year programme. The programme was extended for a third year. I have made a decision to extend the support for Schools Challenge Cymru schools until the end of this academic year rather than the financial year. We will also have funding in place to address new types of interventions in those schools that have not made progress. Whilst I absolutely acknowledge that many of the schools in the programme have made significant progress, unfortunately there is a minority of schools where the results have not seen that progress and, in some cases, they’ve even slipped further behind. I’m sure you would agree with me we need to refocus our efforts on those particular schools.

With regard to the schools that have made progress, we don’t want them to slip back. That’s why we have tasked the consortia with ensuring that all of those schools have an ongoing programme of support and mentorship agreed with the school improvement service. I was recently with a headteacher, with Alun Davies, in the Blaenau Gwent constituency talking to him about his post-Schools Challenge Cymru plan, which has already been agreed with the Education Achievement Service consortium, of which he is very pleased and very happy with, and I would expect that that example is replicated in all the schools that are affected.

Some local authorities are still consulting on their Welsh in education strategic plans. Once I have received them all, I will make a statement on the way forward. As I have said already this afternoon, I am disappointed by the lack of ambition demonstrated by some of them.

Thank you very much, and I look forward to seeing your statement on these extremely disappointing plans. You’ve also announced your desire to reform the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011 and to present a White Paper before the summer in order to promote public discussion on the provision of a new Bill. It wasn’t clear to me what exactly the remit of the new Bill will be. For example, will the Bill encompass Welsh education and other strategic areas, or will it only appertain to Welsh language standards? And what exactly will the status of the Welsh language strategy be during the consultation on the White Paper? My concern is that the process of legislating, rather than working within the system that we have already, will truly slow down the progress towards 1 million speakers by 2050.

I very much hope that that isn’t the case. May I just say that what I just said in response to your question and to Mike Hedges’s question previously was that some of the plans had been disappointing, not all of them, and it’s important that we put that on record? When it comes to future legislation, we do have an agreement that we will consider and review the Welsh language Measure, the current Measure, that creates the statutory framework for the strategy and the status of the Welsh language. So, we will consider that. The strategy that will drive our work is a strategy that will describe our vision and how we are going to achieve that vision. I share your concern on occasion. I don’t want an endless debate on legislation. I don’t want to see that. I want to see action. But we must have the statutory framework in place that enables us to do that.

I am going to be a bit reticent this afternoon, if you will forgive me, because I don’t want to announce today the content of the White Paper that I’m going to publish at the beginning of the summer; I am still considering a few of the issues that you described. But when we do come to consider the White Paper and publish it, that will take into account how we create the kind of statutory framework that will support the strategy and enable us to achieve our vision.

I thank the Minister and the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item on our agenda is an urgent question, and I have accepted one question under Standing Order 12.66. I call on Adam Price to ask the urgent question.

Yes, the Heads of the Valleys Development Company has submitted a fresh proposal for the Circuit of Wales. We will now consider the submission in detail and commence a rigorous process of due diligence. Members should now have received a written statement in both English and Welsh.

I’m grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for his response, and also for the written statement that was circulated a few minutes ago. After many years of waiting, I hope that this latest development signals that we are through the last chicane in the final straight. But, if the Cabinet Secretary is able to, could he confirm that the two criteria, the two conditions that he has set, firstly in July of last year in relation to the 50 per cent level of public sector guarantee, and, more recently, the need for named investor term sheets, have now both been met? And in relation to the due diligence process, is he able to tell us who will conduct that due diligence? Will it be done externally? In relation to the criteria, will they follow the standard due diligence procedure in terms of the criteria to assess the project, or will there be project-specific criteria? And, given the fact that it’s a decision, if it is positive, will inevitably bind future administrations, will a copy of that due diligence be shared on a commercial-in-confidence basis with spokespersons of all parties represented in the Assembly? In that regard, I’m happy to place on record that my party believes that this has huge potential for the communities of Blaenau Gwent, for the wider south Wales Valleys and, indeed, Wales as a whole, and we will be very pleased to support the project moving forward, subject to those normal due diligence requirements being met.

And finally, in anticipation of a positive final decision, has he instructed his inward investment team to begin preparatory work, scoping the potential demand for inward investment in the technology park, which will be a key element within the Circuit of Wales development?

Can I thank Adam Price for his question and say—I’ll try to avoid motoring metaphors today—that, according to my officials, it does appear that the criteria—the two points that the Member has identified—have been met, so that’s why we’re in a position today to proceed with due diligence and consideration of the proposals before us? Nobody should ever fear due diligence that is carried out on behalf of Welsh Government or by Welsh Government. It’s my anticipation that the due diligence process will be pursued externally. I’ve never come across a situation personally in this role where I’ve shared commercial-in-confidence details of due diligence with opposition spokespeople, but I will happily look into this question that the Member raised, and come back to him with an answer. It may well be that we would also require permission from the Heads of the Valleys Development Company as well.

In terms of the considerations that will form the due diligence process, this will be carried out over the forthcoming weeks once we’ve got all of the information required. It will encompass all information that is being provided to Welsh Government. All of that information will be considered. We will follow the process that is normal for a project of this scale, and I’ve outlined, in the written statement, some of the points that will be examined as part of that process.

In terms of demand from potential investors for the technology park, well, of course, this will form part of the due diligence process and assessment of the likely demand and the likelihood of automotive clustering taking place. I can’t go into any details of the latest business plan that’s been submitted, I’m afraid, so I can’t give any details at this moment about what the exact proposals are concerning a potential automotive cluster, but that will form part of the due diligence process.

Cabinet Secretary, I think your decision to issue the Heads of the Valleys Development Company with that two-week deadline two weeks ago—two weeks ago today, or two weeks yesterday—was exactly the right thing to do and I made that clear in the business statement yesterday. I also agree with you on the issue of due diligence. It’s clear now that that will play a vital role in the next part of this process.

Cabinet Secretary, it’s clear that the HOTV company—. Well, it now appears clear that they have the money in place to proceed at this point, and that the private finance part of this package is the majority part of the overall financial deal with the Welsh Government underfunding coming in as a minority. Can I ask you, first of all, are you fully satisfied that that private finance is in place, and if so—and I believe you are—how quickly will the Government be in a position to give the green light to this project, as long as the due diligence checks out? Because I understand that the private finance involved is of a type that can be fluid, and given that you now feel that this part of the deal has been met, it would be sad if this project was lost as a result of unnecessary delays from this moment on.

Can I thank the Member for his question, and also welcome the fact that he recognised that the two-week deadline was significant and important? I decided to issue the two-week deadline for a number of reasons. One was that we were assured that the Heads of the Valleys Development Company, back in July, would be able to come to us within a matter of weeks with a revised proposal. So, I felt in the new year it was important to lay that deadline. But above all, I felt that the people of Ebbw Vale had shown considerable patience in waiting for the proposal to come forward. And I felt that in the new year it was necessary to give the company that deadline. It has now been met. We are examining the private finance details under a non-disclosure agreement. I can’t comment further, I’m afraid, on the examination of the private finance that’s taking place.

In terms of the due diligence process that will commence upon us receiving all of the information, it will enable us to begin that process. We expect it to take place and be completed in approximately four to six weeks, which is a normal time frame for a project of this scale, upon which Cabinet will then be able to consider it.

As the Cabinet Secretary knows, I’ve been a strong supporter of this proposal all along, and whilst I do understand the necessity for doing proper due diligence in proposals of this kind, this is a transformational project. If it succeeds, then it’s going to completely transform the economy of Wales, certainly in the south-east and mid Wales. It’s important, I think, to point out that there isn’t actually any public money going into this development, apart from the £9 million that’s already been committed for development funds, but all that’s been sought is a guarantee of less than half the private capital that is going to be invested. The Government will actually be paid £3 million a year for that guarantee, so the Government is actually getting something in exchange, and the guarantee itself will not actually become executable until the assets are actually built on the site. So, there will be solid security, as and when the guarantee might, as we hope not, ever be called. Consequently, this is a very good deal, I think, for the Welsh Government, and for the people of Wales, and so he should give it as fair a wind as he possibly can.

Can I thank Neil Hamilton for his question, and for recognising that the deal that is on the table is certainly better than the one that was presented back in July? I think it justifies the position. I recognise they came under a lot of criticism back in July, but it justifies the position that was taken back then, when we were presented with a request for guarantees amounting to 83 per cent, which is more than £100 million more in guarantees than what we have been able to drive through with this deal. However, due diligence is required, as normal, as in every project of this type, to give us confidence that the investment, the potential guarantee drawdown, is something that the taxpayer is comfortable with, something that we are comfortable with. And, as I said in my answer to Adam Price, no investor should fear the due diligence process.

I thank the Cabinet Secretary.

The next item is questions to the Assembly Commission, and no questions have been tabled under this particular item.

And therefore the next item is the 90-second statements. Darren Millar.

Diolch, Lywydd. This coming Saturday, 11 February, marks the three hundredth anniversary of the birth of that greatest of Welsh hymn writers, William Williams of Pantycelyn. And it’s apt that his anniversary will fall on the very same day that Wales will be playing England in the cauldron of the Millennium Stadium, because, during that six nations game, there is no doubt whatsoever that the Welsh fans will be singing what is probably his most famous work, ‘Guide Me, O thou Great Jehovah’, with great gusto.

William Williams was more than Wales’s most famous hymn writer. He was also one of the greatest religious and literary figures that this country has ever produced. Along with Daniel Rowland and Howell Harris, Williams was one of the leading figures in the dawn of the Welsh Methodist revival, which dominated Welsh religious thinking and attitudes for much of the eighteenth century.

Born in 1717, Williams is often simply known as ‘Pantycelyn’, the name of the family farm on which he lived most of his adult life. His family were non-conformists, and he was educated locally, and then at a non-conformist academy near Talgarth. He intended to become a doctor, but, having heard Howell Harris preach in the churchyard in Talgarth in 1737, he underwent an immediate conversion experience and fell in love with his new-found saviour, Jesus Christ. He became fired with religious conviction.

Despite this non-conformist upbringing, Williams felt that he was being called to the priesthood of the established Anglican Church, and, in 1740, he was appointed curate to Theophilus Evans, a minister in charge of several rural Welsh parishes. But Williams was refused ordination as a priest because of his Methodist leanings.

He was a great preacher, and a great organiser of the Welsh Calvinistic Methodist tradition. So, when Welsh rugby fans sing out ‘Bread of Heaven’ this coming Saturday, they will be paying tribute to a remarkable and fascinating man.

Swansea City Supporters Trust. Firstly, I must declare an interest as a member of Swansea City Supporters Trust. Unfortunately in Britain, professional football clubs—especially at the top level—normally have a very large local fan base, but ownership of the club by one or more individuals, quite often from abroad. I know Cardiff City fans would recognise that situation.

Swansea City is different, because even though a foreign owner has over 50 per cent of the shares, the supporters trust owns over 20 per cent of the club. The supporters trust has one member on the club’s main board, an opportunity for the views of supporters to be raised in the club’s boardroom. The supporters trust has direct contact with supporters, and is representative of us.

With the supporters represented on the main board, Swansea City have avoided the arguments over kit colour, team name, club badge and ticket pricing that have beset other clubs. Direct supporter involvement is, I believe, crucial to keeping the football supporters and the owners working together. A club in the Premier League, owned partly by the supporters, is, as far as I am aware, unique. But, having a supporter representative on the main board is both unique and also is desired by supporters of other clubs.

This shared ownership stems from the dark days of Swansea City nearly going out of the football league. The supporters trust’s success owes much to the hard work and dedication of its officers and those who have served on the football club board. A team partly owned by its supporters, playing in the Premier League, is a huge success—one I hope continues into next season—and something that I hope will become more common in the future for other clubs.

On 6 February 1952, King George VI sadly passed away. Princess Elizabeth, next in line to the throne, returned home, stepping off the plane as our Queen. That was 65 years ago this week, and not a day has gone by that our sovereign has not put our country and its people first. She is our longest reigning monarch and the first of the United Kingdom to reach a Sapphire Jubilee—a mother, grandmother and great-grandmother to a family, many of whom have served our country valiantly during times of conflict. It’s an incredible reign that has seen her appoint 13 Prime Ministers, from Winston Churchill to Margaret Thatcher, and, of course, the Rt Hon Theresa May MP. She has undertaken state visits to 116 countries, to include those across the Commonwealth, with style, grace and elegance. She is patron to over 500 charities, having raised over £1.4 billion. Supreme Governor of the Church of England, she is loved the world over and no more so than here in the United Kingdom, and by all generations. Congratulations, Ma’am, and God save the Queen.

I didn’t intend following that, I have to say, but as one who preaches on a Sunday in non-conformist chapels, I was also going to pay tribute to William Williams Pantycelyn from Llandovery in Carmarthenshire. One of our main hymn writers, he was born 300 years ago to this coming Saturday. One of the leaders of the Methodist revival in Wales, he wrote some 820 Welsh hymns when the vast majority of the population were monolingually Welsh speaking, and some 120 English hymns: ‘Bread of Heaven’ or ‘Cwm Rhondda’ being among the most popular. Of course, that will be cried out in the Principality Stadium on Saturday.

A whole host of wonderful poetry exists within his Welsh hymns, such as,

Iesu, Iesu, ‘rwyt ti’n ddigon, / ‘Rwyt ti’n llawer mwy na’r byd’.

We will have all learnt that in Sunday school. And another:

Pererin wyf mewn anial dir,/ Yn crwydro yma a thraw’.

And the wonderful, when you are concerned about something or feeling a little depressed:

Mi dafla’ ‘maich oddi ar fy ngwar / Wrth deimlo dwyfol loes; / Euogrwydd fel mynyddoedd byd / Dry’n ganu wrth dy groes’.

So, this Saturday, whilst we sing out ‘Hen Wlad fy Nhadau’, ‘Calon Lân’ and, yes, ‘Bread of Heaven’, as we drive our rugby heroes forward to a deserved victory over visitors from the other side of Offa’s dyke, do recall the anniversary of William Williams Pantycelyn.

The next item on our agenda is the debate on Members’ legislative proposals. To move the first such proposal, Suzy Davies.

Diolch, Lywydd. Could I also thank the Assembly for the chance to be the first Member to make use of this new piece of business? I’d also like to thank my former office manager, Mark Major, who brought the whole subject to my attention when I first became an Assembly Member.

A six-year campaign began with a statement of opinion in 2011, seeking support for the mandatory teaching of emergency life-saving skills in school and then a short debate in which the present education Secretary, as well as Plaid and Labour Members, spoke in its favour. Support came from every party in the fourth Assembly, and it seems that every party in this fifth Assembly also supports the principle. I want to thank all of those of you who have already tabled your support for the proposal today, the core of which is the right to be trained to save a life. In so doing, you’re supporting a principle that has been fought for over many years.

The introduction of mandatory life-saving skills onto the school curriculum is supported by the British Heart Foundation, St John Ambulance, the British Red Cross, but also the College of Paramedics, the Royal College of Physicians, Cardiac Risk in the Young, British Cardiovascular Society Education, the Association for Physical Education, the NT—in England, anyway—Sudden Arrhythmic Death Syndrome UK, the Royal College of Nursing, the Arrhythmia Alliance UK, the British Medical Association, the Welsh ambulance service, the Atrial Fibrillation Association, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, the Royal Life Saving Society and many others. I’ve had e-mails of support and social media support for this for the last 48 hours. It’s been utterly amazing.

You are also supporting the wishes of parents and young people. The British Heart Foundation found that 86 per cent of UK parents want emergency and lifesaving skills taught in schools—it’s actually 88 per cent in Wales. Seventy-eight per cent of children themselves wanted to learn it in school, and 75 per cent of teachers, who already have a crowded curriculum, want this taught in our schools. You are also supporting the wishes of Labour MP Teresa Pearce. Ms Pearce had cross-party support for her Bill on a similar theme, but it was talked out—a process we don’t have here—by that infamous Conservative MP, Philip Davies. In this ongoing campaign, Cabinet Secretary, I wonder how comfortable you would find yourself to be on the same side of the argument as the infamous Conservative MP Philip Davies.

So, why legislation? Well, first of all, I want to congratulate all schools who have given their time voluntarily and used school time to give their children a chance to save lives. I want to congratulate those charities—I’ve mentioned some already—the public services, the military cadets, Heartstart and Reactive First Aid, who can provide training of all kinds, and charities like Cariad who help provide defibrillators. Hats off to Shoctober, Defibruary, Save a Life September, Staying Alive—you all remember Vinnie Jones on that one—defibrillators in old phone boxes, and all the awareness campaigns. This is excellent work and, without it, our poor survival rates for cardiac arrest outside the hospital environment would be even worse. Around 90 per cent of those victims will die—perhaps even more, according to one source—and even though most of these victims will have somebody with them when they suffer their event, they will still die. Without circulating blood, it takes only six minutes for a victim to have permanent brain damage. After 10 minutes, it’s basically too late. So, shouldn’t a child grow up with the right to know how to intervene—how to help save a life?

In 2013, only 20 per cent of children in England and Wales had had a minimum of one lifesaving skills lesson in the whole of their school life, and one lesson is nowhere near enough here. You can tell, because only 4 per cent of them had the confidence to intervene—4 per cent. Yet, 94 per cent of secondary schoolchildren said that they would be more confident if they had updated training relatively regularly. I wish nothing but the best for the Government’s cardiac plan, but if you can’t guarantee whole-population level uptake, competence and confidence, step one of that plan will fail because of the random occurrence of cardiac arrest. And on the basis that you say we still need a mapping exercise to know who provides CPR; that you still have to go to page two of Google to get anywhere near the ambulance service’s list of defibrillators; and that Donaldson’s curriculum change is some time away, I don’t think we have time for good will and good work to give us that whole-population level change.

Eight thousand people in Wales will have a heart attack outside a hospital setting this year, and most of them will die because of bystander ignorance or fear. So, who has that whole-population uptake, competence and confidence in first aid skills—and it’s not just CPR? Well, let’s have a look at the screens: Norway, 95 per cent; Germany, 80 per cent; Austria, 80 per cent; Iceland, 75 per cent. Even France is at 40 per cent. Now how did that happen? Because of a legislative obligation to receive mandatory lifesaving skills training at various periods in the lives of those citizens. In Denmark and Switzerland, you can’t even get your driving licence unless you’ve done this training. And which countries have the highest rate of survival for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest? Some of them are at well over 50 per cent—that’s compared to our 3 to 10 per cent. Well, I’m sure that you can guess.

This legislative proposal is not just about cardiac arrest, about CPR and defibrillators; I want our children growing up with the confidence to intervene when they encounter a person who is bleeding, unconscious, fitting, choking, who’s been electrocuted, or shows signs of drowning. A new scheme in the poorest part of northern Bangladesh has acted on this last point, and nine-year-olds there are having to learn CPR and how to save a life after a potential drowning. And these are just proposals, of course. They’re not fully developed, but they’re certainly not difficult or expensive to deliver. They don’t clash with Professor Donaldson’s suggestion that legislation should be used to define a broad set of duties. You could start consulting on these tomorrow. So, Members, I think this is an occasion where the Norway model definitely is appropriate for Wales, and I recommend these proposals to you and to the people of Wales.

May I remind Members that their contributions under this item should be three minutes? Dai Lloyd.

Diolch yn fawr, Lywydd. Can I commend Suzy Davies for her initiative, and I wholeheartedly support the intention of getting cardiopulmonary resuscitation on the school curriculum and to be more widely acknowledged and trained for the general population. Also, we need defibrillators everywhere and people confident and not afraid to use them. Because that’s what I find, as a general practitioner—I’ve been unfortunate enough to do CPR on a number of occasions over the years, occasionally successfully, most often not successfully, and, with the use of defibrillators, what you find is that lots of people in the out-of-hospital situation are afraid to use a defibrillator. Get away from being afraid: with modern defibrillators, you cannot do any damage. Somebody who’s collapsed in cardiac arrest in front of you has basically died—you can only do good, even if the success rate is only eight per cent. That’s eight per cent of people who would have just died. So, my message is: get with it, people, don’t be afraid and you can’t do any damage; you can only transform a life. Diolch yn fawr.

I’m delighted to support this initiative. I’d just like to talk about the strength of the voluntary sector in this area, because there is so much to draw upon that I think makes this proposal even more viable in terms of improving policy in this area. Can I talk about St John Cymru in particular? I’m proud to be associated with that marvellous charity, and I am indeed wearing their tie, as a very observant leader of the opposition has just spotted. Just to mention a couple of their schemes: the young lifesaver scheme is aimed at children in after-school programmes, and it’s often delivered by a teacher who has been specifically trained. An estimate that’s been made by St John is that around 130,000 accidents happen in UK schools, and they offer a one-day course for teachers, so that they can help children who have suffered an accident, as another area where vital work is being done. And it’s also high-tech—there’s a free bilingual app on first aid; don’t ask me how you use it, but I’m sure those that know will be able to advise.

St John are just one of many charities and non-governmental organisations that do valuable work in this area. I think many of us are aware of the British Heart Foundation’s CPR training programme, which is available in the workplace. We’ve had it here in the Assembly. I’ve gone on it, Presiding Officer, and I’m pleased to say the dummy survived. And I think we all should undertake that training; it’s really, really important. The figures that we saw earlier on the bar graphs speak for themselves, because if you get trained for the workplace, you also have those skills if you’re at home, if you’re on public transport, whatever. It’s essential. The need to install defibrillators in main public places, again, is really, really important. And if you’re trained and you’re out shopping, you’re in a shopping mall, whatever, you will be one of the people that could use it. And, as Dai Lloyd so poignantly said, if you don’t intervene, the outcome is pretty certain. You need to have the confidence to intervene. So, I do think, Presiding Officer, this Bill, if it could be brought forward, would be of great benefit to the people of Wales.

I’d like to thank Suzy for proposing that we legislate to ensure that everyone in Wales is provided with the basic skills to save a life. Yesterday, we discussed the heart conditions delivery plan in this Chamber, during which I highlighted the fact that, each month in Wales, 720 people will go to hospital with a heart attack and, sadly, 340 of those people will die. Without CPR and defibrillation within the first 10 minutes, the chances of surviving a cardiac arrest are virtually nil. Given that over 80 per cent of cardiac arrests take place in the home and the number of red category ambulance responses that take longer than eight minutes to arrive, it is vital that we have people on hand with the skills to save a life. It takes minutes to learn CPR, and using a defibrillator can be taught in a single morning. Despite this, how many of us can honestly say that we have the skills to save a life?

I fully support Suzy’s campaign, and would like to see every child in Wales spend just one morning a year learning how to perform CPR. We could also explore other options for improving the number of people equipped with lifesaving skills. Should CPR and emergency firs aid form part of learning to drive? Should having these skills be a requirement for having a public service vehicle licence? Can we insist that all front-of-house staff in public buildings know CPR and how to use a defibrillator? These are the considerations we must make if we are serious about ensuring that as many people as possible have the skills they need to save a life. We are very lucky in this building as many of the security staff and ushers are trained in first aid, we have a number of automated external defibrillators, and our staff have responded to emergencies both on and off the estate. People aren’t so lucky in other parts of Wales.

I urge Members to support Suzy’s call to ensure that lifesavings skills training is available to all and that AEDs are made more widely available in Wales. By taking these small steps, we can ensure that chances of surviving a cardiac arrest, whether at home or in a public place, are greatly improved. I would also urge everyone in this Chamber to learn CPR if they have not done so already. Diolch yn fawr.

In very few words I will also say that I support this proposal. We’ve already heard about the importance of first aid in emergency situations. We know how important it is that equipment such as defibrillators and first aid kits are available.

The recent survey by St John—and we’ve heard reference to this already—tells a very clear story, in that 69 per cent of schoolchildren say that they wouldn’t know how to treat a member of the family or a friend of theirs if they found themselves in a situation where that was necessary; 72 per cent of people say that they would wish to have those skills; and 83 per cent say that they would be far more confident in trying to save a life or in caring for an individual if they had been given that education.

If I could just turn to some comments made by the Welsh Government in response to the BBC, saying that pupils do learn about emergency care techniques already as part of personal and social education. Now, those comments suggest to me that there is a deal of difference between what the Government believes is happening and what’s really happening in our schools. Research demonstrates that there is dissatisfaction in terms of what is provided at present, and in addition to the fact that the pupils themselves say that they don’t have the necessary skills and that they would like to learn the skills, teachers, too, according to research and surveys, say that they lack confidence in terms of the skills that they are expected to pass on to their pupils.

But I will conclude with this question, which I would ask of any Minister listening and any official, too: if you were going for a walk one day and suffered cardiac arrest, and the only person nearby is a 15-year-old, let’s say, would you prefer for that 15-year-old to have gone through an inadequate system of learning certain skills as part of personal and social education, or would you prefer for that 15-year-old to have gone through an education system that would have taught him or her the correct skills, with that provision based in legislation? I know what my response would be, and that’s why I support this legislative proposal.

I carefully cut the grape in half and I fed one half very carefully to my precious child. She sucked out the contents and then proceeded to choke on the skin. I was utterly terrified. My CPR training—learnt when I was a rescue diver, in the days when I was younger and fitter—completely went out of my head. Thankfully my husband was present and he saved our little girl’s life. Today she is 14. I can tell you now, she does not and has not learnt any lifesaving skills at school, but she’s learnt them from her mummy and her daddy, and she will grow up to be an adult who, perhaps, won’t panic if the same thing happens to her—if her child were to choke on a grape.

I utterly support this campaign, as a mum and as a parent. I also support it with a bit of an education hat on, because I believe really firmly that we need to build resilient children. This is a debate that Lynne Neagle will be bringing to the Chamber later on today. When they’re at school, the more little skills we can give them, the more little bits added into that jigsaw puzzle, it builds confidence, builds resilience, builds determination. I think that this is something that we can easily add into the curriculum. I’ve heard before the cries of, ‘The curriculum is already really crowded’. But it’s about putting in priorities and it’s about really cleaving to Donaldson’s new six strands, and this would fit very well into those six strands. It’s a skill that, once you have learnt it—providing the panic doesn’t set in—you can use time and time again. But I would emphasise that we also need to build in constant re-teaching. It’s been a long time since I had to do CPR on anyone and I wouldn’t mind learning again. I think this is a wonderful idea and I do hope that the Government will allow Suzy Davies the opportunity to take this forward and explore it in more detail. Thank you.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Well-being and Sport, Vaughan Gething.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am pleased to have the opportunity to set out again what we are already doing to improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, which includes many of the aspects in Suzy Davies’s private Member’s Bill proposal. However, whilst I do support the ambitions in the proposal in principle, I can’t support the motion as I don’t believe that imposing a statutory duty is the right approach to take at this time in delivering improvements across Wales. In particular, the impact on the school curriculum is not one that the Government can support, and I’ll hopefully explain that in some helpful detail.

I set out in my written statement in December the excellent work that took place across schools last October, when approximately 17,000 children were trained with a variety of life-saving skills. That type of approach can work well in our school system using the existing platform of personal and social education. But, looking further ahead to when we do have a new curriculum following the Donaldson process, the best evidence has shown us that using legislation in the way the motion urges us to has led to an overloaded and complicated system. We should not dismiss that argument out of hand. Donaldson was very clear about this. We want to use legislation sparingly, and I do really understand the well-meant intent, that the motion is seeking to add life-saving skills as a mandatory part of the curriculum. On this, I don’t agree with Suzy Davies’s view that this would not undermine the approach we are taking that flows from the Donaldson review. I really do think that those of us who support this significant review, and the prospect of a coherent curriculum cannot then cut across that Donaldson approach by making discrete bids for mandatory additions to the new curriculum before it’s actually been completed and implemented.

Now, work has already commenced in developing an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest plan, which will look at ways to improve CPR and access to defibrillation—common themes in the debate today. We’re already starting to make progress in Wales, particularly in relation to access to defibrillators through the register, with over 2,000 registered since I launched ‘Be a defib hero’. That campaign started in February 2015. We should also make the most of the similarities between the emergency services and their shared commitment to keep people and communities safe. Almost all fire appliances now have defibrillators, and firefighters are trained in life-saving skills. I’ve agreed with the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children to a set of priorities to help focus fire and rescue service support for the NHS. The priorities that we’ll be working to deliver in 2017-18 include support for an emergency medical response.

It is, though, worth noting that, in Wales, following the changes that we made to our ambulance response model, the average ambulance response time to a cardiac arrest in Wales is now between four and five minutes. That’s a significant improvement because we’ve refocused our ability to get people to those really life critical calls. Now, for the out- of-hospital cardiac arrest plan to become embedded, I think that we do need to build on that momentum that we’re already making prior to taking a decision about introducing a mandatory requirement. That plan is being developed with partners across the NHS family, emergency services and the third sector. As with other Members, too, I want to recognise and welcome the work of the campaign in the third sector, with a wide range of volunteers and the training they provide. I know that every Member has the opportunity for them and their staff to receive first aid training from a number of different organisations, and I recognise the work they are already doing. They are very much part of producing our new plan and seeing it through to reality. We do recognise that life-saving skills and emergency aid procedures are clearly extremely important, and the Welsh Government fully supports the work of those organisations in raising awareness and helping people acquire those skills.

Last week, as Members have mentioned, the Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust launched their latest defibrillator campaign, aimed at raising awareness of what a defibrillator is, where to find the nearest one, and what support is available to obtain one. I hope Members will take the opportunity to support that campaign and, in particular, to listen to the words of Dai Lloyd that, with modern defibrillators, they talk you through what you need to do and, if someone is in cardiac arrest—you’re absolutely right—you can only help. I hope that’s a message people do take on board and take seriously.

I do accept that it’s of the utmost importance that the population of Wales is given the opportunity—every opportunity—to survive cardiac arrest and are provided with knowledge and resources, like defibrillators, that will enable the efforts being made to save lives. We are committed to working with organisations across Wales to achieve this, but, at this point, I’m not persuaded that this requires legislation. Now, if this were a Stage 1 debate, then the Government would oppose the motion. However, the Government will abstain today and backbenchers in my party have a free vote. But, in abstaining, the Government wishes to signal its support for continuing to improve life-saving skills and our view that legislation is a potential future option where it is clear that it is either the best way forward or the only way to make further progress. But we will continue to make progress with our out-of-hospital cardiac arrest plan. We want to see what comes from that and then we’ll continue to work with stakeholders, including Members in this place, regardless of what party they’re in, to try and save lives and review what our next steps should be as we move forward in trying to improve lives and, of course, to save lives.

I call on Suzy Davies to reply to the debate.

First of all, can I please say thank you to everyone who’s supporting this today, and thank you also to the Cabinet Secretary, because I’m not against what he’s planning to do? What I’m saying is it’s going to take way too long. It takes two hours to train a child to save a life; it takes 10 minutes to kill a cardiac arrest victim. So, I’m disappointed that you haven’t been able to show support for this today. Dai Lloyd is quite right: nobody in Wales should be dying of ignorance or fear, and that’s what lack of population-level life-saving skills could mean for Wales. However, I’m determined to do my little bit before you all leave, and so, if you’re happy, we’re just going to do a little bit of life-saving training now. Thank you.

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

The next item on the agenda is the debate on the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s report on its inquiry into youth work, and I call on the committee Chair to move the motion—Lynne Neagle.

Thank you, Llywydd. I’m very pleased to open this debate on the first report of the Children, Young People and Education Committee’s inquiry into youth work in Wales. I’d like to place on record my thanks to the 1,500 young people from across Wales who gave their views to the committee. Their evidence was very clear that youth services are very important to many young people and can make a significant difference to their lives.

I was also delighted to see the positive response that this inquiry received from stakeholders across Wales. We were very grateful for their honesty in helping us, as a committee, understand what the challenges are, and for their enthusiasm in engaging with the committee’s work.

I’d particularly like to thank the Council for Wales of Voluntary Youth Services for their support in bringing so many of those people together at our excellent round table event with stakeholders. The commitment and enthusiasm of those who attended made a real impression on me, and I’m sure that the same is true of other committee members.

Youth work is genuinely life-changing, not just for the children and young people but for the countless staff and volunteers who make it happen every day across Wales. Members will be familiar with services in their own constituencies and know how they can shape young citizens of Wales and set them up with skills for life.

Through the course of our inquiry, we had evidence of young people who have benefited from youth services, and also those who have had them removed. One young person who had previously accessed services said:

‘Without youth workers I wouldn’t be the person I am today… it is a young person’s right to a safe space and somewhere to have fun, play and participate.’

Another told us that ‘I feel like they’—youth services—

‘are really good for people with fewer friends as it gives a chance to make friends.’

And another said that it has:

‘Given me so much confidence, experiences and life skills that I would not have been able to gain anywhere else.’

These were just some of the positive experiences that were shared with us. When youth services are in place, they can really change lives.

I want to thank the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language for his consideration of our findings. It was very welcome to see the Minister broadly accept all 10 recommendations made by the committee. Our findings were very clear: when youth work disappears from a young person’s life, the impact is considerable. Whilst cuts in funding are not exclusive to youth services, in a difficult financial climate for local authorities it can often be youth services first to bear the brunt. The total amount of expenditure on youth services by local authorities, including funding through the revenue support grant, has reduced by almost 25 per cent over the last four years. Evidence from the voluntary sector suggested they had also faced severe reductions in funding, and that this has had a considerable impact, with intensified competition for scarce resource.

The committee recognised the difficult decisions faced by local authorities. However, we feel that developing youth services is an essential investment in the future of the nation’s young people. These services are often a catalyst to help young people develop skills and confidence and make better choices in their lives. Whilst their impact may not often be apparent in the short term, young people told us of the longer term impact services can have to help them achieve their potential.

During the course of the inquiry, the committee identified several key issues that needed urgent and radical action by the Welsh Government. These were a lack of strategic direction and leadership from the Welsh Government, the sector and young people not being sufficiently involved in developing policies, and the need for greater collaboration between the statutory and voluntary sectors to make the most of scarce resource. Deputy Presiding Officer, an area of major concern was in the balancing act that local authorities faced funding open-access services and targeted interventions for specific groups who require additional support. We were told that the diversion of funding to target young people who are not in education, employment or training has posed a serious risk to open-access services. We also heard that this shift fundamentally undermines the principle that young people’s engagement with youth services must be based on their own choice rather than a requirement that is placed upon them.

Contributors to our inquiry also expressed concern that the impact of the reduction in funding is being felt disproportionately by certain groups of young people. One example that was cited by many contributors was the impact on Welsh language provision. We felt strongly that the Minister must address the need for more strategic and joint working between the statutory and voluntary sectors. We feel this is a significant barrier to delivering a universal youth work offer. It is also preventing the best use of increasingly scarce resources.

I was pleased to see that the Minister has already committed to refreshing the statutory guidance in place and, in doing so, undertaking a review of the current strategy. It is also welcome that the Welsh Government will develop and publish a detailed action plan by March 2017. The committee was clear that an action plan is necessary to translate the high-level policy ambitions into reality. Deputy Presiding Officer, an updated youth work strategy is a step in the right direction, and I hope it will create the much-needed framework for local authorities and the third sector to work together effectively. This will be a major step towards creating the service that our young people are entitled to.

As part of developing that common purpose for youth service delivery, the committee recommended the Minister develop a national model for youth work. We heard compelling evidence making the case for a national model to drive forward youth work policy and implementation. This is something we believe would create greater collaboration, reduce duplication and enable better workforce development opportunities. The Minister has responded positively to this key recommendation, and we look forward to hearing further detail as plans develop as part of the refresh of the national guidance.

Members recognised the importance of localism in designing services around the needs of communities, and we are confident this would achievable while striving for greater consistency. In the vein of driving greater collaboration, the committee were eager to see an effective mapping exercise taking place to understand where gaps in provision occur. We hope Welsh Government will further consider the use of local sufficiency assessments taking place at local authority level and informing the national approach. Making sure that all young people in Wales are able to access well-resourced youth services is crucial to support them to reach their full potential.

I want to conclude with a striking comment from a young person, who told us:

‘There should be more of them across Wales. Need more money to grow more services—too many being cut by councils. Not all my friends can attend them as they live in the sticks. Youth workers are amazing and they really help us—they are life-savers.’

I think you will agree that this makes the need for radical change all the more real. In closing my statement today, I would just like to thank again the huge numbers of young people who took the time to respond to our survey. Members were so moved by the enormous contribution made by people who work in youth services across Wales. I very much look forward to Members’ contributions this afternoon and to revisiting this vital issue regularly with the committee in the course of this Assembly. Thank you.

I’m pleased to take part in this debate, and I want to commend the Chair and the committee clerks for all the work that they have done in helping to produce what I think has been a very robust report, with a list of very clear recommendations directed at the Government. I was very pleased to see the Minister’s response to the report. I think it is fair to say that we had a few tussles with the Minister during the course of the inquiry, and we were a little surprised by some of the actions that were taken while we were still receiving evidence as part of the inquiry. Notwithstanding that, there has been a positive outcome from the inquiry, and I’m very pleased that we’ve managed to establish that.

Like the Chair, I, too, was impressed at the engagement that we received from the voluntary sector, in particular, and the way in which they provided some access to the direct views of young people. I am very much hoping that the establishment of a youth parliament in Wales will help to facilitate the views of young people, not just to our committee but to other committees in the future. I think we ought to put on record our thanks to the campaign for the youth parliament, which, of course, has again been here in the Assembly today.

We know that statutory youth services have been pressure, under some financial pressure, but what has impressed me, I think, during the course of the inquiry, is to see the different ways that local authorities have been helping to meet their statutory obligations. It’s quite clear that some local authorities have focused very much on local authority directly provided youth services, whilst others have used their limited resources, and their shrinking resources, to invest in the capacity of the voluntary sector in order to aid them in the provision of youth work. Clearly, some local authorities have done a good job in helping to grow the capacity of the voluntary sector, whilst others appear to have pretty much ignored the voluntary sector to a large extent, and I think that that’s been quite disappointing. I think this issue of trying to map the services that are available was a critical issue that we identified. It was very clear from all of the evidence that we received that there was no detailed understanding of the services that were available around the country, particularly from the many voluntary organisations such as the Scouts, faith groups and even sports organisations, which may be delivering aspects of statutory youth work that we’re not always able to see. I think that the key recommendation in the report is that one that seeks to ensure that local authorities have a very clear understanding on the ground in their local areas as to the youth services that are available for young people to engage in.

The other big concern I think that I had in receiving the evidence was that it was very clear that, because of the diminished budgets, there’s an increased focus on small groups of young people with particular problems, and that that was causing the other young people to suffer, because there was no universal offer available to them in their localities. I’m very pleased that the Minister has given a very clear commitment to wanting to ensure that there is a universal offer available and that all young people can access youth services that they might be able to benefit from.

I know that we had a debate within the committee on this, but I don’t think that the level of spending on youth services necessarily reflects the quality of the youth service and the availability of the youth services within each local authority. So, whilst there were arguments around whether there should be hypothecation of the RSG in relation to youth services to local councils, I’m not sure—I think that was a bit of a red herring, to be honest, because I know that, in the two local authorities that my constituency straddles, we’ve got excellent provision, but quite low levels of spending compared to the amount allocated in the RSG. That’s because of the way those two local authorities worked in partnership with the voluntary sector and with the third sector to provide high-quality youth services.

So, in summary, Deputy Presiding Officer, I’m very pleased with the outcome of the report. I think it gets the Government onto the right page in terms of its approach to youth services, and hopefully we’ll see a universal offer across Wales and we’ll have a better understanding in future years of the services that are available from those other partners that are providing them across the country.

I do think that it’s about time that we as an Assembly discussed this sector of youth services, because the sector has told us that they do feel isolated and undervalued, and have done over these past few years. When you ask people, everyone agrees that youth work is a positive thing, but maybe they don’t understand the real importance of the sector and the feeling that that isn’t perhaps reflected necessarily in the work that the Government and local authorities and others do.

Now, we know that youth work is there to empower young people, to give them participative experiences and expressive experiences, and educational experiences. At its best, youth work creates better citizens, more confident citizens, who are prepared with life skills and are more resilient individuals—much of what is discussed in the context of Donaldson and curriculum reform within formal education. Youth work does much of that. Certainly, it adds value to formal education and also engages with some who have turned their back on formal education, and that is an extremely important service in and of itself.

It’s an excellent example of preventative spend; investing at an early stage to avoid costs later on, from a social perspective, a health perspective, and from the perspective of the justice system, and so on and so forth. As we heard from the Chair, one of the most significant findings in this report, as far as I can see, is that we have opened the door on the serious decline that there’s been in terms of funding and staffing provision in Wales over the past few years. The expenditure budgeted from the RSG to local authorities for youth services has reduced by almost 25 per cent over the past four years. Now, that’s not the only area where there have been reductions, but that, in my view, it’s one of the most significant. It isn’t unique to youth work, but the impact of that on young people is inevitably going to be very substantial indeed.

There’s been a decline of 20 per cent in staffing capacity in just a year, and a fall in registered members for the provision of local authority youth work—from 20 per cent of young people down to 17 per cent in the two years since 2013. And CWVYS, of course, the Council for Wales of Voluntary Youth Services—and I should declare an interest as one of the honorary presidents of that organisation—say that some 30 per cent of their members don’t anticipate continuing beyond the next financial year in the current climate.

So, given statistics of that kind, we must realise that the youth service is at a precipice, and that we need urgent action. And this report is very timely indeed. We have a relatively new Government now, certainly a new Minister, and the committee is now providing guidance and recommendations in terms of some the reforms that we believe are needed in developing the sector. We certainly need to restate the importance of youth services and give the recognition of its important and central contribution to Welsh life, and to reflect that in Government priorities, the priorities of local government and society more widely.

There is a commitment from the Minister, of course, to open-access bilingual provision that should be universally available. It’s a statement of intent that is encouraging. It’s a very promising starting point, but extremely ambitious, and delivering that will be extremely challenging. But, as we’ve heard as a committee, there is a postcode lottery in terms of provision. The access that you have to services is too often dependent upon your postcode, and in order to overturn that, we certainly need to take action on some of the recommendations made by the committee, as outlined by the committee Chair.

We certainly need to bring the maintained sector and the voluntary sector closer together. There needs to be more collaboration, not just on the ground, but also at a strategic level, regionally and nationally.As we’ve already heard, we need to review the national youth work strategy. We need to reform the statutory plans and have a detailed action plan. We need better engagement between Government and the sector, particularly through the youth work reference group, and certainly, there is talk about having an accountability framework for local authority use of funding for youth work through the revenue support grant. And through all of this, of course, we must ensure, too, that the voice of young people is central to this discussion in all aspects of the provision of youth services.

There is far more in the report, of course, and there will be opportunities over the next few months to start to tackle some of these most important challenges and create a foundation to build a national youth service of the highest quality that will be accessible to all in all parts of the country and in whatever language they choose. The young people of Wales and wider society should insist on that and deserve no less.

Thank you very much. Julie Morgan.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you for calling me to speak in this very important debate about the report from the Children, Young People and Education Committee into youth work.

I found it very concerning indeed to hear from people in the youth work field about how the provisions for young people have diminished so much. I personally believe, and I think it was the belief of all the committee, that youth work is absolutely vital because it does reach people outside the formal school setting. I think we all know that, particularly, the teenage years are very stressful and difficult times for young people.

I was reminded of that when we noted that this week is Children’s Mental Health Week. There have been figures from the NSPCC that show the growth of mental health problems amongst young people, which have been shown in the number of calls to Childline. It seems children and teenagers aged 12 to 15 make up a third of the calls that are received, and girls are almost seven times more likely to seek help than boys. I think we’ve all heard about the great concerns that many girls have about body image in particular. Those are just illustrative of the difficult issues that children and young people have to grapple with at this time.

So, it’s absolutely and vitally important that they have the opportunity to have contact with skilled professionals, really, because that’s what youth workers are, in an informal setting, where these issues can be raised in a non-threatening way. So, I think it’s absolutely essential that we put more impetus into the youth services.

In my own area, I can bear witness to the reduction in services. At one time, there was a full-scale, five-day-a-week youth club operating in the youth buildings in the grounds of Whitchurch High School. This has now been reduced to one evening a week, run by the YMCA in the Ararat church. I’m very grateful to the voluntary sector and to the Ararat church for providing this service, but it’s only one night a week and it’s hugely oversubscribed. There’s no doubt—you have to accept the fact that the service for our young people actually has diminished. When the proposals came to change the service, I had quite a number of meetings with the young people involved and they said they just wanted somewhere where they could go, somewhere where there was no pressure on them and somewhere where they could have fun. I am very concerned, as several Members have mentioned, about the diminishing services for open access, because I think it is the entitlement of every child and every young person to have the opportunity to go somewhere where they aren’t going because they have a particular issue or problem, but is open for everyone to go. Hopefully, in those circumstances, if they do have particular issues or problems, those can be helped to be addressed.

I wanted to mention in particular the Scouts and the Guides, because in the inquiry the Scouts and the Guides were mentioned as providing youth work. I’d like at this point, really, to use the opportunity to pay tribute to the Second Llandaff Scout group who are very strong operators in Cardiff North. They’ve been the occupants of a church hall in Llandaff North for many years. They’re actually under threat of losing their premises because the land is being sold. They’ve just had another three-month extension to try to raise the extra £100,000 to buy the premises. They’ve already—it’s a small group—raised a staggering £150,000 through the efforts of dedicated volunteers, which I think is absolutely amazing. So, I wanted to pay tribute to them during this debate today, but I can say that the work they do with the young people in the area, many of whom come from disadvantaged homes, is really absolutely tremendous.

I think it’s absolutely vital that the Welsh Government gives more direction to the youth service. Looking at the evidence that we received, I do feel that there is a danger that it is withering away in the way that we’ve always known it. I hope that the Minister, as a result of our report, will give a renewed impetus to this service. We certainly need that in this area. I think that the other very important issue is to give young people a voice in the service. Several speakers have already mentioned that. But I hope with the new shaping of the service, if that is what will happen, that young people will be consulted about how the service should turn out and that they should be a pivotal part of developing the service.

In conclusion, I think we all felt it was an absolutely vital service. We can’t let it wither away. We know that there are pressures on all the services within the local authority, but we have got a lot of goodwill in the voluntary sector and it’s absolutely essential that we get the voluntary sector and the statutory sector working together effectively.

I would like to thank and congratulate the organisations and specialists who gave evidence to the committee during the inquiry for their willingness to say it as they see it. Stakeholders in both the statutory and voluntary sectors talk about a lack of leadership and strategic direction from the Welsh Government. The Council for Wales of Voluntary Youth Services—CWVYS—reports that 30 per cent of its members don’t think they will be able to exist beyond this next financial year. The Minister’s response to comments made by CWVYS was to attempt to undermine the credibility of CWVYS and cast their view as a minority one. Well, the organisation’s members include the British Red Cross, Mencap, NUS Wales, Race Council Cymru, Alcohol Concern, Police Youth Volunteers, the Scouts, Shelter and many other brilliant and well-respected organisations. They represent the interests of far more people in the sector than a single AM does. Well, regardless of what the Minister thinks of these organisations, they’re saying that the strategy is wrong.

Sadly, in terms of deciding the future of youth provision, the Minister cannot be dismissed as easily as he will attempt to dismiss the comments of organisations like CWVYS. He says there is a national youth work strategy and funding allocated for its implementation. Well, allocating funding and coming up with a posh document isn’t the same as co-ordinating its implementation in statutory and voluntary sectors across Wales. The views expressed by the Minister and the organisations are so different that it is tempting to assume that either the Minister doesn’t communicate with these stakeholders, hasn’t listened or is in denial. The report recommends that the Minister must harness the expertise and understanding of the principal youth officers group and CWVYS. I would urge him to work with those groups to improve youth work across Wales.

The report goes on to identify a need for Welsh Government to better understand the levels of provision across both sectors in Wales, effectively exposing that the Welsh Government may not be entirely sure as to which youth services are on offer or where. The Welsh Government has overseen a reduction in youth service funding by almost 25 per cent over the last four years, a reduction in registered members of youth work provision, from 20 per cent of young people in 2013-14 to 17 per cent of young people in 2015-16, and local authorities are reporting the loss of 148 full-time equivalent staff across the statutory sector in 2015-16.

The Welsh Government may claim in their own defence that the funds sent over from England aren’t sufficient. But it’s a question of priorities, and I would certainly question whether the Welsh Government has its priorities in the right order here. The report expresses the concern that there is a lack of accountability for the use of funds allocated to local authorities via the revenue support grant, and states that the Minister must ensure that mechanisms are in place to hold local authorities to account for the use of those funds for youth work. I would be interested to hear whether the Minister will implement this, or provide proposals regarding how he will implement it.

The Welsh Local Government Association has called into question whether Welsh Government statistics on the use of funding through the revenue support grant are reliable. This is a particular worry. If the Welsh Government doesn’t ensure that they obtain the right data, what they say about youth work strategies is potentially meaningless. There’s no way of knowing whether local authorities are spending money on other things, and no-one is accountable.

So, to recap, we have a Minister who dismisses much of what the stakeholders have to say, doesn’t seem to know where and what the current provision is, and is possibly using questionable data. We and the people of Wales simply cannot give any credibility to what he says on this important issue. Decent youth provision can transform lives and change young people’s futures. Every youngster should have access to youth services, if they wish to avail themselves of them. My big question is, therefore, whether the Minister will implement the recommendations of this report, or otherwise act upon it. Thank you.

Speaking as the youngest member of the committee—[Laughter.] These things are all relative, you know—I don’t claim to have any special insights, other than what we learned from the inquiry. And I agree with the Chair, with Lynne Neagle, that that stakeholder event was a great thing, a real chance to tap into the thoughts and the experiences of those people delivering those services, and it was a really important part of the whole process.

It was my first inquiry, and I’ve got a copy of the Minister’s response, and he’s accepted—or accepted in principle—all of the recommendations. And I don’t know whether that happens all the time, but it seems like a good thing. Where does it go next?

I’d like to focus on one specific recommendation, which is recommendation 8. And I’m very pleased that the Minister’s accepted that one in principle, which asks the Minister to develop an accountability framework for local authorities’ use of funds for youth work, via the revenue support grant. And it isn’t agreeing to hypothecate funding, as other Members have already noted. But what it does say is that the Government has begun the process to undertake a review of all these youth work funding streams to identify the true impact, and to support future thinking for youth work in Wales.

And my mind turned to youth work in my constituency, and Julie Morgan’s mentioned open access—well, in Senghenydd—where Julie just told me that’s where she’s originally from—the Senghenydd youth drop-in centre, was visited by the Minister, and is an open-access youth group, and it’s massively important, but also facing a very, very uncertain immediate future. And given the changes that are likely to happen with regard to Communities First—and I know there’s been criticisms of Communities First for the funds not going where they’re supposed to go; I understand that there’s been criticism in a minority of cases—I suspect a good deal of youth work, particularly there at SYDIC, has been partly funded by overspill from Communities First.

So, given that the Minister has proposed to consider the changing nature—sorry, to consider the future thinking for youth work in Wales, and the Cabinet Secretary for communities is looking at the changing nature of resilient communities, I’d like the Minister to particularly consider that impact. What will be in that review that is recommended in recommendation 8 and what will be the impact of the Welsh Government’s new resilient communities policy? I think there must be—there must be—an overlap so that youth work doesn’t suffer as a result of any changes that take place.

But what I’d say, from my experience, is that the Minister’s taken a hugely constructive approach, as seems to be expected of this Minister, which is great, and I look forward to seeing what happens next after the recommendations have been made.

Can I first of all thank Lynne Neagle for presenting the report and the committee for the work that they’ve done? It was clearly a very wide-ranging inquiry and the contributions here today, I think, setting out the work that’s been done have been quite exemplary, so thanks everybody for that. In many respects, I guess the whole thrust of the report is probably neatly summed up by the opening paragraph, which you alluded to, Lynne, when you talked about one of the comments from the contributors, talking about youth workers as life-savers. I think that’s probably worth just repeating, because it’s on that particular aspect that I wanted to primary focus my contribution this afternoon.

First of all, I’d like to comment on the challenges faced by our youth services, as that has a direct impact on the areas that I want to talk about. While I don’t want to rehearse again the arguments about the impact that Tory austerity policies have had on Wales and on our public services and our communities, the continual reduction in funding to the Welsh Assembly has inevitably had an impact on the way in which these services have been funded.

At this point, can I just take a moment to commend the finance and local government Secretary, Mark Drakeford, for the work that he has done in delivering a settlement for local government this year, which sees an increase in funding for the first time since 2013-14, despite the overall pressures on Welsh Government finances? However, you know, we cannot escape the fact that the overall cuts in funding to local authorities have left them with, not just difficult decisions, but actually sometimes nigh on impossible decisions.

I’m very grateful to the Member for taking the intervention. You weren’t on the inquiry and you didn’t take part in it, but one thing that was absolutely evident was that there was no direct correlation, actually, to the quality of youth services on the ground and the amount that’s being spent on them by local authorities, as I indicated in my remarks earlier. Conwy is a local authority, for example, that has a very low rate of spending, and yet the services are actually very high-quality because they’ve embedded them within the voluntary sector and supported the capacity of that sector to provide them.

And I’m sure that there are examples of that, and I don’t doubt what the Member is saying, but I think, as a general rule, if you keep starving a service of funds, then inevitably it begins to impact, and I would say that there are more examples of the opposite than the kind of examples that the Member refers to. But it is about local authorities having to prioritise, and there’s no getting away from that. Of course, it’s not just about the services that are directly provided by local authorities—as we know, many third sector providers rely heavily on the funding that they also get from local authorities and that’s also been the subject of cuts that they’ve had to face.

If I could just take a moment to talk to you about some of the organisations in my own constituency. We have some incredible originations and schemes, such as the Forsythia Youth Project and the Dowlais Engine House to name but two. As Hefin David has already mentioned, these receive significant amounts of funding through the Communities First programme. That, to a large extent, has plugged the financial gap from local authorities and the money made available to them. So, while I’m not today going to open the debate about Communities First, because I know that the Minister responsible for that is going to be making a statement in the near future, I have to say that, if Communities First funding is to go or is to be phased out, then it’s crucial that we look at ways that youth schemes, like the ones that I’ve mentioned, continue. And I ask myself why that is so crucial. Well, I’m absolutely in no doubt whatsoever that if it were not for the likes of those services, provided by some of the projects like the ones that I’ve mentioned, many of the young people served by them would end up roaming the streets. They’d then be engaging in anti-social behaviour, possibly falling into dependency on drugs and alcohol, or even becoming young offenders. In some of these areas, the closure of those facilities wouldn’t result in their parents just paying them to go and use other facilities because they are generally in areas where those families would not have the money available to do that. So, when the Minister reviews the national strategy for youth services, I hope that recognition will be given to those projects such as Forsythia Youth Project and the Dowlais Engine House that I’ve referred to, and others that provide that early intervention that is so important, particularly in the most deprived areas in our society, and that we will give consideration as to how these schemes can be maintained in the future, regardless of the decisions surrounding the future of Communities First.

So, Llywydd, in conclusion I’m just pleased to be supporting both the motion and the inquiry report, and in doing so trust that the significance of the work done by our youth services and the staff who work in them will be fully recognised going forward.

Thank you very much. I call on the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I’m grateful to all the Members who’ve contributed to the inquiry and to the debate this afternoon. In many ways, Deputy Presiding Officer, I felt the inquiry was a great example of the Assembly and Government: the correct tension that needs to exist between the two institutions, as referred to—an occasional tussle between us all—but also the committee putting very firmly on the Government’s agenda some issues that are of clear national importance, and the committee reporting in a robust fashion and compelling Government and the Minister to consider the approach that has been taken. And I will say that the response of this committee—Members have generally been quite kind about the response of the Government, but the response, actually, isn’t simply what was written and published in the documentation that we’ve seen and discussed today; the response in many ways was the fact that we were compelled to actually have a debate that probably wouldn’t have taken place without the committee’s investigation, without the committee’s report, without the evidence that the committee took and without the conclusions that the committee made on the basis of that evidence. And compelling Government to actually look hard at its priorities, to look hard at its programme, the way we seek to move forward, has ensured that the words that have been described by Members this afternoon and used by witnesses to the inquiry over the last few months have actually had an impact on changing in policy and in changing the approach and direction of Government. I think it’s right to begin my contribution this afternoon by acknowledging that, and acknowledging the work that the committee’s done over the last few months.

I think there’s broad agreement that high-quality youth work has a crucial role to play in supporting many people to achieve their full potential, and makes a very real difference to the lives of young people, whether it is through different experiences that are opened up to people or the support it offers. It does underpin many of our priorities, from education, health to community regeneration. I’ll decline Dawn’s kind offer to discuss Communities First this afternoon, but we are absolutely clear in our minds that the work of community regeneration and community development is aided and supported by the wider youth work agenda. We recognise that, and we recognise the points that have been made.

I’m pleased to be able to accept or accept in principle all 10 recommendations. I approached the committee report in a way that sought to look at how we can enable these things to happen, not looking for reasons not to accept recommendations, but looking for reasons and ways of accepting those recommendations. I will say to Hefin that that’s not always been the case, I think it’s fair to say, over the years, and I hope that he’s enjoyed his first inquiry, as a member of the committee here. And I certainly hope that he’s found the experience of scrutinising Government in this way as one that’s both been enjoyable and also critical in changing the direction of policy.

Can I respond to some of the concerns that have been raised about the need for a clearer strategic direction? I was very taken by Darren Millar’s contribution in terms of describing the way that the Government does need to establish a far clearer direction of travel. I think that was clear during the evidence session that we had together, and I think I have already committed to refreshing ‘Extending Entitlement’, the statutory guidance that underpins the provision and delivery of youth support services in Wales. A detailed action plan will be developed and published by the end of March 2017. My officials are working with the subgroup of the youth work reference group to develop a plan for the refresh of ‘Extending Entitlement’ and they will meet for the first time in two weeks. This work will cross a number of different ministerial portfolios, and it also includes youth support services more broadly and not simply youth work.

We will also need to review the current national youth work strategy to inform the work of refreshing the statutory guidance. My officials have already begun discussions with members of the youth work reference group on how we will develop this piece of work. I would invite the committee to continue its work and to continue its scrutiny of this refresh, and to play a part and a role in doing so, and that’s something I’d very much welcome if committee members were to do so.

A number of Members have discussed the concerns raised about the lack of engagement with the sector and young people. I recognise the description that Julie Morgan gave in her contribution. I recognise very much the points that you made, Julie, and I think you’re absolutely right to make those points. I met with the youth work reference group on 8 December, and I and my officials will continue to work with the group to shape the future of youth work delivery in Wales. I hope that young people’s participation will always remain central to the work that we undertake, and we will certainly seek to utilise the expertise of stakeholders, including Young Wales, to ensure that we are able to reach some people who are not always a part of these processes. I will certainly be looking at how we can do that and if the committee has further contributions to make as to how we would do that, then I would very much welcome hearing those views.

I understand what is said about a national model, and I know that Llyr Gruffydd has spoken widely on this, in terms of the need to have a national model and the way that we take that forward. I want to give this some further consideration, and I do not, today, wish to pre-empt that consideration. But let me say this: I recognise the comments that have been made. I think Darren made a comment in the debate today about the Government rushing on, taking decisions and implementing decisions whilst the committee is undertaking its inquiry, and I think Llyr has made that point on other occasions as well. There are times when I feel that, as a Minister, I cannot sit back and wait, I have to take decisions and move forward, and there are other occasions—and we’ve discussed the Welsh language in education strategic plans this afternoon—when I feel that it is more important for me to sit back and wait until I am in a position to take a reasoned decision on these matters. This is another example where, at the moment, I wish to take a more reasoned approach and an approach where I would wish to give myself more time to listen to what is said and to understand what the refresh of ‘Extending Entitlement’ and the review of the national strategy tell us before taking a decision on this matter. I hope that Members and the committee will appreciate the reasoning behind that.

But I do listen to and hear the concerns raised by all Members on the closure of open-access provision. Julie Morgan gave us an example in her own constituency, but we’re all familiar with that. It is difficult for local authorities—we know that, and Dawn Bowden has given examples of that, and we’re all familiar with the difficult decisions facing local authorities.

It has a strategic role to play in offering a mechanism to identify potentially vulnerable young people and providing early intervention support. It is clear also that the youth work landscape is changing and open-access provision is also changing. I want to be able to work with local government in order to ensure that we are able to have the sort of provision that we wish to see. Llyr described it, I think, as being overly optimistic, possibly—‘ambitious’ was your word. Very ambitious, yes. I hope that we are able to achieve that, and certainly, what we want to explore is whether sufficiency assessments might be a suitable vehicle to assist local authorities to assess the needs of their local populations and then be able to meet those needs.

There will be a number of different issues regarding funding and the revenue support grant. We know that the RSG is an unhypothecated funding stream, and it is, therefore, a decision for local authorities as to how this funding is utilised. Hefin has discussed that himself and, as somebody who’s served on a local authority, he knows better than most the difficulties that local authorities face in taking these decisions.

I hope that we will be able to undertake a review of all of our youth work funding streams including the revenue support grant, to identify the true impact and to support future thinking for supporting youth work in Wales. I can see that time is against me, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I won’t test your patience any further. What I would like to say in conclusion is that this is a report that has changed the way that we’re thinking. It’s forced us to think twice, think three times about what we’re doing. We will continue to work with the committee to take these matters forward, and I hope that I’ll be in a position to come to this place to make an oral statement on these matters in the near future. Thank you.

Thank you very much, and I call on the Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee, Lynne Neagle, to reply to the debate.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and can I thank all the Members who’ve contributed to an excellent debate on our report this afternoon? I’d like to thank Darren Millar for his positive comments about the outcome of the inquiry, which are very much welcome. I also wholeheartedly endorse what he said about the importance of the youth parliament. I, too, was there today to receive the report from the campaign for the youth parliament. What I think is so important is that the reason these services are being deprioritised at a local level is because young people don’t have a voice, and that youth parliament will be absolutely critical in ensuring that they do have a voice. I hope that that is something that we can push outwards across Wales, so that they are reprioritised, those services.

Can I thank Llyr Gruffydd for his remarks? He’s absolutely right that this isn’t an issue that we’ve focused on before, and I’m very grateful that it was Llyr who made the suggestion to the committee that we undertake this inquiry. It was intended to be a snapshot inquiry, and it was certainly, for me, very much an eye-opener, and I do feel that we opened a bit of a Pandora’s box with it. So, I’m really pleased that we’ve done that. Now that we’ve looked at it, I would just like to assure everyone that I’ve got no intention of letting it go to the side again: we need to keep a focus on that. As you rightly say, this is a key preventative service. We talk a lot about prevention here, but in a whole range of ways, this is a key preventative service for young people and therefore is one that deserves our investment.

Can I thank Julie Morgan for her contribution and her support, as always, for universal services for young people, and also for highlighting the important role that youth work plays in mental health provision? Of course, the committee is also focusing on an ongoing basis on young people’s mental health issues, which is sometimes ironic given that these services are under pressure and these are services that can be preventative if introduced at the right time. So, thank you, Julie, for those comments too.

Michelle Brown highlighted a number of concerns, including issues around local authority funding. I hope that recommendation 8 will make a difference to that and, as Darren Millar has said, it’s not always about the amount of money, but what comes out from the expenditure of that money. And I really hope that, although that recommendation was accepted in principle, we will be able to go forward to develop a proper accountability framework, so, regardless of the amount that is being put in, we have got consistency of provision, and that that is the universal open-access measure that we want to see.

I’d like to thank Hefin David, the youngest member of the committee, for his contribution today, and also for his highlighting of the importance again of that recommendation 8. I’d also like to thank Hefin for highlighting the importance of Communities First funding in supporting youth services. I am very mindful that, should that programme end, then there will be a gap in youth service provision and we need to think very carefully about what we do about that going forward.

Dawn Bowden made very much a similar point, and I know that that’s been a particular concern in your constituency with the projects that you’ve referred to today, who are very worried about Communities First funding. Dawn also reminded us that youth services are life savers, and when I used that in the speech, it wasn’t a loose phrase to use. I genuinely do think that we need to remind ourselves that these services can be life savers, whether it’s mental health, early intervention, stopping young people going into crime—I don’t think that it’s over-egging the custard to say that they do that. I’d like to thank the Minister, again, for his response this afternoon, and also for indicating his willingness to continue to engage with the committee on this very important issue.

Just finally, to thank the members of the committee for their work on this inquiry, to thank the committee team who have also worked really hard behind the scenes to make everything happen and to produce what I think is an excellent report, and to thank, once again, the young people who have contributed, and the stakeholders, and to assure everybody that we aren’t planning on letting this issue go. We’re going to continue to monitor it, and try and drive forward some change. Thank you.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to note the committee’s report. Does any Member object? No. Therefore, the committee’s report is noted and agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

We now move on to item 6 on the agenda, which is the Welsh Conservatives’ debate on further education. I call on Darren Millar to move the motion. Darren.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I want to formally move the motion tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

I’m very pleased to be leading this debate on the future of the further education sector in Wales, on behalf of the Welsh Conservatives. We know that education plays a vital role in our national economy, underpinning and ensuring personal success, health and satisfaction, and contributing to economic and social outcomes for our nation. Our FE and vocational providers have been, and continue to be, in this party’s eyes, a very vital part of the national landscape. They make a huge contribution to changing the lives of individuals and communities in Wales, especially in some of our most disadvantaged communities. It’s the vital bridge that links school and work and/or higher education, supporting people to gain the vocational or academic qualifications and skills that they need to secure and progress into employment or into further learning.

But I think there’s strong evidence to demonstrate that they’ve been undervalued and under-resourced by successive Welsh Governments, and we believe that this negligence must change. But before I embark on the journey that will navigate us around some of the fundamental aspects of this debate, I want to briefly address the amendments that have been tabled.

Now, I have to say, I think it’s a real shame that the Government has decided to respond to our debate today by adopting such a negative approach from the very outset. I think there are aspects of its amendment that we could have agreed to, particularly following the statement on Professor Hazelkorn’s review last week, which of course garnered some cross-part support. But I think its unconstructive ‘delete all’ amendment demonstrated the very blinkered approach that the Labour-led Government has taken over the past 18 years with education policy in Wales. Of course, we’ve seen that education policy cause Wales to lose its way and to lose ground compared to our international competitors, and I think that that’s very disappointing.

What makes it all the more disappointing is that we have a new Cabinet Secretary and a new Minister, and I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt. I was hoping for a different sort of style from the new duo, if you like, at the education helm. But, unfortunately, it looks as though you’re going to be standing on the shoulders of your predecessors and continuing to give us more of the same.

In terms of the Plaid Cymru amendments, we can certainly accept amendment 2. But in terms of amendment 3, we cannot accept an amendment that will in any way limit the choice that learners have. As you might expect, we Welsh Conservatives believe that competition is a good thing in our education sector, and that giving learners choices can actually help to drive up standards, so we will certainly not be supporting anything that seeks to limit that.

Deputy Presiding Officer, it’s right that we properly recognise the vital contribution that further education and vocational skills make to Wales. I think there’s long been a propensity for us as politicians, when debating post-16 education, to focus primarily on higher education as a sector, and the funding of HE and its student cohort. But our colleges are also major providers of education here in Wales, and they help to produce some of the best learner outcomes. They are the predominant providers of funded vocational and technical education in Wales, providing around 85 per cent of the total provision. They certainly haven’t shied away from finding positive solutions to some of the critical challenges in recent years.

Wales has gone through a significant transformation of its network of colleges, and we’ve seen the number of FE colleges halve over the past 10 years. We now have larger institutions, with a different size and critical mass, and they’re proving themselves to be genuine anchors for skills provision in Wales’ regional economies. One of the unique selling points of our college network is that they’re so close to the people that they serve, both learners and businesses. They’re embedded in their communities, serving learners from a diverse mix of socioeconomic, cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Yet we shouldn’t be under the misapprehension that they just provide skills and training to SMEs. Colleges are close to employers of all sizes; they interact with 10,000 employers around Wales as a matter of course, and these are companies of all sizes and all shapes, from small businesses and enterprises right through to large companies such as Airbus, General Electric, EE and British Airways.

The FE sector continues to deliver positive outcomes in the face of a challenging financial climate. The Welsh Government has cut revenue grant funding for the FE sector by £24 million between 2011 and 2016-17, a 7 per cent reduction in cash terms and 13 per cent reduction in real terms. While funding for full-time provision has risen very slightly, funding for part-time courses has been slashed by 71 per cent. This reflects the Welsh Government’s decision, of course, to prioritise its statutory work and to focus on provision for 16 to 19-year-olds. But we believe that that’s the wrong emphasis. There’s a real danger that we’re not allowing people a second-chance opportunity in terms of their study, or to upskill themselves by returning to learning, and I think that that will have a devastating impact socially and economically in the future unless we reverse that trend.

The FE sector plays a huge role in bridging the skills and attainment gap for our young people who have left the compulsory system with few or no qualifications, and many colleges now spend a lot of additional time and resource helping learners to resit their GCSEs in English and maths because of the failures in our school system. Yet, in terms of recognition, it seems to me that, at the very best, second-chance learning has become second best in the eyes of this Government, and we don’t find that at all acceptable. In fact, it suggests that there’s some ageism about when it comes to accessing further education.

So, what can we do to help? Well, we certainly need a proper financial framework. We know that giving colleges the opportunity to plan over a three-year funding cycle has been hugely beneficial to them in the past, but, for whatever reason, the Welsh Government decided to row back on those three-year rolling budgets a number of years ago, and now colleges are having to contend with simple 12-month funding cycles. That’s causing them problems in terms of their planning. It’s causing problems for learners, as well, who can’t guarantee that the courses that they have embarked on in year 1 will be able to be completed by year 2 or 3, because of a potential rollback. So, I think that we need to ensure that there are three-year funding cycles.

We know, also, that there’s some extra resource that has been made available, which could be spent in the FE sector, as a result of the UK Government’s apprenticeship levy—£128 million per annum, roughly. That’s a lot of money, which could go a long way to helping colleges expand their provision and really help to transform the Welsh economy.

In terms of the security of provision, I think it is really very, very important to ensure that that continuity of funding is there, and making sure that these three-year funding cycles are available will transform the opportunities for colleges to plan and invest.

Now, the final point of our motion is a call for the Government to invest a significant proportion of the savings that it expects to make as a result of changes to student support for those in the HE sector, and to take some of those and invest them into our further education sector. We’re not asking for all of the money to be invested into our colleges; we’re simply saying that some of those savings could realistically be invested in order to help our colleges do more. We know that changes to provision, cuts in support for adult learners, and the increasing demands from employers for a higher skilled workforce, necessitate a change in approach to the future funding for both higher and further education.

As I said earlier in my contribution, the issue of student tuition fees and funding arrangements for our universities have occupied a lot of attention in recent years. But FE occupies an equally, if not more, important role in terms of providing skills for our local economies. Colleges also provide education and training for high-level skills, and I think the important role that FE institutions play in delivering those level 4 and level 5 skills and foundation degrees was highlighted in the Welsh Government’s review of higher education and further education in a report that was undertaken back in June 2015. This showed that the pattern of higher education activity that takes place in our colleges throughout Wales was diverse, and not only diverse but also growing.

I think also that we need to expand the availability of Welsh-language courses in our FE colleges. Unfortunately, whilst we’ve got good provision in primary and secondary education, when it comes to doing post-16 education in our colleges, there’s very little support in any way, shape or form whatsoever. I think it’s those two things—that investment in higher level skills and investment in expanding the Welsh-medium education and offer in our FE colleges—that we could rightly invest some of those savings that are going to be realised as a result of Diamond into. Let’s not forget: we’re talking about £0.5 billion-worth of savings, potentially, over a five-year period as a result of the savings that have been identified by Diamond, and, indeed, some of the changes to those upper earning limits that the Cabinet Secretary for Education announced. So, a small slither of that invested in our colleges would go a long way to helping them achieve more for our economy and for the people of Wales.

So, I do hope that you’ll be constructive in the debate this afternoon, and that we will see a positive response to some of the suggestions, albeit that you’ve put this ‘delete all’ amendment down, because we believe that this would help Wales to have the sort of education system in our FE sector that we all want to see. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I have selected the three amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Formally.

Diolch. Galwaf ar Llyr Gruffydd i gynnig gwelliannau 2 a 3, a gyflwynwyd yn enw Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. It’s a pleasure to move amendments 2 and 3 in the name of Plaid Cymru. May I thank the Conservatives for bringing this debate forward this afternoon? I don’t think we discuss FE often enough—in the Chamber, anyway. I don’t think that FE is covered as much as it should be, and I think this is an important opportunity for us. Perhaps we’re all guilty of a lack of equal respect in what we’re trying to achieve for the sector as compared to academic education. This is certainly an opportunity for us to air some aspects of this issue.

I’m disappointed that the Conservatives won’t support our second amendment, amendment 3, because reference was made to a consensus around Hazelkorn. Well, what we say to all intents and purposes emerges from what Hazelkorn said, and there’s a need to move to a better balance of competition and regulation—that’s what the Hazelkorn report says. But we can have that debate on another occasion in the course of the debate around that piece of work.

Nawr, rwy’n dod o genhedlaeth, wrth gwrs—neu roedd fy rhieni’n dod o genhedlaeth—pan oedd addysg yn ymwneud â chael eich lefelau O. Oeddwn, roeddwn yn y flwyddyn ddiwethaf a safodd arholiadau lefel O. Rydych yn cael eich lefelau O, rydych yn cael eich Safon Uwch, rydych yn mynd i brifysgol ac rydych yn cael eich gradd. I fod yn gwbl onest, nid wyf wedi gwneud llawer o ddefnydd ymarferol o’r radd a gefais heblaw ei glynu ar cv i ddweud fy mod wedi cael gradd. Ond nawr fy mod yn dad—. O, peidiwch â dweud hynny wrth fy narlithwyr. Rwy’n gweld ychydig o ddarlithwyr yn edrych arnaf—. Dyna ni. Ond gan fy mod bellach yn dad, wrth gwrs, ac mae’r hynaf yn mynd drwy’r ysgol uwchradd, rydych yn dechrau meddwl am y dewisiadau sydd allan yno ac yn sydyn, wrth gwrs, fe fyddwch yn sylweddoli, o fod yn dod o gefndir o’r math hwnnw fy hun, lle roeddech ond yn gweld un cyfeiriad, fod yna ehangder—llu—o gyfleoedd allan yno, rhywbeth nad yw’n cael ei werthfawrogi’n gyffredinol rwy’n siŵr, yn sicr gan bobl ifanc, buaswn yn dychmygu, i’r graddau y buasem i gyd yn dymuno. Yn aml iawn, mae’n cymryd rhywbeth go syfrdanol i wneud i chi sylweddoli mewn gwirionedd nid yn unig yr opsiynau sydd yno, ond gwir werth llawer o’r opsiynau hynny, o’i gymharu efallai â’r canfyddiad a oedd gan rai ohonom yn y gorffennol ynglŷn â chael gradd—os ydych am gamu ymlaen, fe gewch radd.

Un o’r eiliadau hynny y llynedd oedd y gwaith a wnaeth Ymddiriedolaeth Sutton—ymchwil i botensial ennill cyflog graddedigion prifysgol o gymharu â phrentisiaid—a ganfu y gall prentisiaid uwch ddisgwyl ennill miloedd yn fwy yn ystod eu hoes na llawer o israddedigion, yn enwedig o brifysgolion nad ydynt yn perthyn i Grŵp Russell. Canfu’r adroddiad y bydd y rhai sy’n dewis astudio ar gyfer prentisiaeth uwch lefel 5 yn ennill £1.5 miliwn yn ystod eu gyrfa, yn fwy na graddedigion o rai o’r prifysgolion hynny, a allai ddisgwyl ennill £1.4 miliwn. Felly, mae prentisiaethau uwch ar lefel 5 yn arwain at fwy o enillion dros oes na graddau israddedig ac wrth gwrs, heb lawer o’r ddyled sydd, yn anffodus, yn aml iawn yn dod gyda gradd addysg uwch. Mae potensial ennill cyflog prentisiaeth uwch ar lefel 3 yn dal i fod ychydig yn well na rhywun sydd â Safon Uwch yn gymhwyster uchaf. Rydym wedi clywed llawer am fanteision cyffredinol addysg bellach, ac rydym yn gwybod eu bod yn helaeth, wrth gwrs. Ond mae’r canfyddiad yn dal yno—yn rhy gryf, rwy’n credu—ynglŷn â gwerth addysg bellach o gymharu ag addysg uwch. Cafodd hynny ei danlinellu eto mewn arolwg YouGov y llynedd: roedd 68 y cant o’r farn mai addysg uwch oedd yr opsiwn gorau, a 7 y cant yn unig o bobl 18 i 24 oed a ystyriai mai prentisiaethau oedd yn iawn ar eu cyfer hwy, a dywedodd 51 y cant o oedolion y buasent yn hoffi i’w plentyn gael addysg uwch, o’i gymharu ag 20 y cant a ffafriai brentisiaeth. Nawr, rwy’n gwybod fy mod yn siarad llawer am brentisiaethau, ac mai rhan fechan o addysg bellach yw hynny—rwy’n derbyn hynny’n llwyr—ond rwy’n credu eich bod yn cael y pwynt rwy’n ceisio ei wneud.

Felly, yn amlwg, mae angen hyrwyddo gwell—yn niffyg gair gwell—ar fanteision addysg bellach a llwybr galwedigaethol. Mae angen hyrwyddo parch cydradd, yn sicr mewn perthynas â’r cynnig hwn o’n blaenau heddiw. Mewn gwirionedd rwy’n gobeithio y gallai hynny fod yn etifeddiaeth bwysig i’r Cynulliad hwn, ac efallai i’r Gweinidog, ein bod yn symud yn fwy pendant i’r cyfeiriad hwnnw. Nawr—rwyf wedi dychryn, mewn gwirionedd, mai 30 eiliad yn unig sydd gennyf ar ôl. [Torri ar draws.] Ie. Felly, Hazelkorn: fel y cydnabuwyd yn y datganiad yr wythnos diwethaf, mae amryw o sectorau a darparwyr yn cael eu rheoleiddio a’u hariannu mewn ffyrdd gwahanol gan wahanol gyrff, ac mae mathau newydd o ddarparwyr wedi dod i’r amlwg yn ogystal, wrth gwrs. Mae’n arwain at gystadleuaeth ddi-fudd, ddywedwn i, rhwng darparwyr addysg, ac mae angen strategaeth gliriach a chydlynu gwell arnom. Dyna yw byrdwn ein hail welliant wrth gwrs. Cefais fy nghalonogi gan y datganiad yr wythnos diwethaf, ond mae angen hyrwyddo’r agenda hon a chreu momentwm y tu ôl i hyn, a bydd y ddadl hon, gobeithio, yn ein helpu i gyflawni hynny.

Thank you very much. Paul Davies.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I’m very pleased I’ve had the opportunity to take part in this debate this afternoon. Members are right to emphasise the importance of the further education sector in Wales and to draw attention to examples of some of the excellent work that our FE providers are doing. In my constituency, Pembrokeshire College offers a strong and varied programme of courses, from A-levels to apprenticeships to degrees to business skills programmes. It’s also important to note that FE providers like Pembrokeshire College open their doors to students of all ages, not only young people between 16 and 21 years of age.

Indeed, for employees facing the loss of their jobs, the FE sector can be a major resource. It offers an opportunity for workers to learn new skills and to adapt to changes in their local economy. Of course, by offering part-time courses as well as full-time courses, adults who are in work or stay-at-home parents, as well as older people, can access a variety of important educational opportunities, and this has a positive effect on our society and on our economy.

However, as Darren Millar said, the future of that positive effect is in jeopardy as the sector faces a funding cut of 71 per cent for part-time courses. Despite this, I do accept that funding for full-time provision has increased 3 per cent in real terms, and this is certainly to be welcomed. But my concern is that by decreasing funding for part-time courses so dramatically, the message that is sent is that second-chance opportunities to study or upskill are not a priority, and aren’t even on the Welsh Government’s agenda. Even though I accept that schemes like ReAct have gone some way towards assisting people in developing new skills, cuts to funding for part-time provision are sure to lead to fewer opportunities for those who want to seek new career opportunities following the loss of their job, for example. Therefore, perhaps in responding to this debate, the Minister can say a little bit more about what the Welsh Government is doing to ensure that further education institutions can continue to offer part-time courses, and how it is promoting second-chance opportunities via the FE sector.

Of course, I realise that budgets are tight and challenging, and that the Welsh Government can’t fund everything, but it’s not just about how much money is available; it’s also about the way in which funding is prioritised by the Welsh Government to ensure the best possible outcomes for learners of all ages. Therefore, I encourage the Minister to look again at funding for part-time courses, to see whether there is any flexibility to give a much-needed boost to FE institutions.

Now, the second point in our motion today calls on the Welsh Government to commit to a three-year funding cycle for FE colleges on a fair basis to enable plans to be made that are more sustainable. Members will know that the Welsh Government at one time did provide a three-year funding cycle for colleges, and that made the task of making plans much easier, and it also led to greater certainty for learners in terms of knowing that their courses would continue in the medium-term. But I can’t see how introducing one-year funding allocations has led to better support for FE institutions, and I don’t see how this has led to better planning in the medium-term.

I think that this, too, has a negative effect in terms of attracting students. Indeed, we know that FE institutions have seen a decline in the number of learners in 2015-16, and I think that one of the reasons for this is the decrease in funding that the sector has received and the instability caused by one-year funding allocations.

We know that the Wales Audit Office is currently reviewing FE funding, and I’m sure that that report, when published, will make interesting reading. I hope that the review will give serious consideration to how the sector is funded and to how the shift to a one-year funding model has affected the sector’s ability to offer courses.

Now, Professor Hazelkorn is right when she says in her report that there is a feeling that the FE sector isn’t fully appreciated and cannot therefore operate to its full potential. The Welsh Government must respond to this concern and ensure that our FE institutions are better supported.

I appreciate that, in the wake of Professor Hazelkorn’s report, the Cabinet Secretary has confirmed that a single authority needs to be created with parity of esteem across the post-compulsory education sector, and I very much hope that when this authority is created, the FE sector will receive the focus and attention it deserves.

So, in concluding, Deputy Presiding Officer, whilst FE providers in Wales are doing excellent work in providing education and training for thousands of people every year, the sector needs much more support. So, I encourage the Minister to consider the future direction of the FE sector carefully and ensure that the sector receives the vital investment that it needs. Thank you.

I think it’s good that we’re debating and discussing further education in the Assembly today and reflecting on its contribution to education and skills in Wales, because I do believe it is a very impressive contribution, which should be recognised, and we should discuss how we can strengthen it and take it forward.

One aspect of further education, of course, is the opportunity to have a second chance at education, and that’s what my local college, Coleg Gwent as it now is, provided for me and many others. So, I was able to do GCSEs there, A-levels there, and then go on to university and obtain a law degree and then a career as a solicitor on the back of that second-chance education during evening classes, whilst unemployed at the time, and then moving into work. So, I very much value that aspect of further education and the opportunities it brings, and I believe we should bear that in mind in the round when we look at the role of further education and how we develop further education and support it.

Coleg Gwent now, Dirprwy Lywydd, is providing a quality education and many quality skills for the population in Gwent. Last year, we had very strong A-level results in Gwent through the efforts of Coleg Gwent, and indeed positive value added as demonstrated by the advanced level information system analysis conducted by Durham University, or under the formula developed by Durham University. Indeed, the Welsh Government learner outcome reports for 2015-16 show Coleg Gwent’s main qualifications success rate of 85 per cent—amongst the best in Wales. Also, very recently—hot off the press, as it were—one of Coleg Gwent’s learners, Tom Seward, has just won the Welsh round of the Sparks UK electrical apprentice of the year. So, I think there’s quite a lot of evidence that Coleg Gwent is providing top-quality education and skills, and those are just a few examples of that.

In taking forward the offer that Coleg Gwent is able to make in my part of the world, Dirprwy Lywydd, I’m very encouraged that they’re not resting on their laurels at all. They’re very ambitious for the future to build on the success and the opportunities that they have provided and will provide. Chief amongst that—. A main example of that ambition, Dirprwy Lywydd, is their proposals for the relocation of the Nash campus in Newport to the riverfront, which would go alongside the University of South Wales campus and establish what would be called the Newport knowledge quarter. It would be a partnership between FE and HE, very much geared to the needs of the local economy and working in tandem with businesses. It would integrate FE and HE and put the further and higher education combined offer in the faces of the local population with a very prominent city centre riverfront location. So, I think that’s very exciting indeed. I know that plans are being worked up at the moment and obviously the Minister and his officials are part of that work. I am very supportive of it, as I know other local politicians, the local authority and many others are. I hope that it will come to fruition.

What we need, I believe, Dirprwy Lywydd, are transformative projects of this type, showing what further education and higher education working together can deliver and how they can really understand the skills needs of their local population—what the employers require to take the local economy forward—and deliver those in a way that is state of the art in terms of further and higher education in the UK.

So, I hope that the Minister is able to offer some words of encouragement in his response today. We have met and discussed the proposals. Obviously, there’s an amount of work yet to be done to flesh out the strategic outline business case and the other parts of the process that are necessary, but I do believe that it’s one example that we could look to with real pride in Wales in terms of how we’re at the forefront of knitting further education and higher education together with a clear and very strong partnership of all the major partners locally, and we would then transform the offer to the benefit not just of Newport but the immediate region as well.

The Welsh Conservatives recognise how vital further education institutions are for providing students with opportunities to garner the skills required to enter into industry through apprenticeship programmes and eventually achieve full-time employment.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I’ll tell my colleagues here a little story, and a true fact. A gentleman came to this country at the age of 22 or 23. He landed without any prior qualifications, only one degree in politics and $22 in his pocket. He landed in this country and he came to the city. He got an articleship with a chartered accountant. He worked there for a few years but, in the meantime, he also, straight away, got a free college education to learn accountancy.

The gentleman, when he passed his exams, very quickly, was offered a job in the same higher education college in the city. He refused. He stayed with this chartered accountant and he worked with him for 14 years. While he finished working, he was learning. He also learned to drive for the first time. He couldn’t speak proper English even. He learned to drive and he got a taxi licence. He never drove a taxi in his life, but he has a taxi license—that’s a skill.

Once he set up his own practice, after 14 years, finishing his chartered accountant job, he learned to fly. Within a few years—that was a time when, in this country, vocational qualifications were virtually available to the people and that opportunity was available—the gentleman became a fully qualified pilot. Then he started his own practice. My point to you all, ladies and gentleman, my colleagues, is: that gentleman is me.

I actually can tell everyone that it is a crime if we don’t give opportunities to our children to have full access to anything—whatever they want to do in their life. The skills should be there always, for development, for learning and upskilling—all their life. From cradle to grave, we are all here to learn.

Anyway, colleges in Wales work closely with employers of all sizes, from medium-sized enterprises through to large employers such as Airbus and General Electric, who my colleague has just mentioned. I am concerned, therefore, to see that the Welsh Government has cut revenue grant funding for the further education sector by nearly £24 million in the last five years. That is not going to have a good impact on the learners. Also, their decision to focus on 16 to 19-year-olds presents a real danger for second-chance opportunities to study—a return to learning will no longer exist. As I mentioned earlier, it is actually a crime. We should not bar our children from learning in life. We should be giving opportunities—this institution. A British qualification and skill is not only recognised, but is highly respected globally. Since Brexit, I think it is more appropriate and more important for us to make sure that the entire world will come and learn our skills and see our education system, because it is one of the best in the world.

I’m also saying what the second one is. The lack of information and clarity on the Welsh Government’s part means that the further education institutions cannot plan and prioritise as effectively as they would like to do. It also puts staff positions in doubt and has negative effects on further education institutions and on communications with employers, and jeopardises the ability of further education institutions to provide a quality education to its students. Additionally, the Welsh Government’s lack of urgency with informing further education institutions about whether they will receive their share of the sector priorities fund means that the further education sector could face additional cuts to its budget. I think it’s not fair. This would particularly affect part-time provision, which is so important for those in employment who want to develop their skills to thrive in a dynamic economy. I believe we need to put in place a forward funding programme that would inform further education institutions of their budget, which would allow for greater transparency and put an end to the last-minute approach that the Welsh Government currently undertakes.

Deputy Presiding Officer, I welcome this debate, which recognises further education’s contribution to meeting the needs of learners and employers alike. I support the motion and hope all of us will do the same in this process. Thank you.

Just before Christmas, I convened a meeting in my constituency in Neath of players in the local economy. I had the further education college there. In fact, they hosted the event and it was hosted very beautifully and very effectively buy them, so I thank them for that. We also had universities, businesses in the local economy and unions to come together to discuss what we wanted from a regional perspective from the Welsh Government’s economic strategy. But one of the issues that came out in the discussion was a call for a clear, integrated strategy for further education, skills training, workplace learning, adult learning and HE—a holistic approach to all those modes of education—and as part of that, the development of a clear pathway between vocational and academic education and in the workplace through from pre-apprenticeship to high-level skills and degrees. Confidence and hope was expressed that the Hazelkorn proposals at that point would provide a foundation for a much more integrated approach than has been able to be in place to date.

Echoing the point that a number of speakers have made, there were calls to encourage students not just to think in terms of a higher education route. I think that’s about actually giving equal validity to both vocational and academic higher education. But it goes beyond, I think, the question of parity of esteem: it should at least be that. But there’s also a scenario where someone feels they may flourish in higher education, but actually the better option for their particular career choice isn’t higher education, despite the fact that they might very well do excellently at university. Until we get to that sense of genuineness of approach—

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, certainly.

I’m very grateful to the Member for taking the intervention. Do you agree with me that what we actually also need is some very decent careers advice given to our young people? I think the careers service in Wales is in need of an overhaul to make sure that there’s accurate careers advice being given, not just by individuals who work in schools or individuals who work in FE colleges, but independently, to actually give that tailored support to young people across Wales.

Well, I think it’s vital that in schools and colleges students and pupils have a very clear understanding of what the options are for them, what the progression opportunities within those career choices are and what course options and so on they should take to get them there. And I think there’s a place for much more integration between the world of work, the local economy and schools and colleges, so anything that takes us down that route, I would welcome.

The Hazelkorn proposals that have now been accepted I think are a good institutional foundation for what we’re talking about today. There have, of course, been funding challenges—speakers have spoken about the cuts to FE, and there have also been cuts to the adult learning budget—and I think that presents a challenge in some of the things that John Griffiths referred to in terms of second-chance learning and so on. But I do want to pay tribute to the FE sector for great innovation in the face of some of those pressures. There are a number of examples, including in my own constituency, of FE colleges really looking very creatively at how they can deliver what they can deliver in a much more entrepreneurial way, and I think that plays into the spirit of those institutions. One of the, I think, if not hidden, then undervalued exports from Wales actually is the work that FE colleges are doing to provide education services overseas, which happens in lots of our institutions. So, I think that also should be recognised.

There are some boundary issues between FE and HE that I think need to be looked at closely, where you have degrees being offered by FE colleges under partnership agreements. There are issues around transparency of what can be delivered to learners that I think need to be looked at. We have now a system of tuition support that is based on the living wage, but, of course, an apprentice’s minimum wage is discounted minimum wage, so I think there is a potential there for some perverse incentives, which I think we need to look at.

We’re always invited to look at European models when we’re looking at FE, HE and vocational options. And I think it will benefit us to look at some of the things that are happening in the Netherlands. In the time left to me, I won’t be able to elaborate too much on that, but I’ll just pick out two or three lessons I think that we could learn. One is that the institutional landscape, for example, in the Netherlands is very, very straightforward. It’s very clear how the institutions work and how they interrelate, and I think there’s a benefit in that. There’s a high degree of flexibility and coherency, in particular around some of the apprenticeships, which, again, I know is not the only offer from FE, but it’s an important offer. And there’s a high level of flexibility between the academic and the workplace aspects of that. Most importantly, to take us back to where we started, the vocational route is promoted from a very early stage in the school and college journey. Most students that go through the system actually end up taking a vocational route in the Netherlands, and I think that’s testimony to the real level of integration and the lack of boundaries between vocational college-based and higher education. We’re living in a time of a changing economy where, actually, a linear conventional learning path probably is becoming outmoded. I think we need the imagination to look beyond that, and look at a flexible, modular part-time system as becoming the norm for all of us.

I’m really pleased to take part in this debate this afternoon, because I’ve had a great interest in FE education throughout my time as a Member of the Assembly, and I’ve raised these issues in the past because it is sometimes the forgotten part of the education sector, but it’s hugely important to the Welsh economy. As we’ve heard, it allows students to acquire vocational skills, fill skill gaps, update their skills and even prepare for a career change, and Members have touched on all those aspects, I think, of what FE provides. In a modern economy, we need a flexible, confident, skilled workforce, and this isn’t just because of what might happen because of Brexit; it’s the modern world. I was talking recently to a group of students and saying, ‘Not only will you change jobs half a dozen times—a dozen times perhaps—you’ll probably change careers two or three times.’ That’s the astonishing thing of what happens, and that’s greatly liberating but also, if you’re not prepared, very, very challenging. It is, perhaps, the learners who don’t feel so prepared whom I want to spend a little time talking about. FEs have played a great role over the years in helping to fill the skill gaps that occur, and we know there’s a really troubling attainment gap at GCSE level in English and maths, in particular, and it ends up being bridged, if it is bridged, in the FE sector. I think we should remember the skill that they perform in that task in dealing with students who’ve often had less than pleasant experiences in formal education, and then find it much more conducive in the atmosphere of an FE college. I think that is something that we really, really need to value.

When I give advice to young constituents who have various issues, I ask, ‘Are you in employment? Are you in training? What are you looking for?’, and I’m always impressed by those who say they’ve gone back and they’re at FE colleges pursuing some qualifications there and are seeking to improve their chances in the labour market and to improve their employment opportunities.

FEs also help older people to improve their numeracy and literacy skills. And again, I think we’ve all helped people, perhaps through our surgery work, with the direct issue, but also you realise that part of their problem relates to fairly basic literacy and numeracy. Again, the FE sector, through their continuing education for adults and evening classes, as we’ve heard, provide really essential services here that can be greatly liberating. When people, slightly later in life, achieve that level of education that allows them to flourish, I think it’s a deeply moving moment. Sometimes, that includes people who are in the workplace. They may not be in highly skilled jobs, but they are in the workplace, and I’m particularly attracted to those programmes that have been developed with FE colleges and trade unions, in fairness, as well, which help employees in the workplace to improve some of the basic skills.

Can I just turn to another aspect of the debate? I am concerned about the future funding streams for the sector. We’ve heard about the budgetary arrangements and the need to move to three-year budgets, so I won’t repeat that point. But, you know, since 2007, about £600 million has come into FE colleges through the European funding routes, and I am concerned about what will happen after 2020, because Brexit must not mean that skills training in deprived areas is in any way downgraded. I hope the Minister may have something to say there; I think it’s very, very important that we maintain the priority here.

Let me finish, then, on the importance of FE. I mean, this was the part of the—. It goes back to 1944, really. The vision was grammar schools, technical schools and then secondary modern. Secondary modern was never really a very robust approach. Technical schools used to work quite well where they were really tried, and in Wales, we had a fairly good record, but it still didn’t get that parity of esteem with the academic grammar route, as they called it then. We’ve heard some really interesting examples about the Netherlands, and I would say Germany as well. I remember attending a conference in Germany and putting the television on, and there was an advert about a town at work, and it was just showing how vital vocational skills were to the everyday running of that town. So, you know, that’s what we really need to emphasise.

Llyr said he’s never used his degree professionally. He didn’t tell us what his degree is, but I have two degrees in politics, so I’ll leave it up to you whether you think I’ve used them very well. [Laughter.] But I thought Oscar, when he said that he arrived here without any prior qualifications apart from a degree in politics—well, that probably tells you what he thinks about a degree in politics. [Laughter.] And he didn’t tell us whether he acquired his flying lessons via an FE college, which I suspect he didn’t, but anyway, this is a sector to celebrate and we need to nurture it.

I say in response to David Melding that my colleagues make fun of me whenever I mention my degrees and using my degrees, so I’ve learnt to keep quiet about it—[Interruption.] Yes, the gowns were pretty exotic. [Laughter.]

I started my career in what was the Allt-yr-yn, or colloquially known as the ‘Altereen’ campus in Newport. My experience in HE was only ever, and I think I’ve said to this Chamber before, on validation panels in FE, meeting FE colleagues and as a moderator. And that’s about it. There was never any crossover teaching or working with colleagues—certainly nothing like the knowledge centre that you’ve suggested now, and, clearly, Allt-yr-yn campus is now a housing estate. It’s now the waterfront and you’ve got the Nash campus base moving from Nash to the waterfront. I think that’s a good example of how things should happen. The University of South Wales, as Professor Diamond recognised, is a very good example, if not of best practice—a very good example of how we should progress HE and FE links.

I visited, in preparation for this debate and debates like it, Coleg y Cymoedd Ystrad Mynach in my constituency, and if you want to see it, there’s a little video on Twitter all about the visit. What an array of activities that are taking place there. There are no classrooms in the video: there’s a mechanics workshop, there’s an aircraft cabin, and there’s a working kitchen and restaurant. They are some of the things going on at Coleg y Cymoedd. That’s the kind of experience that HE lecturers, I think, need to have as well and see some of those things that are going on.

The Hazelkorn review, to which the Cabinet Secretary made a response last week, took a very welcome look at these issues. And as she said in her statement, the complexities involved in these matters, FE and HE, has led to unhelpful competition between education and training providers, with duplication or gaps and confusion for learners. And the Minister for lifelong learning, as I mentioned earlier at question time, said, when he visited the Children, Young People and Education Committee on 10 November, that he would like to see no border at all between FE and HE. I’d like to hear more about that in discussions, because I think it helps answer some of the questions in this debate and that are referred to in the amendment in the name of Jane Hutt.

I welcome the fact that there’d be a body that would ultimately replace the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales, which will play an important part in resolving some of the border problems between FE and HE, although in my question to the Cabinet Secretary earlier, she said she’s got plans for this, but I asked about the short term: what’s going to happen in the immediate future? She said, when she visited the Children, Young People and Education on 10 November, that there would be an expectation that the money that has been going to Higher Education Funding Council for Wales—that part of that is used to enhance the relationship between FE and HE, and she’d make that clear in her remit letter. When I asked her today, she said that she’d already made it clear in the interim remit letter, but that was issued in October. She made the statement to the committee in November, so I’d still like some clarity on that. And if the Minister could pursue some clarity on that, I’d be very grateful, because that would help us get some clarity as to what will happen while further consultation is going on regarding the funding body.

But perhaps we need to go further and establish a post-16 education and training strategy for Wales, looking at FE and HE, work-based learning and adult community education. This is something that I hope will be at the forefront of the Welsh Government’s thinking when it comes to the work of implementing the recommendations of Diamond and Hazelkorn. This is something that can happen.

The Conservatives have brought forward this motion today. I’ve been critical of Darren Millar in the past, particularly—not his fault, but the UK Government’s fault—their decimation, the UK Government’s decimation, of the international student market in higher education. The picture in England is not much better in FE either, with the Public Accounts Committee of the House of Commons identifying a looming crisis in FE funding that was coming in England. So, I think work needs to be done at all levels in FE and HE, and I think the Welsh Government, commendably, are taking an approach that is addressing that issue. Hazelkorn provides us a golden opportunity for us to learn from those mistakes that are being made in England, and forge our own Welsh approach to a successful post-compulsory education regime that meets the needs of employers, providers and learners in the years ahead.

Thanks very much. I call on the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I think it’s been an excellent debate with much common ground, despite the somewhat churlish remarks of the Conservative spokesperson in opening the debate. I trust he’ll take the opportunity in his winding up to perhaps reflect further on the tone with which he opened the debate. Certainly, the debate has risen far beyond the expectations that were raised by us through listening to his speech this afternoon. But I’m pleased that there’s been a great deal of consensus across the Chamber. There’s been a consensus on the place of further education, both in education and in wider society; on parity of esteem, which was first raised by Llyr Gruffydd in his remarks, but emphasised by Members on all sides of the Chamber; and also a recognition that there are significant challenges facing the sector, and this sector is already living up to and meeting those challenges.

Let me say this: coming into office as a Minister for this sector, one thing that has struck me more than anything else is the sheer diversity, not simply of provision, but of delivery, of organisation, and the way that this sector is very agile—fleet of foot—in meeting needs, in looking at needs, in understanding what employers need; understanding how we deliver education in different ways, in different parts of the country; not imposing uniformity, but ensuring that we do have consistency of excellence across all parts of Wales. And I think that is something that we really should celebrate.

Let me say this, in terms of moving the debate forward: I was very taken by the remarks that Jeremy Miles made about his experience in the Netherlands, which reflected very much David Melding’s remarks on Germany, as well. I was actually in Germany two weeks ago looking at different forms of provision, and I think there are some very real debates that we need to have about this. I fully accept the points that were made by Hefin David in his conclusion that we do need to look at removing some of the borders and the barriers that exist at present between further and higher education provision. But we need also, not simply to do that; we need to look at removing some of those barriers that exist between further education and school provision as well. So I think we do need to be a bit more radical in our thinking there, and we do need to be a bit more radical in looking at how we deliver the excellence of education that is tailored to the needs of the individual student, pupil or learner—however you wish to describe individuals. We need to look at how we then deliver it.

I am instinctively not in favour of a uniform approach, but I—

If I could just finish the sentence. But I do wish to ensure that we are able to deliver a richness of opportunity of choice, together with excellence in standards, and to do that in both our national languages. I’ll give way.

I’m grateful to the Minister for taking the intervention. I couldn’t agree more with you about breaking down the barriers, Minister, but it’s maybe for us on this side to pose that question and for you as the Minister to hopefully give us some of the solutions. Because since I’ve been here—since 2007—we’ve been pointing out about these barriers, both from the Government’s side and from the opposition side, but can we have a feel for how you’re going to root this through the education systems so that those barriers are broken down and the links are established?

I think the Cabinet Secretary started that last week in her statement on Hazelkorn, which signalled a very real, and different, and radical approach to moving forward. But let me respond more profoundly to the debate that we’ve had. We’ve heard from both Oscar and John that further education provides opportunities for people and that second chance for an education, and we understand that, and we appreciate that. We need to find ways to ensure that FEs certainly will continue in the future to pursue that and deliver on those expectations and that role. I want to ensure that we also have the ability to support vulnerable learners, that we’re working with employers, meeting local needs, and that we are providing this diversity in provision that means that we will continue in the future to be able to deliver those second chances, but also, that we will look in a more radical way at the way the labour market is changing, and that we will respond in a more radical way to ensure that skills match the needs of the economy and of individual learners for the future.

The new Government programme, ‘Taking Wales Forward’, recognises the value of further education and its role in ensuring that everybody has the opportunity to reach their potential. Many Members on all sides of the Chamber have spoken about the need to ensure that Welsh-medium or bilingual provision is developed and delivered. Let me say this: I’m absolutely committed to ensuring that that happens. The Cabinet Secretary has established, of course, a task and finish group that is looking at some of the lessons from the work done by the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol in higher education, and we are absolutely committed to ensuring that we are able to improve and deliver courses in further education through the medium of Welsh, in a way that we don’t do at the moment, and then to expand that in terms of work-based learning and apprenticeships as well. We need to be able to look—. We had a conversation earlier during questions about how we improve the availability of Welsh language education, and this Government is absolutely committed to doing that.

But we also need greater coherence between the academic education and vocational learning. Now, more than ever, we do need to be engaged with the wider debate that is taking place on vocational education, particularly in Europe, and we need to ensure that we are able to continue to deliver at the very height of excellence. The second year of Leading Wales, our FE leadership programme, is having a positive response. I want to maintain and build momentum. A third round of the programme will start in May and a similar programme will be delivered for the HE sector, building on the success of the FE programme. We need to be able to strengthen the sector’s capacity to respond to change, and I am considering at the moment options for a resilience programme, supporting the sector in developing even stronger leadership, financial sustainability and employer engagement. We need to ensure that we are able to maintain the vitality of the sector into the future.

Members, at different parts of this debate, have talked about funding decisions and the impact of funding decisions on further education. I’m very pleased that we’ve been able to identify shared priorities with Plaid Cymru, resulting in an additional £30 million for further education and higher education in the next financial year. However—however—it ill serves debate in this place for Conservative Members to constantly complain about the impact of Conservative policies. We understand exactly why further education is under the pressure it is today, because we have a UK Government that is consistently, consistently, consistently reducing the funding available to us, and we understand that the UK Conservative Government wishes to continue with that policy.

I understand, and I actually agree with, the point that Darren made in his introduction about a three-year funding cycle for further education. We actually do recognise that, and we recognise the desirability of planning. However, we do not have the same certainty ourselves from the United Kingdom Government. A late autumn statement, £3.5 billion-worth of cuts in waiting to come in 2019-20, and the ongoing uncertainty about the financial impact of the UK leaving the European Union, and then you tell us you want certainty. Let me tell you now: if you want certainty, that isn’t a message you need to give to this Government; it’s a message you need to give to your Government in London.

We all know that the impact of the loss of structural funds will hit further education hard, and I know nobody—nobody at all—who believes the assurances that have so far been given by the United Kingdom Government that they will make good on their promises. I’ll give way.

I would just remind you that the Minister is out of time, but I will allow this intervention very quickly.

Very briefly, I appreciate the frustrations about the lateness of the autumn statement, but, on the other hand, you do have to recognise, Cabinet Secretary, that that autumn statement did deliver an extra £400 million for the Welsh economy over the next five years—not to be sniffed at.

And we also understand there are £3.5 billion-worth of cuts still to come in the pipeline. Now, you should do the maths, the same as I can.

Let me conclude. I won’t test the patience of the Deputy Presiding Officer any further. Further education has seen a transformation; it has been proactive in pursuing a radical change agenda. This Government wishes to pursue that agenda, which is to continue thinking in radical ways about how we can ensure that we have parity of esteem and we have the delivery of high-quality education consistently across the whole of this country. We will continue to work with the further education sector to deliver that, and I trust that Members on all sides of the Chamber will support the Government in doing so. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. I call on Suzy Davies to reply to the debate. Suzy.

Thank you very much. Well, sorry to disappoint you, Minister, it’s me who’s going to be winding you up—sorry, winding the debate up. Parity of esteem—that’s what we’ve been talking about today, until it sort of all lost its way in the last few minutes there. I think it’s an important point to make that this was quite a consensual debate, and for a very good reason as well: parity of esteem is good for the economy, it’s good for the colleges and the universities, and, most importantly, it is good for our citizens. The sum of the parts—let’s add those up to be even greater. Let’s make sure that parity of esteem does mean that we end up with a whole that’s better than the sum of our parts.

Actually, our education system has kind of reflected that in recent years; at least in the pre-16 sector. I thought Jeremy Miles’s contribution on the Netherlands was very illustrative of this: post 16, we are still operating pretty much in silos here in Wales and perhaps it would be fair to say, in the UK generally. Of course, the Welsh Conservatives made a manifesto commitment to university technical colleges, which actually captured some of the points that you were making there, Jeremy, but unfortunately we didn’t get the chance to let Wales see the benefits on that.

We, of course, had this rush to university education absolutely right, in the sense that no-one should be prevented from following their best path for reasons of geography or finance, but it did end up tipping the scales in favour of young people feeling obliged to go to university regardless of aptitude, and on the back of parental opportunities, as Llyr mentioned—I experienced it as well—and perhaps teaching to exams, to a certain degree, as well. I think both Oscar and David were absolutely right on this. Opportunity is what a young person needs—an opportunity that is appropriate to them. That’s why, Llyr, I have no problem with you talking about apprenticeships over and over. I think they’ve been a massively important reintroduction into the offer to our young people. We’ve devalued further education and other vocational experiences as something that persists even now, despite further education institutions being able to offer a huge range of types of education for young people. I mean, in many places, they have a university on the doorstep now, where higher education provision has been brought into them, as well as A-levels, which we’re familiar with, and of course engagement and level 1 education, which are part of stopping some of our young people being left behind altogether.

The main message, I think, that’s come through today, apart from the ambitions of further education and its skilfulness at re-describing itself, if you like, through a partnership, is this—and it’s been raised by many Members, including John Griffiths—and that is the second chance. I think it would be fair enough to say that it’s the first chance, actually, in the case of some of those whose school experience didn’t work for them. David Melding pointed out that people change their careers, they change their jobs throughout their lives, and sometimes that’s not done willingly. I’m thinking of Tata in my region, for example. The Welsh Government has committed quite a significant amount of money to re-training people who lose their jobs at Tata. These are people who perhaps haven’t done any new training in years. We need our further education colleges to do that—part-time as well. You ask anyone with caring responsibilities about the importance of part-time provision when it comes to improving your life chances.

In the case of a friend of mine, she left school at 16, she worked in a shop, had a child and was left by her partner. Needing legal advice, she became interested in the law—a pretty common experience, actually. She took a part-time foundation course at her local college. She got great marks, got a place to study law at university—also part-time—did her legal practice course, her training contract and joined a firm. She now writes the College of Law’s recommended reading on medical negligence, and she earns a fortune. It only happened because her college was funded well enough to run a part-time course. I don’t think that course even runs anymore.

Are you being generous to me, Deputy Presiding Officer?

Carry on.

Okay. Thank you.

You’re still in the black.

Good. [Laughter.] Minister, your point about removing barriers between school and college actually is very well made, and I would agree with you on that. You have been saying, actually, pretty much until the end there, all the right things, but we do need to see them happen now. Really, I’m just begging you: stop moaning and plan. Plan to spend that £400 million. Parity of esteem is not just about FE and HE, vocational or academic; it’s about parity of citizenry.

I don’t think anyone should abandon their potential on the doorstep of their start in life, and the diversity of offer and the convenience of FE institutions for many will be what they need to cross the threshold at any age, at any time. So, I think that what we’ve actually been speaking about is parity of value to our people, and, yes, that does need a radical approach.

Thank you very much. The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] Okay. Thank you very much. Therefore, we will defer voting under this item until voting time.

We move on to the Welsh Conservative debate on economic development. I call on Russell George to move the motion.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. It gives me great pleasure in introducing the second Welsh Conservative debate this afternoon, and I formally move the motion in the name of Paul Davies. I should say that I agree with all of Plaid’s amendments. Unfortunately, we can’t support them because they delete all of our motion.

After the referendum to leave the European Union and the inevitable uncertainty associated with the result, the UK Government’s recently published industrial strategy, I believe, provides businesses with the security and certainty to plan for their future, as well as a firm foundation for improving living standards and investing in the future success of all parts of the UK. It outlines major investment for infrastructure, new investment in science, in research and development, and aims to ensure that growing enterprises have the skills and support to create new jobs and prosperity.

Looking at the Welsh Government’s White Paper—and there is much I can agree with in that, I should say, but there is little in the way of support to businesses and little to drive forward important infrastructure projects. We have to wait, of course, until the spring to see what the Welsh Government plans for the Welsh economic strategy. When that plan is published, I hope that the Welsh Government looks to ensure that its strategy dovetails with the UK Government’s industrial strategy and is equally forward looking and ambitious for the future economic challenges that face Wales. The UK’s industrial strategy puts emphasis on addressing the regional disparity in economic prosperity and the skills shortages that exist within the UK and in Wales, which, if successfully addressed, will drive increases in productivity and in social mobility.

It ought also to be noted that the industrial strategy will support the economy of north Wales, with the north Wales growth deal, major transport schemes under construction, including a third crossing over the Menai straits, work to improve the A55 and the A494 interchange, and also the electrification of the north Wales coast line. One of the ways in which the industrial strategy is doing this is to recognise R&D as an essential part of the future economy. It is, therefore, I think, a welcome development that the UK Government is concentrating on making the north of England a tech region. This will present significant opportunities, I think, for north Wales to plug into the wider Northern Powerhouse. I want the Welsh Government to have the appetite to drive R&D forward to ensure that north Wales has the tools to be able to take advantage of these opportunities. The Welsh Government has, historically, chosen not to invest heavily in R&D. It continues not to in the 2017-18 budget, in terms of business innovation and R&D facilities. The year-on-year budget remains unchanged, and, of course, that represents a real-terms decrease in funding for this, I’d say, crucial growth area.

Now, when it comes to support for the steel industry, we need to ensure that the industry can be commercially sustainable in a competitive global market. The UK Government have been addressing some of the key asks of the industry, including compensating—[Interruption.] in a moment—energy-intensive manufacturers, providing flexibility over the implementation of EU emissions regulations, and have also pressed for action against unfair steel dumping. I give way to David Rees.

I thank you for taking the intervention. You mentioned steel, so, me, so—. Clearly, are you as disappointed, and perhaps disgusted, as I am at the lack of emphasis on steel, a foundation industry here in the UK, in that industrial strategy, and that, in fact, to date, the UK Government’s done very little to support the steel industry? It’s the Welsh Government that’s been doing it, not the UK Government.

Well, I just outlined, just before you intervened, what the UK Government’s been doing. But what Greg Clark said last week is he wants a special deal with the steel industry as part of the Government’s flagship industrial strategy. I’ve got to say, I won’t take any lessons from Labour, and I don’t think the UK Government should take any lessons from Labour, in regard to the steel industry. The steel industry reduced productivity by around about a third when the last Labour Government was in power. Also, in terms of people employed, the industry halved the amount of people employed whilst Labour was in office as well. So, I don’t think the UK Government should take any interventions in that regard.

In drawing my remarks, Presiding Officer, to a conclusion, the UK’s industrial strategy is optimistic and ambitious for Britain’s future, from a UK Government that is determined to make a success of leaving the EU, and surely we should all be supporting that aim. My concern is that the recent White Paper issued by the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru is not a plan that supports the economy. Welsh businesses need that security to plan ahead. Now, the Welsh Government promised to, and I quote, ‘produce a plan for confidence-building measures, to help re-assure businesses and investors that Wales remains open for business, and that the economy is a priority for the Welsh Government.’

Now, in my view, as much as I agree with a large amount of what’s in that White Paper, what I’ve just read out now is not achieved when it comes to the ambition of the Welsh Government in that regard.

The UK Government’s industrial strategy is a vision for a modern, successful, ambitious Britain that gets every part of the country firing on all cylinders. It’s now time, I think, that the Welsh Government devoted the same kind of commitment as the UK Government in laying the foundations for improved living standards, economic growth, and a more prosperous and equal Wales. So, I do commend our motion today to the Members, and I look forward to contributions from Members throughout the next hour.

I have selected the two amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on Adam Price to move amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Adam Price.

Diolch, Lywydd. I welcome this debate because I think there is a vacuum at the heart of Welsh Government economic strategy at the moment. Unfortunately, and the reason why our amendment is a ‘delete all’ amendment, the motion doesn’t seek to fill that vacuum with anything that is distinctive or new, but seeks to borrow the UK Government policy and apply it to Wales.

Now, we are in a position where we have an economic strategy going back to 2010. Effectively, that strategy was ripped up in 2011. The basic, key changes that were in that strategy, which were having a much more tightly focused sectoral approach to economic development, well, that went when three additional sectors and virtually every business in Wales outside of retail became a target sector. And, also, the move away from the old approach, which is, basically, the kind of grant-aid, inward-investment focused strategy—moving from that to one that was focused more on business investment based on equity or loans—that was ripped up as well and it was a reversion to type. What we have now is not a strategy but a lot of activity, but without actually a coherent economic strategy to back it up.

The same is true about our regional economic development position. We have still, in theory, a spatial plan, which was first published in 2006. We learnt—[Interruption.] Well, the leader of the Welsh Conservatives may laugh, but most economists would say that, actually, place making, having a spatial economic strategy, is absolutely critical. I give way to him.

I do not laugh at the spatial plans; I just remember the long and tortuous debates that my namesake, Andrew Davies, when leading those debates in the third Assembly, had Wednesday after Wednesday, Tuesday after Tuesday, in this Chamber. That’s why I laughed when you talked about the spatial plan.

Of course, there was a revision in 2008. It’s quietly been buried, but, actually, we heard only in the last few days, of course, that’s it’s still on the books; there’s going to be now a new national development framework. But the thinking behind the spatial plan, of having a clear idea about the different roles, the spatial roles, that the different regions and centres of population in Wales have within our national economic strategy—all of that has been lost. So, we are in this position where we don’t have a strategy at the moment. The Welsh Government now has set out in the amendment, thankfully, a date for the new economic strategy, and we all look forward with bated breath.

But the problem is that economic policy also abhors a vacuum, and so what the Welsh Government has allowed to happen is for Welsh economic development policy to be written in Whitehall. The new economic map of Wales that was unveiled by the Minister for finance and local government was written in Whitehall; what was the point of devolution? Because it’s based, of course, on the map of the city regions, the city deal regions and the growth deal for north Wales. What is the point of having this institution if we allow even something as fundamental as the economic regions of Wales to be actually decided by a pot of gold in Whitehall? I give way.

I’m grateful for your taking the intervention. There are two points I’d wish to put to you. One is the fact that the Welsh economy is connected to the economy over the border in England and therefore it’s entirely appropriate that we should consider what is going on over the border. Secondly, you had a Deputy First Minister who was responsible for the economy for a number of years while I’ve been an Assembly Member. I can remember trying to get a manufacturing strategy out of the Deputy First Minister for many, many years. It was finally produced in his last year in Government and it was a simple, two-sided page document that did nothing to enhance the manufacturing industry here in Wales. What action do you think your party has contributed to the economic decline that we’ve seen in Wales in recent years?

Well, thank you for that injection of positivity and creativity to our economic policy debate. You know, that’s the way we’re going to move things forward, isn’t it? We can—[Interruption.] We can all stand here—. I was only elected a few months ago. We can all stand here—[Interruption.] We can all stand here and jab and point the finger, right; the only way—. [Interruption.] The only—. I’ll give way to the honourable Member again, if he likes. No. Right, okay.

Just to make the point again—he’s not honourable. [Laughter.]

The only way we’re going to prise ourselves out of the rut is if actually we produce some positive ideas, and I noticed that there are none coming from the Member opposite.

Finally, if we allow our economic strategy to be written in London then we see an economic policy that is actually not fit to actually address the unique problems in Wales. The obsession with the city regions, with the city as the motor of economic growth—that is not the way that we’re going to actually deal with the problems of places like the Heads of the Valleys or rural Wales. That sort of metropolitan approach is not going to work here.

And this obsession with the old west-east corridors as well is something that has been an affliction in terms of Wales’s economic development. It is not going to provide us with a solution. Trickle-down geography, as the late Doreen Massey called it, will not provide the solution that we need in Wales. We need unique, innovative economic thinking, not borrowed, old-fashioned ideas from Whitehall.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure to move formally amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Moved—formally.

As the Prime Minister said in her Lancaster speech last month:

‘I want Britain to be what we have the potential, talent and ambition to be. A great, global trading nation that is respected around the world and strong, confident and united at home.’

She said this is why this UK Government has a plan for Britain that:

‘sets out how we will use this moment of change to build a stronger economy and a fairer society by embracing genuine economic and social reform.’

It’s why, she said:

‘our new Modern Industrial Strategy is being developed, to ensure every nation and area of the United Kingdom can make the most of the opportunities ahead.’

Well, this strategy aims to provide, after the referendum to leave the EU, improvement in living standards in all parts of the UK, major investments in infrastructure, new investments in science, research and development, ensuring that people and businesses have the skills they need for the future, and supporting firms looking to scale up.

Nowhere is this needed more than Wales after 18 years of, dare I say it, Labour-led Welsh Government—a Wales ranked tenth for poverty, eleventh for weekly earnings, and bottom for both GVA economic prosperity per head and people not in employment, amongst the 12 UK nations and regions.

Worryingly, the latest GVA figures show north Wales trailing even further behind. West Wales and the Valleys, including four north Wales counties, still have the lower GVA of all UK sub-regions, down again to just 63.3 per cent of the UK average. Anglesey—lowest GVA of all UK local areas, down again to just 52.9 per cent of the UK average. Even GVA per head in Wrexham and Flintshire, which stood at 99.3 per cent of the UK average in 1999, at the time of devolution, has fallen again to just 84 per cent of the UK average. Hence recognition in our motion today of the inter-governmental work to develop the north Wales growth deal.

The Chancellor’s autumn statement provided public confirmation of his commitment to a north Wales growth deal, described by the chair of the north Wales business council as a very positive outcome. As the director of CBI Wales said:

‘we are pleased the Chancellor today reaffirmed his commitment to both the Swansea Bay City Deal and the North Wales Growth Deal. Business in Wales wants credible deals that truly deliver more prosperous regions.’

The north Wales growth deal includes major transport schemes from west to east, which we’ve heard referred to, but also working with the counties to the south and the electrification of the north Wales coast line from Holyhead to Crewe. The North Wales Economic Ambition Board’s growth vision for the economy of north Wales was submitted to the UK and Welsh Governments last summer, supported by the leaders and chief executives of all six local authorities in the region, the north Wales business council, both the region’s universities and both the region’s further education college groups. Key to this, the vision calls for the devolution of powers by the Welsh Government over employment, taxes, skills and transport, stating that this would boost the economy, jobs and productivity, create at least 120,000 jobs and boost the value of the local economy from £12.8 billion to £20 billion by 2035. This would enable north Wales to maximise the opportunities presented by the UK Government’s devolution of powers to England’s adjoining Northern Powerhouse. As the North Wales Economic Ambition Board’s vision states:

‘The Vision complements the developing strategy for the Northern Powerhouse, is fully integrated with the Strategy Growth Bid submission of the Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership, and has the Growth Track 360 plan for rail investment at its core. By building an investment strategy around this outward-looking vision we can succeed in capitalising on the opportunities within the North Wales region whilst adding value to a connected and cumulative set of regional plans for Northern England and the wider UK economy.’

The UK Treasury responded to the growth vision document by asking the ambition board to detail strategic priorities and to prioritise projects. However, whenever I have asked Ministers here whether and how they have responded to the document’s call for the devolution of powers by the Welsh Government, they’ve provided a classic diversionary Labour Welsh Government response by referring instead to its proposed north-east Wales metro: no details and only generalisations about its connectivity with the growth vision’s proposals. I therefore ask the Cabinet Secretary: is it to be ‘yes’ from a confident, can-do Welsh Government or ‘no’ from a craven controlling one?

I’m pleased that we are debating the need for an industrial strategy today. It’s taken, from my point of view, far too long to get to this point, when it seems that the vast majority of us are in agreement that it should be a political priority. It’s something that I know from my previous life before being elected here that the trade unions have been pressing for for a number of years, as far back as I can remember. I’m going to focus briefly on three points today. The first is steel, the economic needs of north Wales and ensuring that Welsh Government’s new economic strategy meets those economic needs of north Wales.

It’s clear that saving and sustaining the steel industry in Wales is key and the foundation industry is key not just simply in itself but also as part of any wider strategy. And whilst I welcome the UK Government’s warm words in support of British steel and the production of the UK Government’s industrial strategy, I noted with some surprise, like my colleague David Rees, that there is just one mention of steel in the 132-page document, buried away on page 91. I do acknowledge that the UK Government has talked about a potential sector-wide deal for the steel industry, but we’re still waiting to see this principle actually in practice, and we need to take that forward with some urgency now.

I’d contrast this with the proactive approach of the Welsh Government and support that has actually been recognised directly to me when dealing in my regular meetings with the workforce and management at the Shotton steel site, a site that is profitable—I can’t say enough that it’s profitable—innovative and successful, the Tata site at Shotton, and it’s one aspect of our advanced manufacturing base in north-east Wales, a priority sector that is a fundamental part of any north Wales growth deal and key to our regional economy.

Aligned with these key priority sectors, it’s crucial that we make our cross-border connections much more competitive and appealing. I welcome the Welsh Government’s announcement that next month it will consult on much-needed and long-awaited improvements to the A55 across north Wales, and I also look forward to plans for the north Wales metro to progress with pace.

As part of any growth deal for north Wales and for the region, and the Welsh Government’s overall economic strategy, we must continue to work with stakeholders and partners such as the North Wales Economic Ambition Board and the Mersey Dee Alliance, and for the Welsh Government to provide the levers to emancipate economic development across north-west and north-east Wales, something that I am personally and politically committed to.

To conclude, on the Welsh Government’s economic strategy that is now due later in the spring, I trust that this strategy will reflect and recognise regional priorities and a level of autonomy. I will hold my own future Flintshire event next month in order to ensure that the economic aspirations of my area shape the economic strategy of our nation, and through inter-governmental co-operation working with the Welsh Government, supporting our vital industries and recognising regional diversity and the value of regional stakeholders and businesses, we can build a new economy that can exceed our economic potential as a nation.

I’m pleased to take part in this afternoon’s debate, welcoming the announcement of the UK Government’s industrial strategy. We’ve heard in the opening remarks from Russell George about some details of that strategy, placing education and skills at the heart of the economy, and re-establishing in some measure technical education, too long undervalued, as David Melding mentioned in the previous debate. We clearly need to lift literacy and numeracy skills, and many people are falling short of the threshold needed for skilled employment in Wales.

At the heart of this debate is the need for a Welsh industrial strategy, and a strategy as soon as possible. We know that the Welsh Government capital budgets will benefit from an extra £400 million over the next five years as a result of last year’s autumn statement, but this needs to be channelled into capital projects. We believe that rather than an ad hoc approach to this, it would be better to have a strategy that underpins this spending. I listened as always to Adam Price’s comments earlier, and I take some of your points, Adam, about the need for a Welsh dimension and a Welsh solution to Welsh problems—as you say, that’s what devolution is all about—but I think to try and isolate that from a broader UK strategy doesn’t seem to me to make any sense. Yes, we may want to enhance the north-south transport and economic links within Wales—yes, of course, we all do—but at the same time those east-west links have served Wales very well. The M4, the A55—like them or not, they are the key arteries, and have been for a long time, of the Welsh economy, and they do integrate us into a wider economy, as my neighbour, Dafydd Elis-Thomas, pointed out a few moments ago. What is the nature of the border between England and Wales? Actually, it is England and Wales, and whilst we strive to seek a distinct Welshness—and all of us in this Chamber are here to do that—we do have to recognise that those links do exist from Cardiff to Bristol and from the north of Wales across to Liverpool. Those are there, and they will remain there until there is a viable alternative. And I think all of us in this Chamber do want there to be increasingly viable alternatives. We don’t want the Welsh economy to be—. I’m looking at Nathan Gill, who’s caught my eye—he doesn’t want the Welsh economy to be dependent on the European economy. We don’t want the Welsh economy to be too dependent on any other economy, other than the necessary trade. We do want a home-grown economy here in Wales, and one that looks to the future and deals with some of the underfunding deficiencies that we’ve had in the past. Adam Price.

You said that one of the problems with the proposed regional economic map of Wales, by including the more prosperous areas, for instance Cardiff, with the Heads of the Valleys in a single region, is that it artificially masks the level of deprivation in those areas, which means that we could, potentially, under a future regional policy framework, not have the highest level of development aid. That’s why we redrew the map for convergence funding to create the west Wales and the Valleys region, rather than having the old industrial south Wales, where we didn’t actually have the highest level of aid.

You were clearly very kind to me in my short debate on the city region last week when you didn’t raise any of these concerns. I’ve listened to what you’ve just said now and what you said in your contribution earlier, Adam. And you clearly have major issues—. Well, you’re thinking outside of the box in terms of the city region. I think everyone else at the moment is saying, ‘Aren’t the city regions, the city deals across Wales the best thing since sliced bread?’ They are not perfect; you are right to say that there are other parts of Wales that we need to think about as well. But I would say, going back to your earlier comments, that, where you have a vacuum, you need to fill it with something, and I think at least those city deals are going to bring in considerable investment; we’re looking at £1.2 billion from the UK Government and the Welsh Government supporting that city deal in south-east Wales. So, I think for us to simply say that that doesn’t address the needs of the Welsh economy and the south Wales economy would be wrong. I think that you have to recognise that they are important. That’s not to say that we don’t support developing the Heads of the Valleys corridor, and that we don’t believe in my area, in Monmouthshire, in making sure that the rural economy there is able to stand on its own two feet as well. Of course we want that, but at the same time, we also have to recognise that, in this part of the world, and for me and my neighbouring Assembly Members and Mohammad Asghar in south-east Wales, the south-east Wales economy is going to be bolstered by the Cardiff city deal, and it will be wrong, I think, to isolate areas like mine from that. So, I hear what you said.

It was nice to hear you mention the spatial plan earlier, by the way. As Andrew R.T. Davies said, it’s been a long time since his namesake mentioned that in this Chamber. There are a lot of good things in that spatial plan, as you pointed out, and we do need to make sure that those are incorporated into a strategy. But first and foremost, in conclusion, because I can see that the Presiding Officer is wanting me to wind up—first and foremost, let’s get on with the job of developing a fully-fledged Welsh manufacturing strategy, an industrial strategy that fits in with the UK strategy, but at the same time, does its own thing—models on providing Welsh solutions to Welsh problems.

UKIP welcomes the UK Government’s Green Paper, ‘Building our Industrial Strategy’. We look forward to the Welsh Government’s plan, which we should have in April. I’ll echo what Russell George has said, and the other people, that we hope it will fit in with the plan of the UK Government.

Now, we accept that some progress has been made towards rebalancing the economy since 2010, but the disparities in economic performance between different parts of the UK and Wales should not be underestimated. The move by the Blair-Brown partnership from a large industrial base to that based on financial services did unbalance the economy and it will take time to unpick that misbalance.

It is a long-accepted fact that weaknesses in infrastructure and connectivity can limit growth areas with lower productivity. The qualification and skills levels of people vary substantially from one part of Wales to another, exacerbating the productivity levels between regions. Now, we must accept that there’s been a great deal of progress made by the Welsh Government, as was succinctly outlined by Alun Davies earlier on. But we have to note that, in the Senedd yesterday, the First Minister said that he had to defer to London for staff, because we do not have personnel with the necessary skills in Wales—surely a damning indictment of 17 years of Labour in this Assembly.

There are issues with retaining those with the requisite skills, and only by expanding the Welsh economy, particularly in the higher skills sector, will we be able to address these deficiencies—

Will you take an intervention?

One second, Dave, and then of course I will.

The steel industry should play a large part in retaining and expanding such a skill base.

I thank the Member for taking an intervention. Do you therefore welcome the input of European money into the development of skills, particularly the Master’s level skills that came through that programme? We now have far more graduates and Master’s graduates as a consequence of their investment.

Well, David, obviously I would argue the fact that it wasn’t European money: it was British money coming back to us after they took something like 50 per cent of it.

However, as we know all too well in Wales, the steel industry suffers from energy costs much higher than its competitors, exacerbated of course by the environmental levies, and these, coupled with high business rates, make our steel industry less competitive. Steel making in the UK as a whole has contracted drastically over recent years, and I will here restate some points made by Russell George with regard to employment in the steel industry. There were 68,000 employed in the industry in 1997, falling to 31,000 in 2010: a loss of 37,000 steel jobs under a Labour Government and, I shall point out, whilst we were in the European Union. Well, indeed, the very fact that we were in the EU probably contributed to such a demise. The EU Commissioner in charge of competition policy, Margrethe Vestager, summed up the rules last year. She said,

‘EU countries and the Commission have put in place strict safeguards against state aid to rescue and restructure…companies in difficulty.’

Will my colleague give way?

I will.

Does he agree with me that the newly competitive pound has been a huge shot in the arm for the steel industry and is a big part of the turnaround we’ve seen in the prospects of Port Talbot?

Absolutely. I’m sure we all welcome that. We all care passionately about the steel industry and the people it employs in Wales. EU state aid rules only allow state support in such areas as research activities or relief of energy costs of steel companies. We shall support this motion. Thank you.

I obviously welcome the opportunity to speak in this Conservative-led debate today, and importantly to highlight some of the important relationships that the Welsh Government should be establishing, and also mapping out at the start of its term in office, which is for five years. Believe it or not, at the end of this term, 20 per cent of this Assembly term will already have gone. It’s unbelievable to think that the time has gone so quickly and yet we are obviously still waiting for the Welsh Government to bring forward its own industrial strategy, and indeed to clarify some of the policy areas that the previous Minister engaged in when she was talking about economic regeneration, and importantly to map out the direction of travel and the support that the Welsh Government will put in place for the Welsh economy over the next five years.

I fully take on board the point that the Minister has commissioned a review of all the bodies that advise him when it comes to developing policy and developing support, and I think even he pointed out that there had been a pyramid of organisations, totalling some 46, I think it was, different organisations feeding in just to the economy department in the Welsh Government. And as we know, the economy is far bigger than just the one department. Education, lifelong learning and skills, health, for example, and transport, there’s a whole pile of organisations that sit in other departments—local government another one—that need to be linked together, locked together, to deliver the support that the Welsh economy needs going forward. And, as we see with the city deal concept that is being brought forward and has been welcomed by the Welsh Government and positively engaged by the Welsh Government, the level of support that can be brought together in one pot when Governments work together and local authorities work together, along with independent businesses in the locality, can have a huge impetus of driving economic regeneration.

But this is an issue that I’ve raised several times with the Minister in the Chamber, and I hope he might reflect on this in his response today. When you look at the way that regeneration and local development is going in England, in particular along Offa’s dyke where you have incredibly powerful local mayors now, in Bristol, in Birmingham, in Manchester and in Liverpool, there is, unless they are positively engaged with, a real challenge to the work that is going on here in Wales when it comes to obviously attracting inward investment and new opportunities to Wales. I’ve yet to hear how the Welsh Government is going to work positively with that new regime of regeneration and restructuring of support for regional aid in England. Again, what is important for the Welsh Government to appreciate here is the big infrastructure projects that will drive much regeneration and job creation capacity around Wales.

I was reading from the construction federation, only today, when they cite three major projects—and some people might question the viability of some of those projects—HS2, Heathrow Airport, and Hinckley Point, that those three projects on their own will create the demand for an additional 35,000 construction jobs over the next five years. That is a huge opportunity for the construction sector to create a skill base in those communities where those projects are being built that will last for generations. But, obviously what’s got to happen is the colleges and the skills providers linking up with these big projects to make sure the opportunities are there. As has been pointed out earlier by Nick Ramsay, and others in fairness, in the autumn statement an additional £430 million-worth of capital spend was made available to the Welsh Government over the next four years, and that will go a long way to activating many of the big construction projects that we would like to see creating opportunities here in Wales.

One of the manifesto commitments that the Welsh Government talked about at the recent Assembly election was the north Wales metro—page 19; the Minister himself wrote that manifesto. But, as of the First Minister’s questions yesterday, I now hear that that metro is no longer the north Wales metro—because it clearly talks of a north Wales metro in the manifesto—but now the talk is of a north-east Wales metro system. So, it’s already scaled back in ambition, or perhaps the Minister could enlighten us all as maybe that might have been a slip of the tongue. Because last time I looked at—.

Might I help you again on the history and the development of transportation in the north? It all started from the east and moved west.

I don’t doubt that. But if you read the manifesto, as I pointed out to you, the manifesto talks of a north Wales metro system, and now it seems Government policy has moved firmly just to stick with the east and forget the west. As we know, in the western part of north Wales we have the lowest levels of gross value added to be found in Wales—in Anglesey, for example. One thing successive Welsh Governments have failed to do is lift GVA levels across Wales and, importantly, take-home pay across Wales, which are the lowest levels anywhere in the United Kingdom. Economic development, training and skills will upgrade the workforce, upgrade the job opportunities to lift those wage levels, lift those GVA levels, so that we get more money circulating around the domestic economy of Wales that does create continued opportunities for some of our most deprived communities.

That is the challenge to this Minister and this Government, at the outset of its term in office, to clearly map out its vision for where it wants to be at the end of its term of office. And I have to say, I haven’t heard nothing to date that convinces me that some of the wrongs of previous administrations will be corrected by this Minister and this Government.

I acknowledge the importance of the Cardiff city deal and, as long as we get the connectivity through the metro, I’m sure it’ll be a great way of joining up Monmouthshire with Bridgend, and the Rhondda with our capital city. But, today I wanted to talk about something that’s more fundamental to both the UK industrial strategy and the Welsh industrial strategy, which is the issue of automation, which is very tentatively mentioned in the UK’s industrial strategy Green Paper. It talks about the increasing pace of technological change, which will need more people to retrain, and the fact that they’re going to put some investments into supporting robotics and artificial intelligence. But this is not really spelling out the extent of the change that’s going to be required, both by companies as well as Government. I just thought it would be useful to reflect on what exactly is involved.

President Kennedy declared that the major domestic challenge of the 1960s was to maintain full employment at a time when automation was replacing men. This was when computers just began to appear in offices, and robots on the factory floor. Indeed, I can recall, in the early 1970s, talking about what we were going to do with all the extra leisure time that we were going to get as a result of computers. Remember that? Anyway, it definitely didn’t turn out like that. But today, we looked at three different reports, all of which confirm that about one third of current UK jobs are likely to be automated in the next 20 years. Deloitte has highlighted that people paid £30,000 a year are five times more likely to be replaced by machines than jobs paying £100,000. Although the replacement of people by machines is well understood, the scale and scope of the changes yet to come may not be, and it’s certainly not reflected in the UK’s industrial strategy Green Paper.

The jobs least at risk from computerisation are those in senior management, financial services, computer science, engineering, education, legal services, community services, the arts and media, and healthcare—those jobs that require people skills and brainpower to make decisions whether to do one thing or another. The jobs obviously at risk are those in office and administrative support work, sales and services, transport, construction and extraction services. We already see that. If you go to the M4 toll road, coming from Bristol, there are practically no people manning the tolls. It’s all being done by machinery. There are going to be fewer and fewer tasks where a labourer alone is required, and more and more tasks where brainpower has to be the given.

But, interestingly, even cognitive tasks can now be automated. This is talked about in an Oxford University study on the impact of future technology. A computer can, apparently, now dispense expert radiology advice currently undertaken by highly trained radiologists, thanks to the advances of deep learning and other forms of artificial intelligence. I’d like to know a great deal more about that and the accuracy of interpreting radiology reports, which is, obviously, a very key thing. But it just tells you how far automation is going in terms of the artificial intelligence. In an earlier debate, we talked about big data being used in agriculture, and the ability of farmers to examine exactly which patch of grass would be most profitable to put the livestock on and/or which things to grow to nourish the quality of the grass. But this is something that’s going to affect all jobs.

I think the key issue for us is who is going to benefit, because if we are going to see routine-type jobs done, for example, in the public sector, things like—midwives and health visitors have to input data on the outputs of their work, and very important work it is, too, but it’s quite routine, and if we can get the computers to do that job for them, it could, in theory, free them up to provide more care. But who is going to benefit from all this automation? Is it going to be a way of improving the quality of care services, or is it going to be yet another excuse by our UK Government to slash and burn public expenditure even more than they’re doing already? Are we the people or the transnational companies that are larger than many nation states, and increasingly feel they are beyond the law, the ones who are going to benefit? This is something that’s absolutely key for us as legislators.

I welcome the debate today, and thank the Welsh Conservatives for tabling this debate. I commend Plaid Cymru’s amendment, which I think is very timely indeed. The Cabinet Secretary for the economy has stated that he wants the north to be a part of the English Northern Powerhouse. Last summer, he also said he wanted mid Wales to join a midlands powerhouse. The First Minister is on record in this Chamber dismissing the idea of economic growth holes in the Valleys and in Gwent. So, we are left with a very inadequate economic paradigm from this Government, at least as far as economic geography is concerned.

In the absence of a Welsh Government economic plan for Wales—I echo the concerns expressed by the leader of the Conservative group on the delay in producing an economic plan for Wales. In the absence of such a plan, we are left to put together the fragments of what could possibly be a plan. Essentially, from what we’ve heard so far, this boils down to communities in the south, within a certain radius of Cardiff and Swansea, relying on trickle-down from those centres, whilst communities in the north and mid Wales hope for trickle-down from the midlands and the English Northern Powerhouse: city-centric trickle-down for the south, cross-border trickle-down for mid and north Wales. The fact that our political entity will not therefore be coterminous with our economic entities, I am sure, will lead to a lack of regeneration, a lack of opportunity and, almost certainly, a lack of political accountability. Instead, the Government should be considering what best practice there is at an international level for countries of a similar geography to Wales, with a similar industrial legacy and with a significant rural profile. In that sense, I would suggest that we would be better off looking at cross-border co-operation and economic co-operation that we can see in places like Malmö and Copenhagen—far better and far more useful, I think—that could deliver equitable economic regeneration. I give way.

Would you agree that, actually, the importation of a city-region-based economic strategy is particularly curious in the case of Wales, which has among the lowest levels of population—or proportion of the population—living in cities amongst virtually any nation in western Europe?

I would, of course, agree with that. There’s nothing wrong with the concept of regional economic growth, or indeed with the city region models. There are OECD reports that are demonstrating that where city regions work, and where regional development works—it’s by how you measure the peripheral areas to the population centres. I fear, from what we’ve heard so far from this Government, that there’s a lot to be concerned about in the so-called peripheral areas of the proposed city regions in the current models.

In terms of the key factors identified by the OECD and others in driving regional success, they include: encouraging critical mass or thinking regionally in order to compete globally—that’s where digital infrastructure is crucial, something that Members in the north, I’m sure, will be very keen to highlight; spurring innovation that can transform a region’s economy—this is where partnerships between HE and the private sector are absolutely crucial; specifically aiming to increase job opportunities and per capita income in a region to at least parity with the state or the nation as a whole—I think that should be a central objective of this Government at a national as well as regional level; strengthen the capacity of people to compete in a global economy—this is where an FE strategy might come in handy; the delivery of proper apprenticeships across the country; and develop and improve regional infrastructure to enhance economic competitiveness—that means a metro system that covers all parts of a region, not just one corner of it, for example.

Some Members will know my particular interest in the idea of creating designated economic growth poles across the nation. One of the great benefits of having a youthful democracy in an old nation like ours is that we can make a choice to build our nation from the bottom up and decide to build in political and economic redistribution to our plans if we choose to. So, designating towns and cities outside of the capital has had, in particular, national significance, and locating corresponding public institutions in them gives all citizens a stake in our national success story and can be a catalyst for local and regional economic growth.

Trickle-down doesn’t work; bottom-up does. I would suggest to the Cabinet Secretary that these should form the key principles of both a national and regional economic vision for our country, when or if an economic plan for this nation is eventually published.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, Ken Skates.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I begin my contribution today by thanking the Conservatives for bringing this debate to the Chamber in a week in which I’m pleased to have already announced more than 500 new jobs through Government intervention? The Green Paper released by the UK Government was certainly an interesting read. The Prime Minister herself gives the document and the new policy a very bold introduction. When she talks about a new approach to government, she says,

‘not just stepping back and leaving business to get on with the job, but stepping up to a new, active role that backs business and ensures more people in all corners of the country share in the benefits of its success.’

This is important, I believe. It demonstrates a major philosophical shift for the Conservative Government, and it recognises that active intervention in the economy makes for stronger economies and more balanced economies. As I sat in my office reading those paragraphs of the introduction to the policy, I did wonder what the disciples of free market economics, such as Keith Joseph, would have made of the conversion that we have now seen from the UK Government. I do like to be collegiate, and so it gives me great pleasure to be able to say that we really are all interventionists now. I will also say that there is a lot in the Green Paper that I can agree with. Prioritising activity that supports business and trade, improving infrastructure and enhancing conditions to support sustainable growth are areas of policy that I am more than willing to put my name to. But, I do want to make two very important points. The first is about actions over words. The Green Paper talks very openly about the opportunities to stimulate the economy in important strategic sectors. It talks about a potential sector deal for steel—a new partnership between steel businesses, the supply chain, research institutions and Government that can support the steel sector to grow and thrive into the future. My reaction is a positive one. The steel sector across the UK is in urgent need of the support that the UK government can offer on a scale that only the UK Government can offer. But it is just a shame that the 12 months that it has taken for the UK Government to come to this conclusion have been the very same 12 months when the steel sector needed Government intervention the most. As Hannah Blythyn rightly said, Tata, unions and the workforce recognise that we have only been able to avert disaster in the steel sector because of interventions by this Welsh Government. So, I do hope that the move to interventionism by the UK Government is going to be realised in actions as well as words.

Another important point I would like to make is about devolution. I do think a key weakness in the Green Paper is the lack of any coherent understanding of the way in which economic policy making has changed in the UK over the past two decades. Now, much of the success of Brexit, as I think we explored yesterday, will be determined by how effectively the UK Government engages with, and opens up to—and engages meaningfully with—devolved administrations and regional areas about the decisions that will affect us all. So, too, this industrial strategy will stand or fall by how much this UK Government wants to do to Wales, and how much the UK Government wants to do with Wales. Now, as the Welsh Government amendment makes clear, and as I have told the Secretary of State, Greg Clark, myself, the Welsh Government stands ready to work collaboratively and meaningfully with the UK Government on areas of shared and overlapping industrial interest. As I have already said, later this spring, we will be publishing our cross-Government strategy to develop the Welsh economy, and we will work with the UK Government to ensure that both approaches work for Wales, its economy and its businesses. I agree entirely in this regard with the fine contribution made by Nick Ramsay, but I want to lay down a very clear marker here and now: the partnership between us and the UK Government must be one founded on respect and of equal standing. It must recognise and respect the devolution settlement.

One area where there is an important and effective partnership is in north Wales. I think it is to his credit that the Secretary of State for Wales and his ministerial team have shown what I believe to be a willingness through the north Wales growth deal to work together in a way that can benefit the region by taking advantage of the cross-border economy. Work is at an early stage but the relationships that have been developed thus far have been encouraging. Again, though, it is about actions, not words. Through the growth deal, the UK Government has another perfect platform with which to demonstrate the more muscular industrial policy that it talks warmly of in the Green Paper.

I look forward in the coming months to seeing tangible progress on electrification of the north Wales main line, more active support for Wylfa Newydd and a clear vision for how the region can plug into the Northern Powerhouse and the Midlands Engine as key leaders of dynamic regional economies. Russell George identified the need for greater investment in technology within the regions of England. In north Wales, where he talked specifically of the need to invest, we have announced the creation of an advanced manufacturing research centre to conduct that sort of innovation and research. Also, we are investing in the Menai science park for the same purpose. We are demonstrating, with cash, our determination to invest in north Wales. We look forward to seeing the UK Government doing so likewise.

Now, I do wish to be generous to my Conservative colleagues—[Interruption.] No. I do wish to be generous to my Conservatives colleagues, so I will at this point give a very heartfelt ‘thank you’ to the UK Secretary of State for Transport, Chris Grayling, who last week paid a very fulsome tribute in the House of Commons to an important intervention the Welsh Government has made in the Welsh economy in recent years when he praised the major success Cardiff Airport has been since it was purchased by us in 2013. He said:

‘Cardiff airport has been a great success story, and I pay tribute to all those involved.’

With record passenger numbers, new routes and sustained growth, the transport Secretary is absolutely right to celebrate the interventionist policy that we have adopted for Cardiff Airport and the Welsh economy.

So, my message to the UK Government in this debate is a simple one: we will work with you, but on an equal footing, and where the UK Government shows a new willingness to invest in Wales.

I call on Angela Burns to reply to the debate.

Diolch, Presiding Officer. I’m very pleased to be able to wind up on this debate, and I’d like to thank Russell for opening it the way he did, because I think, Russell George, you painted a very broad canvas of the economic needs of the country. You rightly pointed out the growth of the Northern Powerhouse and the opportunities for north Wales and the north Wales growth deal. However, despite you doing that, we’ve said that we can’t support the Plaid Cymru amendment because although, technically, everything you say in your amendment is absolutely right, you only concentrated on north Wales. Steffan Lewis, in your contribution, much of which I did agree with, you talked about poor economic paradigms, you talked about the trickle-down effect not working, but above all, you actually talked about not raising or not leaving behind our peripheral areas. Yet your amendment focuses on only one area, and I would like to remind you: we have mid and we have west Wales.

So, Adam Price, I’m going to go through in just a moment—because you obviously weren’t listening terribly clearly—what our plan is for developing economic growth in Wales. But before I do that, I would like to just address a comment made by both David Rees and by you, Cabinet Secretary, over the steel issue. I take great exception to the fact that you both stood up in different ways and in different tones to say that the UK Government have done absolutely nothing to support the steel industry—[Interruption.] Don’t start leaping up to your feet. You are the king of interventions, and it’s not happening today. Let me be clear: the Westminster Government have set up a dedicated steel council to work with all key stakeholders to explore actions that industry and government can take. They have already paid over £133 million—[Interruption.]—no, I won’t—to the steel sector to compensate for the cost of the renewables and the climate change policies. They’ve already secured flexibility over the implementation of the EU emissions regulation. They have successfully pressed for the introduction of trade defence instruments to protect the UK steel produces from unfair steel dumping. Let’s be absolutely clear: this is a global problem, and they have taken action. So, Cabinet Secretary, when you so gleefully talked about Chris Grayling saying how wonderful you were for Cardiff Airport, and you said that in a spirit of generosity, I would challenge you to equal that spirit of generosity and to recognise what the United Kingdom Government has helped to do for the steel industry.

Of course.

I take it, then, that the Member is confident that the UK Government has done all it possibly could do in the past 18 months for the steel sector in Wales—everything that it could have done.

I cannot actually tell you if it’s all, because who knows? In the same way, you guys most certainly haven’t done all you could do. But let’s be clear: what do we have? We have a result that protects a valuable industry for Wales. We have a result that actually will enable an enormous investment to happen in Tata Steel and in the steel industry in Wales, and that’s what we want—outcomes. Outcomes, I’m afraid, Cabinet Secretary, are what we don’t see from you. We’re still waiting for the spring to see what your industrial strategy is, and all we ask you to do is note the fact that the United Kingdom Government has led the way. They’ve put out there—for good, for bad, for comment, for improvement—a UK-wide strategy that we can all look at and see how we can take it, move it through Wales, and help to drive our economy.

Because what we need, Adam Price, is research and development. We need education and skills. We need support for the vast majority of businesses in our country, many of whom are in the small to medium-sized sectors. We have to spread that equitable economic growth that Steffan Lewis keeps talking about, and rightly so. R&D is vital because it doesn’t have to live in traditional areas. We need new industries.

Jenny Rathbone, I do appreciate the concerns and the worries about automation and what automation could do to industries as it goes forward. But, here we are, we’re in a catch 22, because automation ain’t going to go away. It is the way of the world. Your children, my children and our grandchildren are going to live in a world so different to the one that we live in. What we have to do is find those new businesses, encourage them to grow in areas where people live, where people want to live, skill them up and look at different ways of being able to make money, earn salaries, buy our homes, look after our families and live a good life. But wishing automation away simply won’t happen.

There are some very good points in the UK Government’s industrial strategy. I like the industrial strategy challenge fund. I think that’s so positive. It’ll give UK companies the chance to capitalise on our strengths in things like biotechnology and green energy. I like the fact that they’re going to look at tax breaks for people who invest in research and development. Let’s use some of these wealthy people’s lots of money to invest in research and development and to help to grow the communities we need.

Yet, I have to say, Cabinet Secretary, I don’t see that the Welsh Government has shown the same levels of investment in research and development. There have been huge cuts in the budget lines in business innovation resource funding. There’s been huge cuts in innovation centres and R&D facility budget lines. And R&D, of course, is just one plank of supporting a successful industrial strategy.

Education and training—a subject after most of our hearts. We talk about the need to upskill our people. I am not going to rehearse the issues, challenges and disappointments we have in this area in this country, but we must step up, because 72 per cent of Welsh businesses are experiencing difficulties in recruiting the right staff—72 per cent—and 61 per cent of Welsh businesses fear they will not be able to recruit enough highly skilled workers to meet both current demand and to support further growth. If we cannot support further growth, how are we going to grow our economy? That is the vital key we are still missing here in Wales. I challenge you, Cabinet Secretary: you need to be more ambitious in supporting small and medium-sized businesses. I say to you that your business rates fudge is not good enough. Free up funding. Lean on the banks.

The White Paper has zip in it about driving the economy forward. Businesses, both current and potential, have to wait until the spring. And this is in a background of Wales lagging badly behind the UK on GVA. The UK Government’s industrial strategy is a way forward that aims to deliver an improvement in living standards in all parts of the UK. It’s a way forward to deliver major investment in infrastructure. It’s a way forward to deliver investment in R&D and science. And it’s a way forward to support business growth. I suggest, Cabinet Secretary, that you start walking forward and not keep going back.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

A dyma ni’n cyrraedd y cyfnod pleidleisio. Oni bai bod tri Aelod yn dymuno imi ganu’r gloch, rwy’n symud yn syth i’r cyfnod pleidleisio.

The first vote is on the debate on Members’ legislative proposals, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Suzy Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 33, 17 abstentions, three against. Therefore, the motion is agreed.

The next vote is on the Welsh Conservatives’ debate on further education, and I call for a vote on the motion tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 18, no abstentions, 35 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on an amendment 1. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 28, no abstentions, 26 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 3, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 35, no abstentions, 19 against. Therefore, amendment 3 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 37, no abstentions, 17 against. The motion as amended is therefore agreed.

The next vote is on the Welsh Conservatives’ debate on economic development, and I call for a vote on the amendment tabled in the name of Paul Davies. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 17, no abstentions, 37 against. Therefore, the motion is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 1. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call for a vote on amendment 1, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour nine, no abstentions, 45 against. Therefore, amendment 1 is not agreed.

I now call for a vote on amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt. Open the vote. Close the vote. In favour 28, no abstentions, 26 against. Therefore, amendment 2 is agreed.

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

Open the vote. Close to vote. In favour, 28; no abstentions; 25 against. Therefore, the motion as amended is agreed.

The next item on our agenda is to short debate, and the short debate is in the name of Lynne Neagle, if Members would leave the Chamber quickly and quietly.

I therefore call on Lynne Neagle to speak on the topic she has chosen—Lynne Neagle.

Thank you, Llywydd, and I’d like to begin by showing a short video, please.

Thank you. I know there are some Members who attended the launch of the ‘State of Child Health Report 2017’ that the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health organised, who have seen that video, but I did think that it was definitely worth giving it wider viewing. I’d like to thank Naomi Lea and the Fixers organisation for allowing us to show that film today, which is called ‘Spot the Signs’, and, in a very simple but effective way, it encourages us all to ask ourselves the question: would we know the signs if we saw them?

So, I welcome the opportunity today to talk about a subject that I feel very passionately about and one that is vitally important for all of us, as parents, carers and educators—how we develop emotional resilience in our children and young people. And I’m very pleased to give a minute of my time to Angela Burns today.

Mental health problems affect about one in 10 children and young people, with nearly half of all mental health problems beginning by the age of 14. I’ll just repeat that: nearly half of all mental health problems begin by the age of 14. That is a statistic that should concern every one of us. Twenty-four hour social networking, increasing exam stress, and a body-obsessed culture are just a few examples of how modern society can negatively affect the mental health and well-being of our children and young people, and demonstrates the pressing need to address this.

Many of us will, at some point throughout our lives, have to deal with and mange problems of poor mental well-being. For some, coping may come naturally, but for others, they may need to learn or be taught how to build emotional resilience. It is therefore incredibly important that young people are taught how to develop positive coping strategies and that they learn how to take charge of their own emotional health.

We as elected representatives are, unfortunately, too familiar with young constituents who’ve been referred to specialist child and adult mental health services, some of whom still wait far too long for assessment and treatment. The previous health Minister said that children’s mental health is everyone’s business, and in that, he is absolutely right. He told the previous children’s committee, when discussing the long wait for CAMHS services that the CAMHS end of the service is the clinical end of the service; it is not intended, nor was it ever intended to be the whole answer to young people who are experiencing difficulties as they are growing up, and whose mental well-being needs to be attended to. He said that he was always anxious that drawing a young person into specialist mental health services labels them in a way that lives with them for a very long time during their lives and that we are by no means at a point where such a label does not have costs with it in terms of stigma and other impacts on people’s lives. So, we should always be attending to that borderline to make sure that those people who need a CAMHS service get it and those young people whose needs can be better attended to by the more universal and general services get the help that they need there. So, the support that young people can access before specialist CAMHS is absolutely crucial.

The commitments and priority that the Welsh Government has placed on tackling and developing more effective mental health provision for children and young people, through the Together for Children and Young People programme, is to be welcomed. I know that I, along with other AMs, will continue to closely monitor the progress of the programme to ensure that it delivers that crucial timely access to all specialist CAMHS.

But the programme also includes very welcome work streams to promote universal resilience and well-being and to promote early intervention and support for vulnerable children and young people. But I would argue that this work needs to be taken forward with much greater urgency in a genuinely cross-cutting way across Welsh Government. There needs to be a recognition that, for many of our young people, a referral to specialist CAMHS means that we have already failed to support them when they need it most.

The introduction and embodiment of emotional resilience early in a child’s life, through school, youth work settings, and out-of-school clubs, is vital to preventing future problems for our young people. We need to make that early intervention a reality in Wales. Emotional health programmes in schools, an embedded public health approach, and mandatory inclusion of emotional health and well-being within the curriculum, could all help reduce the burden placed on our already stretched CAMHS services. Indeed, the title of the 2001 Welsh Government’s CAMHS strategy, ‘Everybody’s Business’ sums up the importance of this issue and that it cannot just be seen as an NHS matter. In fact, the 2001 strategy had a whole chapter on schools, demonstrating their important role. It’s something that’s been recognised for many years, but it is also clear that we have much more progress to make on this.

In Wales, we have a great opportunity, through the Donaldson review of the curriculum, to drive forward and embed a resilient approach that could introduce a new culture of change and tackle the stigma attached to mental health earlier on. Although the recommendations by Donaldson include an approach to health and well-being, without the right support for teachers to deliver it on the ground, it simply will not happen.

Currently, initial teacher training providers have flexibility in the way they design and deliver their programmes, with no input from the Welsh Government on the content of the courses, nor is there information available in the public domain on the extent to which initial teacher education providers in Wales are including mental health issues as part of qualified teacher status. As a result of the recommendations in the Furlong report, we have an opportunity to improve the quality of initial teacher training courses and ensure that they are aware and trained from the outset. Indeed, prior to the last election, the Welsh Government showed every sign of having grasped the opportunity presented to us, by taking Furlong and Donaldson together and creating a new career path for teachers as guidance teachers. A new type of teaching professional, trained in counselling and familiar with the workings of other agencies, like social services, they were to act as advocates for children with emotional issues and as a go-to person for pupils and fellow professionals as a first response before things developed into a crisis or became intractable. Critically, these guidance teachers were also to become trained specialists in delivering better, more consistent, personal, social and health education in our schools. So, I do ask the question today: what has become of this policy?

If the Welsh Government is serious about meeting its commitment to preventing children and young people entering CAMHS in the first place then these preventative measures must absolutely be a priority, driven forward across Welsh Government. Samaritans Cymru firmly believe that emotional health provision should be made mandatory within the new curriculum. They want to see emotional health programmes delivered in schools as a form of promotion, prevention and early intervention, and believe that referrals to CAMHS will continue to rise unless these preventative measures are embedded in educational settings.

There is already some fantastic practice out there. Samaritans Cymru offer the DEAL project—developing emotional awareness and listening—with free, web-based teaching resources. Through their Aberdare and Cardiff DEAL pilot schemes, eight schools are implementing the programme into their curriculum for this academic year. Samaritans Cymru have said that teachers who’ve had the DEAL training are more happy and confident to deliver emotional health awareness to their pupils.

Save the Children also deliver programmes in schools. Their Journey of Hope programme, in partnership with Place2Be, is currently being delivered to 10 schools in Cardiff. The programme, which has been added to the early intervention foundations directory of evidence-based practice, offers children positive strategies to cope with traumatic events, helps build their natural resilience, and strengthens their social support networks.

In my own constituency, Penygarn primary school are using their pupil deprivation grant money to employ a play therapist and have created a special nurture classroom for children who need extra support to deal with emotional problems. St Alban’s Roman Catholic school, working in partnership with the ‘South Wales Argus’ and Coleg Gwent’s construction and plumbing students, have renovated their old caretaker’s house and are turning it into a sanctuary building for young people. Similarly, staff from Garnteg primary school will soon undertake a training course to enable them to teach mindfulness in schools.

But, of course, the onus isn’t just on schools to deliver this approach; our youth services across Wales, as we’ve heard today, provide key support to children and young people on a range of issues and are an important preventative service when it comes to promoting young people’s mental health. The Council for Wales of Voluntary Youth Services insists that it’s absolutely critical that their open-access model of youth provision is maintained, supported and developed so that all young people can have access to services that enhance their resilience and respond to their needs. I fully agree with this view.

So, in conclusion, there is lots of good practice in building resilience in our children and young people out there, but there is not a coherent and consistent whole operating in Wales. Unless we deliver a step change in early intervention, we will continue to see the CAMHS service picking up the pieces for our children and young people. Crucially, we need to critically revise our expectations of schools on this agenda and equip the system with specialist guidance for all teachers, so that they have the confidence to deliver in this area and ensure that our children and young people receive all the help and support they deserve. Thank you.

Lynne, first of all, I’d like to pay an enormous tribute to you, because you are such an advocate for children and young people and for tackling the issues that we have with the child and adolescent mental health services. Because I agree with everything that you’ve said this afternoon: I think it is vitally important that we enable our children to become more emotionally and psychologically resilient. We’re in a really cruel world and it’s getting tougher by the day. Some kids have tough families, very chaotic lives that they have to cope with, other children are always susceptible to what the media have to say, to the celebrity culture—‘You’re too thin, you’re too fat, you’re too tall, you’re too short’—to everything else. There’s bullying and that can be rife. We’ve heard so many times about adverse childhood experiences and the damage they can have on someone in the long term.

So, I think to make emotional health as a proper part of the curriculum, and to use Donaldson to try and drive this change forward, would be absolutely key. So, Cabinet Secretary, I would ask you to perhaps tell us a little bit about what discussions you’ve had with the Cabinet Secretary for Education to drive this forward.

I do want to add that I speak not just as an Assembly Member, but also as a mother, and, as many of us who have young children in our lives whom we love and cherish, we’ve all have been through the times when we’ll have dealt with them as they’ve come home from school having had a terrible day, where they’ve been bullied mercilessly or they just don’t get what it is that they’re not quite right about. And I thought that that film really portrayed that—the loneliness and the isolation that young children can experience. So, anything that the Government can do to ensure that our children are fit to face their adult lives would be very, very welcome.

My own personal opinion: building an emotionally resilient and psychologically tough individual is actually more important than straightforward plain education. In education, we have to get past this business that it’s about learning, it’s about lessons, it’s about exams: if we can deliver, at the end of primary, at the end of secondary, at the end of FE, and at the end of HE, young people who can cope with this world, then we will have succeeded, because they can do the rest of the learning at another stage.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Communities and Children to reply to the debate—Carl Sargeant.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I start by thanking Lynne Neagle for leading this debate today? It is a topic that’s close to my heart too, and I’m very grateful for the very powerful contribution that you’ve brought to the Chamber this evening.

First of all, I’d also like to recognise the work of the Chair of the Children, Young People and Education Committee. The committee has already undertaken some important work and consultation on the first 1,000 days of a child’s life, and I look forward to seeing the committee’s report and recommendations. Members will be aware that I am intent on doing all I can to increase the resilience of communities, so that they can be better equipped, as Angela Burns says, to deal with the challenges that they face.

I listened carefully to the contribution. I am slightly off script at the moment, because I listened carefully to what you’re saying, and I absolutely agree. And I’ll go on to explain about what my thoughts are, but I think you presented part of the jigsaw, part of the solution to the rounded approach that we need to build into the resilience of an individual. I think the schooling factor of that is an important one, and you’re pushing at an open door with me in terms of our ability to do that, because, whereas children face adverse childhood experiences, while the direct effect is critical to all children, some are more resilient than others and can deal with it better. We can get into that space, and I’m absolutely convinced that, if we don’t do this early intervention and prevention, our health service will collapse—our mental health services will collapse in the future. We’ve got to get into that space of doing something different. But the politics of this is even more incredibly difficult, because the things that Angela talked about, the expectations of individuals—the five O-levels or the five GCSEs, or the attainment level of chasing targets—are all unachievable if we don’t have a resilient young person. So, you can want all the five GCSE results you want, but, if you’ve got a broken person, they’ll never, ever achieve academic success unless you fix that.

So, the good news is that resilient skills can be developed and learnt, and early age is an important factor, and I take on board the contribution that Members have made this evening.

Building resilience—the ability to adapt to adversity, trauma or significant sources of stress—can help our children and young people to manage feelings of anxiety and uncertainty and, in turn, this will help them to thrive, as Angela says about contributing as members of the community as they reach their full potential, but the risk is huge if we don’t get this intervention right.

The onus is on all of us. It’s on all of us. And that’s why I said the jigsaw effect of what you’re suggesting here is only part of the solution to resolving this issue. And to foster an environment in society where our young people are not held back by circumstances or place, but are supported to become resilient, is something that we should all strive upon, including all departments of Government, all the public sector, but, importantly, all of us too. Many of you know of the focus I’ve been giving on early years, and my absolute determination to give children the best start in life. That in itself causes friction amongst colleagues, because I’m committed to making sure we get the best deal for our young people; it’s the best investment we could ever make. If we get this right now, it saves us money; it’s fiscally right to do, but morally right to do, too. We get two wins here if we get this embedded. There is a widespread agreement that early childhood experiences are crucially important to children’s development long-term and their achievements later in life. And evidence does tell us that early life experiences affect a child’s development and influence behaviour in adolescence and adulthood. Adverse childhood experiences have a long-term damaging consequence, and I’m determined to prevent and mitigate the impact of ACEs in everything that I can do. My whole department has a focus on delivering this—from housing to community safety, we have to get underneath this and see that this is more than just warm words. We need delivery.

That’s why programmes such as Flying Start and Families First are really important to us. The investment of £77 million in Flying Start and £42 million in Families First are things that we get into our communities and underneath the very difficult situations that we’re found ourselves in—the submission around children zones, the introduction of that in Wales, and the introduction of an ACEs hub that is being developed with CymruWellWales now, making sure that the things that you talked about, Lynne, about making sure that we can get beyond the educational aspect of this, but, in everything we do, we consider the resilience of an individual—rather than a place-based approach, a person-based approach, and how do we need to support them. This goes for all children through a system and, in particular, I’m very concerned about our looked-after children—the most vulnerable in our communities that, actually, we let down. I’m a parent, as well as many in this room, and I am embarrassed sometimes about the circumstances we place our young people in—the vulnerability of that challenge. I did a conference/seminar/question time with David Melding the other week, when we froze to death in the Senedd, but actually it was a really effective piece of work, talking and listening—more importantly—to young people who’ve had real experiences of the system that we have presided over, and we’ve let young people down. It’s something that we cannot afford to do in the future.

Lynne, the work that you’ve done to bring this to the Chamber is important, but more importantly for me as a leader in the public sector, I have to make sure that all my interventions and all my colleagues’ interventions focus on the prevention and early intervention process to make sure that we get this right for the future. And I’m grateful for the—

Cabinet Secretary, will you take an intervention?

Indeed. Yes, of course.

I just wonder, speaking with my mother hat on for a moment, if you would consider, or if you are already doing, guides or advice for parents about how to help them. Because, of course, schools are one half of the equation, but they spend 50 per cent of their time elsewhere. Whilst many do have chaotic lives, there’s an awful lot where you can have the most robust family, but still have one little flower that can be trodden on. For parents to understand how they can help their children to ignore those adverts, to not follow that celebrity culture and not self-harm because they’re not thin enough, et cetera.

The Member’s absolutely right. I was going to come onto that, in terms of the biggest influence in the early years of a child’s life being the parenting, and the process around what we can do to support a quality environment to support parents. We want to do that. We’re supporting that through our ‘Parenting. Give it time.’ programme, but there’s more we can do in that space. We are committed, on a cross-party basis in many cases, to legislating to remove the defence of reasonable punishment—another aspect of quality parenting—and giving people the tools to support young people as they grow up.

Co-ordinating this crucial piece of work is going to be important. The parenting framework is something that we provide as a strategic, joined-up approach. I don’t like strategies because they generally turn into dusty documents on a shelf. It’s really important that we see delivery. So, my challenge to the sectors, to Government, is asking, ‘With this strategy, are we now delivering?’ Let’s test the system. It’s not a case of, ‘Yes, we tick the boxes here.’ What are the real outcomes? What are the real outcomes for our young people? We know that CAMHS is frustrated by the challenges that they face in terms of numbers.

Actually, I agree with you. When we get to the CAMHS stage, we’re at the end of that process. We should be much earlier on. The things that we do today will have an effect tomorrow. So, moving from the day job of managing a system to intervention is something that I am absolutely passionate about and I know my colleagues are too. I’ll continue the discussion with Kirsty Williams with regard to the very specific suggestions you talk about around Donaldson and the Samaritans outcomes there.

On the broader issue, like I said about the jigsaw pieces coming together, what we’ve got to do now is bring those jigsaw pieces together and put a picture on there, so that we understand what our vision for the future is. My commitment around resilient communities is a two-pronged approach, and I’ll have said this in the Chamber before about economic regeneration and giving families and young people jobs, skills and opportunities to move into a capital programme where they feel resilient and strong, but also building on the emotional aspect of ACEs and well-being in the community and individuals too. The two together, I think, will have a dramatic effect on well-being, but also the effects of our communities on poverty and development too.

So, I’m very grateful for the opportunity. I’ve done several short debates and this has been one that has been very effective in terms of making me think about the job that I do, and hopefully the jobs that we all do. The responsibility of managing and supporting young people is one for us all. I will continue to work in that guise and I look forward to working cross party, particularly with you as Chair of the committee, to make sure that we can continue to, hopefully, tackle the issues that are affecting our young people in the future. Diolch.

Thank you very much and that brings today’s proceedings to a close. Thank you.